Flight Question Flying an assembly of Altea vessels

Archasio

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Is there some way for me to tell orbiter or at least some of the mfd's or the autopilot that I'm flying an assembly of two ships? I would like to use an XR5 as an interplanetary vessel while having an XR2 docked to it as a lander. Is this possible?

:hailprobe:

---------- Post added at 04:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:38 PM ----------

I know it is possible, I'm just wondering if there is some way to make the autopilot and mfd's like TransX adjust for the added mass.
 

Mojave

60% Ethanol
Moderator
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
1,647
Reaction score
132
Points
78
Location
Somewhere, but not here.
Does docking a vessel to another not sum the mass of both ships? What you could possibly do is, within the scenario file, edit the mothership's mass value to include the childship's mass. I know some vessels have this value available within the scenario entry, but it could be different with Altea craft because they're much more detailed and complex.

TransX and other mfd's would then use the "correct" mass when calculating.
 

Archasio

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Once docked the prograde-ap seems to function fine until i throttle up. When i do so the assembly starts rotating "upwards" relative to the XR5
 

Donamy

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
6,904
Reaction score
196
Points
138
Location
Cape
Can you attach it ?
 

Donamy

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
6,904
Reaction score
196
Points
138
Location
Cape
The XR2 to the XR5. Using attachment instead of docking.
 

Archasio

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hmm, how would I do so? Using an add-on, or editing something in the scenario file? Multistage or something? I would kinda like to have the XR5 in orbit and then fly the XR2 to it from the cape, go to the Jovian system and then leave the XR5 in orbit while landing the XR2 and then go back again and redock. So it would be kinda impractical to have to edit the scenario all the time and it wouldn't be as fun as the docking process which adds to the over all feel.
 

Donamy

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
6,904
Reaction score
196
Points
138
Location
Cape
You can add attachment points to vessels, in the config files and you can use the attachment manager, to attach and unattach vessels in orbit.
 

Archasio

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Thanks

---------- Post added at 08:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:50 PM ----------

How though? Not really sure what to add to my config files nor how to access the attachment manager
 

Mojave

60% Ethanol
Moderator
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
1,647
Reaction score
132
Points
78
Location
Somewhere, but not here.
Once docked the prograde-ap seems to function fine until i throttle up. When i do so the assembly starts rotating "upwards" relative to the XR5

Oh, are you referring to the changed CoM? That sometimes happens, and Orbiter freaks out. I'm not always sure it's because of a CoM change, but this is the type of issue you receive when docking vessels in Orbiter. The RCS system will try to correct it, but things get finicky.

The XR2 to the XR5. Using attachment instead of docking.

This is probably the best method; however, somewhat of a cheat. But Orbiter is the one not playing nice with an otherwise real scenario, so you gotta do what you gotta do.

---------- Post added at 16:11 ---------- Previous post was at 16:07 ----------

How though? Not really sure what to add to my config files nor how to access the attachment manager

In the absence of desire to deal with .cfg files or attachment offset trial and error, you could use the Universal Cargo Deck.

https://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=3262

What it does is adds an invisible vessel that uses a parent/child system to create inorganic attachment between two or more ships. It's fairly easy to use, but comes with restrictions. For example, it likes to play games with center of gravity, and mass values.

I recommend finding another way to deal with this such as learning about multistage and utilizing it. It should be possible; though, I've never quite worked with it myself. I do know that multistage is a versatile tool for sticking things together. It's basically a high-end form of duct tape.
 
Last edited:

Archasio

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I actually think it is because the thruster of the XR5 is so far away from the common center of mass that the assembly starts to rotate. But how do I add attachments?

---------- Post added at 08:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:14 PM ----------

Didn't see your second reply. I don't really mind messing with the config files, it's just that I have no idea have to do do in regards to attachments. Is the attachment manager a part of the scenario editor?

---------- Post added at 08:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:17 PM ----------

Universal Cargo Deck seem to be for orbiter 2006
 

Mojave

60% Ethanol
Moderator
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
1,647
Reaction score
132
Points
78
Location
Somewhere, but not here.
I actually think it is because the thruster of the XR5 is so far away from the common center of mass that the assembly starts to rotate. But how do I add attachments?

Didn't see your second reply. I don't really mind messing with the config files, it's just that I have no idea have to do do in regards to attachments. Is the attachment manager a part of the scenario editor?

Universal Cargo Deck seem to be for orbiter 2006

a. Yeah, that's pretty much the problem then. Thrust offset is a big pain in Orbiter, and it's mostly because the generic autopilots aren't specifically designed for it. You might fair better if you use PursuitMFD or AttitudeMFD to hold a prograde attitude during burns.

https://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=5866 PursuitMFD. I highly regard Pursuit to be the better MFD for attitude control. The 2010 compatible release is included in a separate folder within this folder structure. The author merged it with the 2016 compatible version. I know this because I just reinstalled Orbiter myself and was scratching my head trying to find the 2010 version of Pursuit.

b. Unfortunately, I'm not an attachment point guru. There's lots of information on the forum regarding this subject; however, so you can easily find the resources you need. It's just a process of trial and error in my experience.

c. Thinking back to the release of Orbiter 2010, I believe UCD maintained compatibility: https://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?p=177520&postcount=4

That thread is a list of add-ons working in 2010. There is some conversation regarding UCD in there.
 
Last edited:

Archasio

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Dude thanks a lot. You've helped me so much. Just a sidenote. Do you use 2010-P1 as your main install of orbiter? I really like 2016 but I'm kinda getting fed up with all the compability issues. I'm considering getting a 2010 install aswell. What's the reason for using 2016. Did it improve that much other than the terrain? Maybe I should be go 2010 exclusive...
 

Mojave

60% Ethanol
Moderator
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
1,647
Reaction score
132
Points
78
Location
Somewhere, but not here.
Dude thanks a lot. You've helped me so much. Just a sidenote. Do you use 2010-P1 as your main install of orbiter? I really like 2016 but I'm kinda getting fed up with all the compability issues. I'm considering getting a 2010 install aswell. What's the reason for using 2016. Did it improve that much other than the terrain? Maybe I should be go 2010 exclusive...

My main installation is 2010-P1 because of the current compatibility problems with 2016, and the vast repository of add-ons and utilities available for the older version.

Orbiter 2016 revolutionized Orbiter as far as texturing, terrain, mesh-detection, collision-detection, and other advanced features and additions that I cannot even name. It also prompted a revolution in the D3D9-client's development, including graphical features that really make Orbiter standout among other simulators. Orbiter 2016 has, while older versions had its own, totally redefined the simulator's quality. For a free-simulator, it has transformed itself into something that has every quality of a payware video game while maintaining its virtuousness, that is, its principles and goodwill to the community backing it.

But for the person who cannot, or does not want to, be thrust into the new era of Orbiter development, 2010 suffices equally well. The simulator is the same, but 2016 adds bells and whistles that are unnecessary to space simulation as a whole. As for the mathematics behind the simulation, I cannot speak for core improvements. But for the intent of simulation, 2010 is not to be neglected.

Until the compatibility gap is more closed between 2010 and 2016, I would recommend remaining in 2010. But make sure you get a 2016 install setup because that gap may close more quickly than anticipated.
 
Last edited:

boogabooga

Bug Crusher
Joined
Apr 16, 2011
Messages
2,999
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Once docked the prograde-ap seems to function fine until i throttle up. When i do so the assembly starts rotating "upwards" relative to the XR5

As others have said, that seems to be "correct" as your thrust no longer along the center of mass and will cause a rotation. I would add that there is a very real possibility that the rotation may be far stronger than your RCS system can physically correct. No MFD attitude holding program can help you then. You'll have to resort to a "cheat" to artificially relocate the center of mass.
 

Archasio

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Maybe an XR2-XR2 assembly would be a better option then, considering that they dock nose to nose.
 

turtle91

Active member
Joined
Nov 1, 2010
Messages
319
Reaction score
7
Points
33
Currently I am using this combo:

https://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=7061
https://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=6119
(both are Orbiter2010 addons)

It's interesting to switch between the difference thruster-modes (chemical vs. ion)
As a bonus, you can land the carrier, with the "fighter" in the bay.

The conecept is great, you will dock the normal way, and as soon as you have docked, the vessels change from "docked" to "attched".

For the XR2 maybe the Arrow is the better choice or the ICV (https://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=6440)

However, another possibility could be, that you could use the XR5's own attachment-system, which is explained in the XR docs.
 
Last edited:

dgatsoulis

ele2png user
Donator
Joined
Dec 2, 2009
Messages
1,924
Reaction score
340
Points
98
Location
Sparta
As others have pointed out, this behavior is quite normal and realistic, given the fact that the docked XR2 has created a structure in which the thrust vector from the engines of the XR5, no longer passes through its Center of Mass.

The easiest way to deal with this is to use BrianJ's IEAT MFD, in particular the "attitude hold" feature. All you have to do is select the correct reference body and the MFD will keep the orientation you want for the duration of the burn. (you don't even need the MFD to be on during this).
Once you have completed the burn, remember to switch the "attitude hold" off.

IEAT MFD was written for Orbiter 2006 but it works in Orbiter 2016.

Hope this helps
:cheers:
 
Top