It's 0.5 deg/sec, I think.DaveS: Can you still tell me where I can find the proper rotation rates of the transition DAP?
V3.0 sounds good to me.Well, very likely we will have a reason for a major version increment then anyway. :lol:
So, anybody objecting to call this already the 3.0? (which would also end this Dev thread after a very long time, almost 30 months)
In that case, everything is A-OK here, no MDU switches back to DPS here.
That's strange. Regardless what I do, I can reproduce the bug reliable. Even recompiling and checking that there are no local changes did not change the problem.
I suggest checking if the CRTMFD is reading (and saving) its state (the prm something variable).
That's also what I suspect. But I had been too tired to go looking at the code myself yesterday.
---------- Post added at 02:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:10 PM ----------
Lots of good information and data for scenario design and testing:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110001406.pdf
I am surprised that I did not find it earlier.
Well that killed an hour of my day.
Well that killed an hour of my day.
...
[RSLS]
CHECK_SSME_90_PERCENT=true ; enable / disable T-2s SSME PC>=90% check (it may cause aborts when frame rate is low)
...
Hi there,
in the latest nightly (r2244) the "check for 90% thrust" was disabled -thanks for that- but
I was thinking I could make this behavior configurable and searched the source. But I coul not find anything like "config" there.
Am I right that there is no generic SSU-Config where something like this could be placed?
And if there is no general SSU-Config, why is that so?Code:... [RSLS] CHECK_SSME_90_PERCENT=true ; enable / disable T-2s SSME PC>=90% check (it may cause aborts when frame rate is low) ...
/Kuddel
Disabling red-line limits monitored by the GLS is the sole responsibility of the GLS console operator, callsign CGLS. This is after a GO given by the NTD. CGLS can even inhibit/override the SRO "hold-fire" if required.IMO it doesn't make much sense giving users the control of redlines like that. When we have a proper LCC, then it would make sense to allow control over the LCCs. The user would navigate to the GLS or SPE console and could disable this or that. But that is in the future.
About the present: Urwumpe, don't forget to release another nightly today or tomorrow.
About the present: Urwumpe, don't forget to release another nightly today or tomorrow.
BEGIN_MFD Left
TYPE User
MODE CRT
Mode2 1
Display 2
END_MFD
BEGIN_MFD Right
TYPE User
MODE CRT
Mode2 2
Display 5
END_MFD
BEGIN_MFD 5
TYPE User
MODE CRT
Mode2 3
Display 0
END_MFD
BEGIN_MFD 6
TYPE User
MODE CRT
Mode2 3
Display 0
END_MFD
BEGIN_MFD 7
TYPE User
MODE CRT
Mode2 3
Display 0
END_MFD
BEGIN_MFD 8
TYPE User
MODE CRT
Mode2 2
Display 3
END_MFD
BEGIN_MFD 9
TYPE User
MODE CRT
Mode2 2
Display 4
END_MFD
rwy_pos_x[i] = hps->CX + static_cast<int>( Round(hps->Scale*DEG*atan(error[i].x/error[i].z)) );
rwy_pos_y[i] = hps->CY + static_cast<int>( Round(hps->Scale*DEG*atan(-error[i].y/error[i].z)) );
About 95% debug. Occasionally I go to release to see if anything (bad) happens, as the structure is different. I also play with the compiler settings. So far didn't find anything different between them.
SpaceShuttleUltra.cfg! I missed that one :facepalm:Such stuff goes into the SpaceShuttleUltra.cfg, which is parsed in clbkSetClassCaps.
You are right, we have no central configuration class or structure. Not sure if we really need one now, but I like your idea. :lol:
IMO it doesn't make much sense giving users the control of redlines like that. When we have a proper LCC, then it would make sense to allow control over the LCCs. The user would navigate to the GLS or SPE console and could disable this or that. But that is in the future.
About the present: Urwumpe, don't forget to release another nightly today or tomorrow.