OHM Falcon9 for Orbiter2016

[BrianJ]

From the timings on the SpaceX website, it looks like the Sentinel6-Michael Freilich launch will indeed be a 2-burn strategy (circularization burn at apogee). And it may be that it is actually impossible to do a single burn to 1336km x 1336km, simply because it can't get high enough quick enough

 

[Kyle]

FYI Brian: I have the parking orbit of Sentinel-6 as 215 km x 1336 km. Your 200 km x 1336 km guess was nearly perfect.

 

[BrianJ]

Updated on OH: v.210425
Now includes Kyle's "Extra Charred" booster skin (thanks Kyle!)
Set .cfg file "CHARRED" parameter to:
CHARRED = 2
for Extra Charred booster skin!

Cheers,
Brian

 

[francisdrake]

Definitely the extra charred version looks excellent! Looking forward for today's TRANSPORTER-2 mission.
---
Oh, it's on hold now.

 

[BrianJ]

Thanks for reminding me about Transporter2 launch - looks like its going fine at the moment.
Is that the first Polar launch from the Cape with a 1st stage RTLS? Interesting!

 

[Kyle]

Thanks for reminding me about Transporter2 launch - looks like its going fine at the moment.
Is that the first Polar launch from the Cape with a 1st stage RTLS? Interesting!

Second - SAOCOM last year was the first!

 

[BrianJ]

Second - SAOCOM last year was the first!

Oh yes, thats right.

 

[BrianJ]

Updated: v.221115

Updates:
Dynamic (modulated) exhaust visuals.
Booster re-entry max-Q contrail.
Booster re-entry burn "1-3-1" engine sequence.
Some normal maps for MLI foil etc.

 

[ZacharyS41]

Thanks for the update.

Speaking of the "1-3-1" engine sequence, could there be a way to implement that engine sequence as an optional choice for the landing burn?

 

[BrianJ]

Hi,
it could be done - but was it ever done IRL?
Not sure the extra work would bring much benefit.
Starting the landing burn any later will impact the targeting (for my add-on) severely!
You have a specific reason for this idea?

Cheers,
Brian

EDIT: I forgot to mention that the landing burn autopilot will select 3-engines if you're carrying more than 20,000kg fuel at the start of the burn.

 

[ZacharyS41]

Just to simply simulate a last-minute landing burn below 2 km altitude.

 

[ZacharyS41]

The 1-3-1 engine landing burn was done on the early GTO missions (i.e. SES-9, Thaicom 8) as well as the Falcon Heavy side booster and center core landings.

 

[BrianJ]

Fair enough! I'll see if I can put something together for you.
Not sure if I want to implement it in the add-on as it will effect landing targeting.
I'd have to scrap-and-redo the landing algorithm to be much cleverer, to make it work.
But I'll see if I can get something functional for you and you can try it.
Cheers,
Brian

 

[ZacharyS41]

If it effects landing targeting, it's understandable why it kinda won't work.

My idea was just an option. Not trying to make you oblige.

 

[BrianJ]

No worries
Here's a custom booster stage dll module for you to try.

If booster landing autopilot is active, press-and-hold:
NumPad - to inhibit main engine (keep pressed until you want burn to start)
Keyboard 3 to select 3-engines (keep pressed to force 3-engine selection)

Autopilot will still set the throttle to try and match programmed velocity profile.

Have fun!
Brian

 

[Sepehr]

I just Installed Falcon 9 and LC39A Launchpad, but for DM-1 and DM-2 scenarios, and the launchpad is just for Space Shuttle; In other words, I also got LC39A in other scenarios, but for some scenario like DM-2 or DM-1, I have Space Shuttle Launchpad with Falcon 9 digging into it.

 

[BrianJ]

I just Installed Falcon 9 and LC39A Launchpad, but for DM-1 and DM-2 scenarios, and the launchpad is just for Space Shuttle; In other words, I also got LC39A in other scenarios, but for some scenario like DM-2 or DM-1, I have Space Shuttle Launchpad with Falcon 9 digging into it.

Hi,
did you edit your Earth.cfg as required by “LC39A SpaceX” add-on?
Instructions in the readme.txt.
Cheers,
BrianJ

 

[ZacharyS41]

I have another suggestion to propose:

Recently, SpaceX debuted a shorter M-Vac nozzle; which, and I quote from https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/7014:

"This launch will feature a new MVac nozzle extension design aimed at increasing cadence and reducing costs. This new nozzle extension is shorter and, as a result, the engine has a lower specific impulse and therefore performance. Due to this, it will only fly on missions that don't need Falcon 9's full performance capability."

Because of this, RTLS missions using the shorter M-Vac nozzle use the 1-3-1 engine landing burn as well as a single engine entry burn. This is due to the preceding boostback burn eating up nearly all of Stage 1's delta-v.

Attached photos are from the Transporter-7 webcast. Transporter-7 was the first to use the shorter M-Vac nozzle.

 

[luis fernando baylon]

como puedo crear el reciente lanzamiento de transporter en el juego y la mision crs 28 igualmente

 

[Max-Q]

English please