Idea Mercury and Gemini add-on improvements

[Saturn V]

There is no beta. The rockets fly of course, but no animations on the pads and the splashdown stuff is all WIP models.

Even if I had the time, I'm beyond lousy at coding so a recovery scenario isn't happening anytime soon. Search the forum and you'll see the carrier models I made for the Mercury/Gemini/Apollo recovery scenarios too.

Eventually, I hope to put it all together so it's workable, but all my development is done out of 1 orbiter installation, so figuring out the interdepedencies should provide me with hours of mind-numbing fun when I can get to it.

For the time being, I have a LARGE family which is interdependent on my income and need to focus my efforts in that direction. Hoping summer will yield a little breathing space...

 

[4throck]

Time is always the limiting factor, and with the current state of the art in computer graphics, even for free simulation stuff, a one person team is just too short to get anything done in let's say a few months. The solution is to concentrate on one aspect at a time, in order to get things finished.

Saturn V, perhaps you could make some of your work available in this thread and I could try to integrate it into the enhancements that I'm working on. Of course, proper credit will be given. I'm thinking about the pads. I have a working version of Cape Canaveral with all the detailed early pads with correct numbering and placement, and could easily integrate yours.

 

[4throck]

I've uploaded some screenshots of my latest Mercury-Atlas textures at http://orbiterspaceport.blogspot.com. It's a hard rocket to get right, but I'm on track now!

 

[Urwumpe]

Well, I would have little psychological problems in helping in a Open-source project, but I can say so much now after giving it a try: I won't be able to help with the current Project Mercury/Project Gemini sources. They are not only seriously outdated and in a pretty untested shape on the SVN, but also hard to maintain, as the good concept behind the logical stages (Multi_stage6) quickly got flawed by blob classes and a crude mix between C++ and C style code.

Fixing all compiler errors and warnings was possible in 4 hours, but the CTDs remained and would take me months to detect and fix.

I am sure, other developers will run into similar problems, so I would suggest restarting clean sheet, even if this would maybe look counterproductive first. Restart, keep the good ideas from both projects, and especially: produce tidy code, comment it better than the current state, prefer readability over optimizations and make use of all debugging tools in C++. Maybe even consider using the boost library extensions.

 

[Lunar_Lander]

Very cool updates 4throck ! I like the idea of the "generic" mock-up/unmanned capsule for the test flights. But I still would like to know what your opinion on the "post-Mercury" flights (MA-10 to -12) is (I hope I did not miss this in your post, sorry if I did) .

 

[4throck]

.... I like the idea of the "generic" mock-up/unmanned capsule ... to know what your opinion on the "post-Mercury" flights ...

I suggest the following:

On the current Mercury project, there's a Freedom 7-II capsule (there's a texture and mesh for it). I've checked the Project Mercury files and on the situation files there's a CAPSULE_NUMBER parameter. I haven't checked to see if the Freedom 7-II actually appears, but it's worth checking. It it possible to use it and if I change the texture from the mission logo to the general capsule ridge, perhaps we could use that capsule version for all the unmanned and proposed flights, as it would have no mission specific identification. The only problem I see is that the early unmanned test flights used the early versions of the capsule (with porthole) and not the latter windowed versions. But I can live with that. Then it would then just be a matter of creating the right situation files.

 

[kino_astroboy]

I suggest the following:

On the current Mercury project, there's a Freedom 7-II capsule (there's a texture and mesh for it). I've checked the Project Mercury files and on the situation files there's a CAPSULE_NUMBER parameter. I haven't checked to see if the Freedom 7-II actually appears, but it's worth checking.

From Quick_Nick:

Rename merc_Freedom7II.msh to merc_FreedomII7.msh and set CAPSULE_NUMBER to 15 in scenario and it will work...

 

[Quick_Nick]

lol. I forgot about that. Yep, it's a situation where the mesh name is one thing but the code asks for a slightly different one. I'm pretty sure you need to alter the code to use custom capsules though, unless you are willing to change the texture for an existing mesh which would not be such a great idea. (misleading names, and a need for backups of old files)

 

[4throck]

... change the texture for an existing mesh which would not be such a great idea. (misleading names, and a need for backups of old files)

Thanks for the help regarding the capsule_number parameter. What I'll do is just to clean the "Freedom 7-II" painted artwork from the capsule texture. So we get a "clean" capsule that could be used with any generic Mercury mission. That way there's no confusion and nothing is broken, I think .

 

[Lunar_Lander]

Yes! It works!!!

Although I have to say that I think the II looks a bit awkward, as it is yellow and quite wide spaced. The photo has the two bars closer together and a more golden color.

I still wonder what the names of the two other flights would have been. Maybe Liberty Bell 7-II and Sigma 7-II (Because the scheduled pilots were Grissom and Schirra)? Also bad that they did not give Slayton his deserved flight, maybe we could make a MA-13 Delta 7 mission for him ?

 

[4throck]

Here's the unmarked mercury capsule. The Atlas is almost ready, just some corrections to the base of the rocket and I think that the Mercury texture update should be finished. As for the latter Mercury missions, we could start to post here some situation files that we could test and probably release in the future.

 

[Donamy]

Exceedingly nice !!

 

[Saturn V]

4throck -

If you want the reworked Pad 19 model, let me know. I was looking it over and all things being considered equal, it looks okay (certainly more detailed than the original, even without animations).

It's probably not 100% accurate, but it's pretty close, if somewhat simplified.

Some of the modifications...

I've got a screenshot of the gantry updates here somewhere (can't seem to locate it right now).

If you want it, I can probably upload it to OH in the next day or two...

 

[4throck]

...If you want the reworked Pad 19 model, let me know... upload it to OH in the next day or two...

Yes, please make it available for all on OH. It looks great, and I think it's accurate from a launch situation point of view.

I've released my updated Mercury textures on OH ([ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=4000"]Project Mercury updated realistic textures[/ame]) . No major changes from the beta that I posted here, except the Atlas rocket. Hope you have fun with it!

 

[Saturn V]

I found a screenie of the erector while I was sorting out the mesh and texture files...

I used this in my version of missle row (part of the cfg file), so I have to set it up with the spacecraft dll to drop into a scenario.

I can upload it sometime tomorrow.

I like the cinematic effect the extra detail provides...

From inside the lowered gantry top...

...but it may not run very well on a slower PC.


EDIT: Just looked over the original Pad19 files and Kev had it set up as part of a base as well, so that's the way this will be offered for continuity sake...

 

[4throck]

I like the cinematic effect the extra detail provides.....but it may not run very well on a slower PC.

It really looks nice. Yes, there are a lot of polygons on the pad's mesh, but even so, I don't think a current PC would have any problems.

I've been playing with situation and scenery files for Mercury and got as far as having a second helicopter in Canaveral as I think it was in case of launch abort.

That lead me to think that perhaps I could learn how to create the Little Joe rocket . I'm OK with general situation and scenery editing, but I think that it would require, besides the 3d mesh, some config files. Now my question is were to start? spacecraft3, cvel, velcro rockets ? Perhaps this is a lame question but I've looked into the documentation and tutorials and I'm kind of lost. Wat solution would be best for a rocket+capsule+escape tower ?

 

[kino_astroboy]

It really looks nice. Yes, there are a lot of polygons on the pad's mesh, but even so, I don't think a current PC would have any problems.

I've been playing with situation and scenery files for Mercury and got as far as having a second helicopter in Canaveral as I think it was in case of launch abort.

That lead me to think that perhaps I could learn how to create the Little Joe rocket . I'm OK with general situation and scenery editing, but I think that it would require, besides the 3d mesh, some config files. Now my question is were to start? spacecraft3, cvel, velcro rockets ? Perhaps this is a lame question but I've looked into the documentation and tutorials and I'm kind of lost. Wat solution would be best for a rocket+capsule+escape tower ?

I prefer you start with Multistage2, then work your way up to Spacecraft3, CVEL, then Velcro.

------------------------------

To Saturn V:
I observed in the Atlas launches from LC-14 that there was a "clamp" that held the rocket until liftoff, in which they opened. Perhaps you could add a similar mesh to your improved LC-14?

 

[Saturn V]

To Saturn V:
I observed in the Atlas launches from LC-14 that there was a "clamp" that held the rocket until liftoff, in which they opened. Perhaps you could add a similar mesh to your improved LC-14?

The earlier image I posted of the reworked Atlas/Agena is actually on Pad 12 in my Missle Row. Historically inaccurate, yes, but there are too many differences in the pad and tower configurations to launch Mercury and the Agena from the same pad.

The pad 14 I use for Mercury does indeed have the hold-down clamp you refer to. I'll see if I can find all the files and upload what I've got.

 

[Saturn V]

Re-ran a few of my old scenarios to verify that everything works and realized that when an Atlas booster is on the the pad and set to the correct launch heading, the rotation relative to the the pad is wrong (not very noticable on one of the pads that does NOT have the "hold-down" clamp, but sticks out like a sore thumb on the one that does). This may be why they were not represented on the original model.

The pad itself could be re-oriented to line everything up, but that would be grossly inaccurate.

The clamp also appears to be slightly under-scaled.

I think these issues are why I more or less forgot about these mods. Seems to be more trouble than they're worth, but if all you want is the detail, I'll continue to try putting it all together as time permits.

Also figured I'd combine both pads (14 & 19) into one cfg unless it proves to be too much of an FPS hog (lots of polys on both models).

 

[4throck]

...the rotation relative to the the pad is wrong ...

Perhaps some part of the pad itself rotated to position the rocket on the desired heading. Yes, that the trouble with too much detail
My guess is that the clamp should be part of the rocket model in some future version.
For now, perhaps simply changing the offending parts might solve the problem. Something that goes around the base of the rocket could be similar, visually, and not require any alignment. Some sort of cylinder would do, so that the the rocket doesn't look as if its levitating over the ground.