Update TransX development

Enjo · Dec 8, 2013

dgatsoulis said:
I'd say yes, that info is now obsolete.

Thanks for confirming. I've deleted this line from the readme and pushed to the repository.

flytandem · Dec 10, 2013

Great job Enjo and all those assisting.

FWIW, For a long time I have been wishing TransX could have multiple (stacked) maneuvers ability in a single stage.

Just this morning I set up a 2018 EVVEJ with intent to land on Europa, and as I had the planned arrival at Jupiter, I wondered about the difference between doing a direct to Europa single orbit insert as compared to doing a Jupiter gravity well capture burn to high eccentricity orbit with subsequent burn at Ap to align plane and raise the Pe, followed by a synchronizing burn at the Pe to a final capture burn at Europa. But being limited to a single maneuver in the Jupiter stage it could not all be planned. Then I remembered reading about this thread.

Additional maneuvers could be done by having a choice come up, after turning on a maneuver, to allow turning on an additional maneuver using the hypothetical orbit created by the first maneuver. And then a third etc. One would have to be able to toggle forward and back through the maneuvers in much the same way one can toggle through stages. Would the different maneuver orbits all be shown and have different colors? or just show one maneuver's orbit at a time?

Wish I could help but everyone's work here is far beyond my skill set.

rob

dgatsoulis · Dec 10, 2013

I totally get what you say Rob.

At least with TransX as it is right now, you can use the second instance, copy the plan from the first and try a solution with a single maneuver, without messing up the direct plan of the first one. But multiple maneuvers planning in the same stage would be really cool.

At first glance, my thought was "it can't be done without a major re-write of the way the plan is inherited by the previous stage", but it may not be so difficult.

Here is how I imagine it to work:

If the View is "Manoeuvre" and the target is "None", you can set up a hypothetical trajectory for that stage. (Same as now).

Pressing "FWD" would create a new stage, identical to the previous one (same MAJ and MIN body) and the hypothetical trajectory (yellow dotted line) of the previous stage would be turned into an actual "green" trajectory.

To keep new (useless) stages from being created, you need 2 conditions.
1. The previous stage must be in maneuver mode with no target.
2. At least 0.1 m/s of dV in the maneuver of the previous stage to get hypothetical trajectory.

I can't promise anything; it may not be that simple or it may mess up other parts of TransX, but I'll give it a shot. (Hopefully sometime during the weekend).

C3PO · Dec 11, 2013

Would it be possible to add a plan called Deep Space Maneuver(DSM)? And wouldn't you need a target to see what difference your maneuver will have on your trajectory?

Enjo · Dec 11, 2013

First off, thanks for your suggestions and interest. However you must know that what I've done was not very hard from my perspective, because it only involved extracting the numerical part of TransX and plugging it to my own code, that I know very well. On the other hand many suggestions posted here would beg for a redesign of TransX, or at least for author's knowledge about the MFD. Keep in mind though that if any such a redesign was ever to take place, the designer would need as much information as to what is missing, as he can get, because such suggestions help him shape the design.

My current, and so far unfinished, task is the Auto-Min functionality:

1) It has quite an impact on the FPS of the simulation. Just yesterday I realized that I made some code optimizations on the algorithm library level, but ... I haven't enabled them. Today I figured out that there can be even more optimizations made. All of this would guarantee a boost of 33%

2) I think that there's a bottleneck in the TransX' calculation routine, like memory I/O, which needs to be identified and eliminated. This would boost the runtime even further.

3) Last but not least, I think that it would be cool if the Auto-Min was available also in other plans to the fullest, not only in Major Ejection Plan. I imagine that in the Sling Direct plan, it could be added to the velocity variable. You'd set the ejection date to when passing periapsis and then minimize velocity and both angles, for example when using gravity well of Jupiter, Earth from a Moon base or a star when entering a solar system. Also the same in Manouevre mode would be great. In both of these cases I first need to find an objective way to define the variables' constraints first.

Regarding point 3) I have a call to those who are interested: please provide me with scenario files with stock DG, where you think Auto-Min function would fit (like the above), and more or less what you'd expect from it, if it's not obvious. As you can see I can imagine some things, but I'm not the best TransX planner.
Thanks

blixel · Dec 11, 2013

Enjo said:
Regarding point 3) I have a call to those who are interested: please provide me with scenario files with stock DG, where you think Auto-Min function would fit (like the above), and more or less what you'd expect from it, if it's not obvious.

If I understand your post, you're looking for sling examples so you can test the auto-min function? Here's a Mars -> Venus -> Earth sling I set up a little over a year ago. I believe the current solution is a good one, so you can try to set up a duplicate plan with auto-min and see if you can make it as good or better.

Code:

BEGIN_DESC
END_DESC

BEGIN_ENVIRONMENT
  System Sol
  Date MJD 57592.959
END_ENVIRONMENT

BEGIN_FOCUS
  Ship GL-01
END_FOCUS

BEGIN_CAMERA
  TARGET GL-01
  MODE Cockpit
  FOV 50.00
END_CAMERA

BEGIN_HUD
  TYPE Surface
END_HUD

BEGIN_MFD Left
  TYPE User
  MODE TransX
  Ship  GL-01
  FNumber 5
  Int 1
  Orbit True
  Vector  -343704.765469 804127.961368 -3275182.51245
  Vector  204.185390455 -104.93025315 -47.1902990754
  Double  4.28282991638e+013
  Double  57593.0120403
  Handle Mars
  Handle NULL
  Handle NULL
Select Target
 0 Escape
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 0
Plan
0 1
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 0
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 0
Base Orbit
0 0
Prograde vel.
 0  0
Man. date
 0  57593.0100129
Outward vel.
 0  0
Ch. plane vel.
 0  0
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 3
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
Pe Distance
 3  3589615.53685
Ej Orientation
 0  0
Equatorial view
0 0
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
  Int 2
  Orbit False
  Handle Sun
  Handle Mars
  Handle Venus
Select Target
 0 Venus
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 2
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 1
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 0
Base Orbit
0 1
Prograde vel.
 0  0
Man. date
 0  57593.0120399
Outward vel.
 0  0
Ch. plane vel.
 0  0
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 0
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
Prograde vel.
 5  -5245.29312434
Eject date
 6  57593.0010447
Outward vel.
 6  0
Ch. plane vel.
 5  312.3217
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
  Int 4
  Orbit True
  Vector  5822586993.14 373318269.642 -1860368045.2
  Vector  -6051.19647312 -374.530039419 1935.90285498
  Double  3.2485863e+014
  Double  57778.5023713
  Handle Venus
  Handle NULL
  Handle NULL
Select Target
 0 Escape
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 1
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 1
Plan
0 0
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 0
Base Orbit
0 0
Prograde vel.
 0  0
Man. date
 0  57593.0119781
Outward vel.
 0  0
Ch. plane vel.
 0  0
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 0
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
View Orbit
0 0
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
  Int 3
  Orbit True
  Vector  -31544957249.9 3203019352.22 102796002572
  Vector  -36351.6955011 -3932.67695216 -10604.3049253
  Double  1.32712764814e+020
  Double  57789.5707096
  Handle Sun
  Handle Venus
  Handle Earth
Select Target
 0 Earth
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 2
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 2
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 0
Base Orbit
0 0
Prograde vel.
 0  0
Man. date
 0  57593.0119001
Outward vel.
 0  0
Ch. plane vel.
 0  0
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 0
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
Velocity.
 0  0
Outward angle
 5  0.216976924054
Inc. angle
 4  1.17036512235
Inherit Vel.
0 0
Eject date
 0  57789.5707096
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
  Int 5
  Orbit True
  Vector  6847328850.33 -6414666696.05 -435081053.604
  Vector  -3095.40621635 2890.1544086 200.480151147
  Double  3.98600439969e+014
  Double  57934.4781351
  Handle Earth
  Handle NULL
  Handle NULL
Select Target
 0 None
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 1
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 2
Plan
0 0
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 0
Base Orbit
0 0
Prograde vel.
 0  0
Man. date
 0  57593.0116921
Outward vel.
 0  0
Ch. plane vel.
 0  0
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 0
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
Draw Base
0 0
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
END_MFD

BEGIN_MFD Right
  TYPE Orbit
  PROJ Ship
  FRAME Equator
  ALT
  REF Mars
END_MFD

BEGIN_PANEL
END_PANEL

BEGIN_SHIPS
GL-01:DeltaGlider
  STATUS Landed Mars
  BASE Olympus:1
  POS -135.4299504 12.7400334
  HEADING 55.82
  RCSMODE 2
  PRPLEVEL 0:0.250000 1:1.000000
  IDS 0:199 100
  NAVFREQ 124 434 84 114
  XPDR 0
  AFCMODE 7
  GEAR 1 1.0000
  AAP 0:0 0:0 0:0
END
END_SHIPS

BEGIN_ExtMFD
END

dgatsoulis · Dec 11, 2013

A maneuver on the Escape Plan. Here the TMI burn on Stage 1 has been set as a maneuver. (60 secs before the burn).

Code:

BEGIN_DESC
Contains the latest simulation state.
END_DESC

BEGIN_ENVIRONMENT
  System Sol
  Date MJD 52798.7289428562
END_ENVIRONMENT

BEGIN_FOCUS
  Ship GL-01
END_FOCUS

BEGIN_CAMERA
  TARGET GL-01
  MODE Cockpit
  FOV 60.00
END_CAMERA

BEGIN_HUD
  TYPE Surface
END_HUD

BEGIN_MFD Left
  TYPE User
  MODE TransX
  Ship  GL-01
  FNumber 3
  Int 1
  Orbit True
  Vector  -6511923.19152 -8042.46016653 -813591.352081
  Vector  976.966712816 -2.68310663161 -7738.79117651
  Double  3.98600439969e+014
  Double  52798.7295842
  Handle Earth
  Handle NULL
  Handle NULL
Select Target
 0 Escape
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 0
Plan
0 1
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 0
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 1
Base Orbit
0 0
Prograde vel.
 6  3611.22577239
Man. date
 7  52798.7312379
Outward vel.
 1  0
Ch. plane vel.
 4  -32.06
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 0
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
Pe Distance
 1  6571010
Ej Orientation
 9  0
Equatorial view
0 0
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
  Int 2
  Orbit True
  Vector  -32717679158.2 1906319.27624 -148365281338
  Vector  31488.2607856 7.17866286929 -7189.85928601
  Double  1.32712838556e+020
  Double  52798.7312501
  Handle Sun
  Handle Earth
  Handle Mars
Select Target
 0 Mars
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 2
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 1
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 0
Base Orbit
0 0
Prograde vel.
 1  0
Man. date
 1  52798.7289429
Outward vel.
 1  0
Ch. plane vel.
 1  0
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 0
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
Prograde vel.
 9  0
Eject date
 1  52798.7158112
Outward vel.
 1  0
Ch. plane vel.
 1  0
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
  Int 5
  Orbit True
  Vector  -4018134851.11 1618006903.89 3234501769.52
  Vector  2003.73038089 -807.244810232 -1612.790498
  Double  4.28282991638e+013
  Double  52979.5870408
  Handle Mars
  Handle NULL
  Handle NULL
Select Target
 0 None
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 1
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 2
Plan
0 0
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 0
Base Orbit
0 0
Prograde vel.
 1  0
Man. date
 1  52798.7290504
Outward vel.
 1  0
Ch. plane vel.
 1  0
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 0
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
Draw Base
0 0
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
END_MFD

BEGIN_MFD Right
  TYPE User
  MODE TransX
END_MFD

BEGIN_SHIPS
GL-01:DeltaGlider
  STATUS Orbiting Earth
  RPOS -6551916.06 -7876.33 -383327.15
  RVEL 466.976 -3.288 -7785.541
  AROT 179.55 -16.90 -179.91
  AFCMODE 7
  PRPLEVEL 0:1.000000 1:0.997987
  NAVFREQ 402 94 0 0
  XPDR 0
  AAP 0:0 0:0 0:0
END
END_SHIPS

BEGIN_ExtMFD
END

flytandem · Dec 11, 2013

@blixel.
I have tweaked the scenario you provided above for a Mars to Venus then Earth trip. I suppose one has to weigh how important fuel is as compared to time of flight. For example I have the same scenario changed to leaving about 12 days later. The eject burn from low mars orbit is about 91 m/s greater (yours was about 3720 and this one is 3811) but time of flight to Earth has dropped from 366.84 (yours) to 251 (this one). And more factors could be arrival speed at Earth. Maybe getting back quicker is bad if it means burning up on entry. I think we need to define priorities in order to have something automated that is working to maximize the benefits of a flightplan.

Don't get me wrong. I think the plan you submitted is great and could easily be preferable over making it a shorter duration trip. :thumbup:

How would something automated balance the importance of these factors, fuel, duration, entry speed and there are probably other factors too.?? One would have to create a common denominator so we know how much a lb of fuel is relative to flight duration (food and O2) or per unit of speed in entry. All this is way beyond my ability to work out. Maybe I'm just worried that TransX will get so complicated that it will take the fun of manually tweaking and flying.

Code:

BEGIN_DESC
more fuel used, less time of flight
END_DESC

BEGIN_ENVIRONMENT
  System Sol
  Date MJD 57592.9730652097
END_ENVIRONMENT

BEGIN_FOCUS
  Ship GL-01
END_FOCUS

BEGIN_CAMERA
  TARGET GL-01
  MODE Cockpit
  FOV 50.00
END_CAMERA

BEGIN_HUD
  TYPE Surface
END_HUD

BEGIN_MFD Left
  TYPE User
  MODE TransX
  Ship  GL-01
  FNumber 5
  Int 1
  Orbit True
  Vector  -1005593.57456 1150271.48982 -3026091.88446
  Vector  187.046297003 -99.6695459221 -100.04309289
  Double  4.28282991638e+013
  Double  57592.9730642
  Handle Mars
  Handle NULL
  Handle NULL
Select Target
 0 Escape
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 0
Plan
0 1
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 0
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 0
Base Orbit
0 0
Prograde vel.
 1  0
Man. date
 1  57592.9730642
Outward vel.
 1  0
Ch. plane vel.
 1  0
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 3
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
Pe Distance
 1  3589615.53685
Ej Orientation
 1  0
Equatorial view
0 0
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
  Int 2
  Orbit False
  Handle Sun
  Handle Mars
  Handle Venus
Select Target
 0 Venus
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 2
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 1
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 0
Base Orbit
0 1
Prograde vel.
 1  0
Man. date
 1  57592.9727566
Outward vel.
 1  0
Ch. plane vel.
 1  0
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 0
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
Prograde vel.
 3  -5081.33303439
Eject date
 4  57605.3471472
Outward vel.
 4  -1633.61113391
Ch. plane vel.
 4  657.65
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
  Int 4
  Orbit True
  Vector  6096086280.81 -233564939.844 535952658.878
  Vector  -5749.21297689 252.969506403 -487.059186036
  Double  3.2485863e+014
  Double  57756.4329289
  Handle Venus
  Handle NULL
  Handle NULL
Select Target
 0 Escape
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 1
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 1
Plan
0 0
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 0
Base Orbit
0 0
Prograde vel.
 1  0
Man. date
 1  57592.9723511
Outward vel.
 1  0
Ch. plane vel.
 1  0
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 0
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
View Orbit
0 0
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
  Int 3
  Orbit True
  Vector  31061166849.8 -293906517.913 103262111870
  Vector  -38722.5909867 -23.4288680377 8214.74531324
  Double  1.32712764814e+020
  Double  57768.6329284
  Handle Sun
  Handle Venus
  Handle Earth
Select Target
 0 Earth
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 2
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 2
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 0
Base Orbit
0 0
Prograde vel.
 1  0
Man. date
 1  57592.9723422
Outward vel.
 1  0
Ch. plane vel.
 1  0
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 0
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
Velocity.
 1  0
Outward angle
 3  -0.624062335897
Inc. angle
 3  0.433686079693
Inherit Vel.
0 0
Eject date
 1  57768.6329284
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
  Int 5
  Orbit True
  Vector  9122515243.29 -112593590.661 2233960846.11
  Vector  -7794.37478759 98.6598443279 -1898.87662939
  Double  3.98600439969e+014
  Double  57842.8272094
  Handle Earth
  Handle NULL
  Handle NULL
Select Target
 0 None
Autoplan
0 0
Plan type
0 1
Plan
0 0
Plan
0 2
Plan
0 0
Select Minor
 0 None
Manoeuvre mode
0 0
Base Orbit
0 0
Prograde vel.
 1  0
Man. date
 1  57592.9730642
Outward vel.
 1  0
Ch. plane vel.
 1  0
Intercept with
0 0
Orbits to Icept
0 0
Graph projection
0 0
Scale to view
0 0
Advanced
0 0
Draw Base
0 0
Finvars
  Finish BaseFunction
END_MFD

BEGIN_MFD Right
  TYPE User
  MODE TransX
END_MFD

BEGIN_SHIPS
GL-01:DeltaGlider
  STATUS Landed Mars
  BASE Olympus:1
  POS -135.4299504 12.7400334
  HEADING 55.82
  RCSMODE 2
  AFCMODE 7
  PRPLEVEL 0:1.000000 1:1.000000
  IDS 0:199 100
  NAVFREQ 124 434 84 114
  XPDR 0
  GEAR 1 1.0000
  AAP 0:0 0:0 0:0
END
END_SHIPS

BEGIN_VistaBoost
END

BEGIN_ExtMFD
END

blixel · Dec 11, 2013

flytandem said:
How would something automated balance the importance of these factors, fuel, duration, entry speed and there are probably other factors too.?? One would have to create a common denominator so we know how much a lb of fuel is relative to flight duration (food and O2) or per unit of speed in entry. All this is way beyond my ability to work out. Maybe I'm just worried that TransX will get so complicated that it will take the fun of manually tweaking and flying.

In my original version of that scenario, I was arriving back at Earth red hot in a barely survivable situation. So in the version of the scenario that I posted here, I was going for the lowest Pe Velocity at Earth that I could get. I also wanted a really close pass to Venus, purely for aesthetics.

My Plan

Your Plan

But you bring up a really good point. When you have 2 or more plans that work, how do you decide which is "best" (for the sake of automated programming)?

I'm not sure there is a right answer because it depends on what you're trying to accomplish. If your goal is to win a dV challenge with no regards for time (unmanned flights don't have to worry about LOX), then the plan with the lowest dV is best. In other cases, TOF might need to be prioritized. And in other cases, there might be that element of personal preference where a human decides on some compromise between dV usage, TOF, arrival velocity, and sight seeing.

ADSWNJ · Dec 12, 2013

flytandem said:
How would something automated balance the importance of these factors, fuel, duration, entry speed and there are probably other factors too.??

Just tell TransX what your priorities are. I.e. somewhere implement a setup page with biasing values for these different things, and then let the algorithm take this into account with the scoring. E.g. if I rank short flight time much higher than dV, then you get a different result than vice versa.

I don't think these take all the fun out of a utility like TransX, in that you can still switch off the auto-mins and fly it yourself, but it's nice to have as an option if you choose to select it. (Also good for education too.)

Linguofreak · Dec 12, 2013

Enjo said:
3) Last but not least, I think that it would be cool if the Auto-Min was available also in other plans to the fullest, not only in Major Ejection Plan. I imagine that in the Sling Direct plan, it could be added to the velocity variable. You'd set the ejection date to when passing periapsis and then minimize velocity and both angles, for example when using gravity well of Jupiter, Earth from a Moon base or a star when entering a solar system. Also the same in Manouevre mode would be great. In both of these cases I first need to find an objective way to define the variables' constraints first.

Regarding point 3) I have a call to those who are interested: please provide me with scenario files with stock DG, where you think Auto-Min function would fit (like the above), and more or less what you'd expect from it, if it's not obvious. As you can see I can imagine some things, but I'm not the best TransX planner.
Thanks

I started a thread earlier about trying to put together Venus cycler trajectories in TransX. An attempt by me to set up such a trajectory by hand follows (it wasn't very successful, as I recall, I put the scenario together back in November, gave up in frustration, and shelved it), but the basic idea is to launch into an Earth->Venus Hohmann window, then sling by Venus into a trajectory that encounters Earth 8 years (10 cycler orbits) after launch at about the same point in Earths orbit as the initial launch window, and just in time for another Hohmann window. The spacecraft uses Earth to sling into the Hohmann window, and the process repeats ad infinitum.

Code:

BEGIN_DESC



END_DESC



BEGIN_ENVIRONMENT

  System Sol

  Date MJD 56599.3020047760

END_ENVIRONMENT



BEGIN_FOCUS

  Ship GL-01

END_FOCUS



BEGIN_CAMERA

  TARGET GL-01

  MODE Cockpit

  FOV 20.00

END_CAMERA



BEGIN_MFD Left

  TYPE User

  MODE TransX

  Ship  GL-01

  FNumber 6

  Int 1

  Orbit True

  Vector  2162849.32001 112480.226085 5991596.79758

  Vector  -397.598088444 -62.1496260443 144.691872385

  Double  3.98600439969e+014

  Double  56599.3020038

  Handle Earth

  Handle NULL

  Handle NULL

Select Target

 0 Escape

Autoplan

0 0

Plan type

0 0

Plan

0 1

Plan

0 0

Plan

0 0

Select Minor

 0 None

Manoeuvre mode

0 0

Base Orbit

0 0

Prograde vel.

 0  0

Man. date

 0  56599.2914001

Outward vel.

 0  0

Ch. plane vel.

 0  0

Intercept with

0 0

Orbits to Icept

0 0

Graph projection

0 0

Scale to view

0 0

Advanced

0 0

Pe Distance

 0  7645212

Ej Orientation

 0  0

Equatorial view

0 0

Finvars

  Finish BaseFunction

  Int 2

  Orbit False

  Handle Sun

  Handle Earth

  Handle Venus

Select Target

 0 Venus

Autoplan

0 0

Plan type

0 2

Plan

0 0

Plan

0 0

Plan

0 1

Select Minor

 0 None

Manoeuvre mode

0 0

Base Orbit

0 1

Prograde vel.

 0  0

Man. date

 0  56599.2914064

Outward vel.

 0  0

Ch. plane vel.

 0  0

Intercept with

0 0

Orbits to Icept

0 0

Graph projection

0 0

Scale to view

0 0

Advanced

0 0

Prograde vel.

 2  -2720.02361543

Eject date

 4  56609.5915625

Outward vel.

 1  -1287.21048904

Ch. plane vel.

 1  532.6

Finvars

  Finish BaseFunction

  Int 4

  Orbit True

  Vector  -1651381409.9 -3529787924.04 4809985612.2

  Vector  1277.2269449 2760.88123451 -3754.88278562

  Double  3.2485863e+014

  Double  56740.0954359

  Handle Venus

  Handle NULL

  Handle NULL

Select Target

 0 Escape

Autoplan

0 0

Plan type

0 1

Plan

0 0

Plan

0 1

Plan

0 0

Select Minor

 0 None

Manoeuvre mode

0 0

Base Orbit

0 0

Prograde vel.

 0  0

Man. date

 0  56599.2916541

Outward vel.

 0  0

Ch. plane vel.

 0  0

Intercept with

0 0

Orbits to Icept

0 0

Graph projection

0 0

Scale to view

0 0

Advanced

0 0

View Orbit

0 0

Finvars

  Finish BaseFunction

  Int 3

  Orbit True

  Vector  -36648068082.6 732658590.823 -102202521556

  Vector  37263.7626379 -3520.65186053 -12655.1530365

  Double  1.32712764814e+020

  Double  56754.7761865

  Handle Sun

  Handle Venus

  Handle Earth

Select Target

 0 Earth

Autoplan

0 0

Plan type

0 2

Plan

0 0

Plan

0 0

Plan

0 2

Select Minor

 0 None

Manoeuvre mode

0 0

Base Orbit

0 0

Prograde vel.

 0  0

Man. date

 0  56599.3020038

Outward vel.

 0  0

Ch. plane vel.

 0  0

Intercept with

0 0

Orbits to Icept

0 18

Graph projection

0 0

Scale to view

0 0

Advanced

0 0

Velocity.

 0  0

Outward angle

 2  -0.459904729876

Inc. angle

 2  -0.934358524397

Inherit Vel.

0 0

Eject date

 0  56754.7761865

Finvars

  Finish BaseFunction

  Int 4

  Orbit True

  Vector  -8208636261 3583206757.8 -2158115519.66

  Vector  3718.59068144 -1218.80871608 879.709420075

  Double  3.98600439969e+014

  Double  59508.2386995

  Handle Earth

  Handle NULL

  Handle NULL

Select Target

 0 Escape

Autoplan

0 0

Plan type

0 1

Plan

0 0

Plan

0 1

Plan

0 0

Select Minor

 0 None

Manoeuvre mode

0 0

Base Orbit

0 0

Prograde vel.

 0  0

Man. date

 0  56599.3020038

Outward vel.

 0  0

Ch. plane vel.

 0  0

Intercept with

0 0

Orbits to Icept

0 0

Graph projection

0 0

Scale to view

0 0

Advanced

0 0

View Orbit

0 0

Finvars

  Finish BaseFunction

  Int 3

  Orbit True

  Vector  85031251408.9 2255975178.86 122267136020

  Vector  -21357.8582986 -1460.79750148 17592.5733247

  Double  1.32712838556e+020

  Double  59535.5896933

  Handle Sun

  Handle Earth

  Handle Venus

Select Target

 0 Venus

Autoplan

0 0

Plan type

0 2

Plan

0 0

Plan

0 0

Plan

0 2

Select Minor

 0 None

Manoeuvre mode

0 0

Base Orbit

0 0

Prograde vel.

 0  0

Man. date

 0  56599.2911845

Outward vel.

 0  0

Ch. plane vel.

 0  0

Intercept with

0 0

Orbits to Icept

0 0

Graph projection

0 0

Scale to view

0 0

Advanced

0 0

Velocity.

 0  0

Outward angle

 0  -6.82674403119e-014

Inc. angle

 0  2.3666664657

Inherit Vel.

0 0

Eject date

 0  59535.5896933

Finvars

  Finish BaseFunction

END_MFD



BEGIN_MFD Right

  TYPE User

  MODE TransX

END_MFD



BEGIN_SHIPS

ISS:ProjectAlpha_ISS

  STATUS Orbiting Earth

  RPOS 4087979.19 -5301398.61 690145.66

  RVEL -5938.133 -4267.373 2391.723

  AROT 167.91 -59.58 -56.22

  VROT 0.07 0.01 0.01

  AFCMODE 7

  IDS 0:588 10 1:586 10 2:584 10 3:582 10 4:580 10

  NAVFREQ 0 0

  XPDR 466

END

Mir:Mir

  STATUS Orbiting Earth

  RPOS -5736583.15 -229806.06 -3395611.60

  RVEL 3953.966 -389.950 -6631.654

  AROT -179.63 -37.55 -90.97

  AFCMODE 7

  IDS 0:540 10 1:542 10 2:544 10

  XPDR 482

END

Luna-OB1:Wheel

  STATUS Orbiting Moon

  RPOS -1503984.88 1657431.73 22.65

  RVEL -1096.031 -994.616 -0.043

  AROT 0.00 0.00 -91.41

  VROT 0.00 0.00 10.00

  AFCMODE 7

  IDS 0:560 10 1:564 10

  XPDR 494

END

GL-01:DeltaGlider

  STATUS Landed Earth

  POS -82.4988276 23.0005396

  HEADING 174.13

  AFCMODE 7

  PRPLEVEL 0:1.000000 1:1.000000

  NAVFREQ 0 0 0 0

  XPDR 0

  GEAR 1 1.0000

  AAP 0:0 0:0 0:0

END

GL-02:DeltaGlider

  STATUS Landed Mars

  BASE Olympus:3

  POS -135.4300000 12.7366196

  HEADING 0.00

  AFCMODE 7

  PRPLEVEL 0:1.000000 1:1.000000

  NAVFREQ 0 0 0 0

  XPDR 0

  GEAR 1 1.0000

  AAP 0:0 0:0 0:0

END

SH-01:ShuttleA

  STATUS Landed Earth

  POS -0.0000000 48.0000000

  HEADING 0.00

  AFCMODE 7

  PRPLEVEL 0:1.000000 1:1.000000

  NAVFREQ 0 0

  XPDR 0

  UCGO @@0,1,0,0,@@1,1,0,0,@@2,1,0,0,@@3,1,0,0,@@4,1,0,0,@@5,1,0,0,@@6,1,0,0,@@7,1,0,0,

  UCGO @@8,1,0,0,@@9,1,0,0,@@10,1,0,0,@@11,1,0,0,@@12,1,0,0,@@13,1,0,0,@@14,1,0,0,

  UCGO @@15,1,0,0,@@16,1,0,0,@@17,1,0,0,

  UCGO @@0,1,0,0,@@1,1,0,0,@@2,1,0,0,@@3,1,0,0,@@4,1,0,0,@@5,1,0,0,@@6,1,0,0,@@7,1,0,0,

  UCGO @@8,1,0,0,@@9,1,0,0,@@10,1,0,0,@@11,1,0,0,@@12,1,0,0,@@13,1,0,0,@@14,1,0,0,

  UCGO @@15,1,0,0,@@16,1,0,0,@@17,1,0,0,

  PODANGLE 0.0000 0.0000

  DOCKSTATE 0 0.0000

  AIRLOCK 0 0.0000

  GEAR 0 0.0000

  PAYLOAD MASS 0.0 0

END

END_SHIPS



BEGIN_ExtMFD

END



BEGIN_ReFuelMFD

  SCENARIO_TREE 

    NAMED Computers

    END_NODE 

  END_NODE 

END

Ripley · Dec 12, 2013

blixel said:
...If your goal is to win a dV challenge with no regards for time...then the plan with the lowest dV is best...

Speaking of "official" Orbiter challenges, there will be the need of more sophisticated anti-cheat measures (LUA?), because if everyone is using a "magical auto-min" generated plan, there won't be no winners anymore.

Well...perhaps not, I'm not such an advanced user, but the issue deserves (maybe) some thought.

flytandem said:
...I'm just worried that TransX will get so complicated that it will take the fun of manually tweaking and flying...

It's just another choice, another flavour of TransX (and what a tasty one!).
~~There's always the previous dgatsoulis' version~~ (Oops! I've just noticed he pulled it off OH).
There's still the old faithful "enterbutton_graphicsfix" version available for those who want to manually tweak and dial-in their values/plans.

sorindafabico · Dec 13, 2013

I'm a little confused about the versions of TransX. I suppose there are:

- Vanilla
- Graphics Fix Version
- dgatsoulis version?
- any other?

blixel · Dec 13, 2013

sorindafabico said:
I'm a little confused about the versions of TransX. I suppose there are:

- Vanilla
- Graphics Fix Version
- dgatsoulis version?
- any other?

I would look at it this way. You have:

- The version that comes packaged with Orbiter 2010. (Which is broken, so no one should use it.)
- The tried and true graphics fix / enter button version. (Continue using this version if you like I suppose.)
- The 2013.11.28 version that dgatsoulis put on OH sparked some new development interest in TransX. [ame="http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=6393"]The 2013.12.08 dgatsoulis+Enjo version[/ame] added to the work that dgatsoulis started, so it simply replaces his original 2013.11.28 dgatsoulis-only version. (As such, dgats has removed it from OH. So I wouldn't even consider that a separate version at this point.)

Bottom line - if you want the new fixes & features, use the dgatsoulis+Enjo version. If you're content with what you had, continue using the graphics fix / enter button version.

sorindafabico · Dec 13, 2013

The 2013.12.08 version seems very interesting. Thank you very much!

orb · Dec 13, 2013

blixel said:
You have:

- The version that comes packaged with Orbiter 2010. (Which is broken, so no one should use it.)

And additionally:

- The version that comes packaged with Orbiter Beta since build 101116 with: "Fixed bug in pen/brush allocation/deallocation" and "Added module description and category string table entries".

Enjo · Dec 13, 2013

Thank you for all your plan submissions. I'll be taking them into account in the next iteration of the Auto-Min feature. What's still missing is using a large planet's/Sun's gravity well to enter its orbit. Could I ask for this as well? (pun unintended)

Now the good news:
I was able to find and remove bottlenecks of TransX. The time where CPU was wasting most of its power was when the module was dealing with undefined variables' values (results of division by 0). Now the Auto-Min doesn't have any impact on on FPS. I'll make a release today and write a blog entry about technical details.

flytandem said:
How would something automated balance the importance of these factors, fuel, duration, entry speed and there are probably other factors too.?? One would have to create a common denominator so we know how much a lb of fuel is relative to flight duration (food and O2) or per unit of speed in entry. All this is way beyond my ability to work out. Maybe I'm just worried that TransX will get so complicated that it will take the fun of manually tweaking and flying.

I think it's a slight misunderstanding. The sole purpose of Auto-Min is to minimize the Closest Approach. Note that for any other minimization target to be make sense, the Cl.App. has to be minimized first. Sure, thanks to an appropriate choice of velocities' constraints, the dv is minimized by design, but that's it.

ADSWNJ said:
Just tell TransX what your priorities are. I.e. somewhere implement a setup page with biasing values for these different things, and then let the algorithm take this into account with the scoring. E.g. if I rank short flight time much higher than dV, then you get a different result than vice versa.

I'm not planning to create such a complex system.

ADSWNJ said:
I don't think these take all the fun out of a utility like TransX, in that you can still switch off the auto-mins and fly it yourself, but it's nice to have as an option if you choose to select it. (Also good for education too.)

That's the point - to remove the tediousness of manual tuning. And to make it an option.

blixel said:
I'm not sure there is a right answer because it depends on what you're trying to accomplish. If your goal is to win a dV challenge with no regards for time (unmanned flights don't have to worry about LOX), then the plan with the lowest dV is best. In other cases, TOF might need to be prioritized. And in other cases, there might be that element of personal preference where a human decides on some compromise between dV usage, TOF, arrival velocity, and sight seeing.

Totally agree here. I believe that it's widely theorized how much responsibility AIs and algos should take, but I find it natural for human to make the final decision, having all data digested by the AIs and algos in a matter if milliseconds. And he has to have fun with making the decision too!

Ripley said:
Speaking of "official" Orbiter challenges, there will be the need of more sophisticated anti-cheat measures (LUA?), because if everyone is using a "magical auto-min" generated plan, there won't be no winners anymore.

Mark your challenges with "Winners don't use Auto-Min"? :lol:

dgatsoulis · Dec 13, 2013

Enjo said:
Thank you for all your plan submissions. I'll be taking them into account in the next iteration of the Auto-Min feature. What's still missing is using a large planet's/Sun's gravity well to enter its orbit. Could I ask for this as well? (pun unintended)

I am not sure I understand.

You want a hyperbolic arrival at a planet and a maneuver set up at periapsis to encounter one of its moons?
(i.e Earth→Jupiter (burn at periapsis)→Ganymede?)

and then another scenario "up a level"?

(hyperbolic arrival at the solar system (maneuver at perihelion)→Earth)?

Enjo said:
Now the good news:
I was able to find and remove bottlenecks of TransX. The time where CPU was wasting most of its power was when the module was dealing with undefined variables' values (results of division by 0). Now the Auto-Min doesn't have any impact on on FPS. I'll make a release today and write a blog entry about technical details.

That's great news, though I can't say I noticed any impact on my fps with the version that's on O-H. I 've only tested with D3D9, so perhaps it's noticable with the inline client.

Enjo said:
Mark your challenges with "Winners don't use Auto-Min"? :lol:

Make "beat the Auto-min" challenges. :lol:

Seriously though, a good challenge has ~~nothing~~ very little to do with what kind of MFD you are going to use to accomplish the task at hand.
It's more about understanding the basic principles that apply in the situation and then using the correct tool (be it an MFD, or even a calculator and a piece of paper) to complete the task.

Enjo · Dec 13, 2013

dgatsoulis said:
I am not sure I understand.

You want a hyperbolic arrival at a planet and a maneuver set up at periapsis to encounter one of its moons?
(i.e Earth→Jupiter (burn at periapsis)→Ganymede?)

and then another scenario "up a level"?

(hyperbolic arrival at the solar system (maneuver at perihelion)→Earth)?

Yes, that's exactly what I mean. This should be done with SlingDirect plan, no?

dgatsoulis said:
That's great news, though I can't say I noticed any impact on my fps with the version that's on O-H. I 've only tested with D3D9, so perhaps it's noticable with the inline client.

You should notice how much slower the MFD reacts by moving the date when both velocities have Auto-Min on. Also FPS readout should drop significantly. Well, not anymore. I'm just preparing the release.

dgatsoulis · Dec 13, 2013

Enjo said:
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. This should be done with SlingDirect plan, no?

A SlingDirect with "Inherit Vel: Yes" (or "No" and adjust the velocity manually), would be needed if you exited the planet and headed for another planet. In this plan you adjust 2 variables "Out. Angle" and "Inc. Angle". If you have selected "Inherit Vel: No" you adjust a third variable which is the "Velocity".

For a moon that orbits the encounter planet, you turn on the maneuver mode and setup a maneuver, with 4 variables (pro,pl.ch.,outw and date).

That's why I asked which one you mean. Both examples of my previous post need a maneuver at (or close to) periapsis, not a SlingDirect plan.

The plans flytandem and blixel posted are examples of Sling Direct plans.

Enjo said:
You should notice how much slower the MFD reacts by moving the date when both velocities have Auto-Min on. Also FPS readout should drop significantly. Well, not anymore. I'm just preparing the release.

With Prograde, Ch.Plane and Outward set at "Auto-min" I noticed a drop from 120 fps to 90 fps, while I was changing the date.
It went back up to 120 as soon as I stopped clicking on the "++" for the date variable.
Funny, hadn't noticed it before. Great job for taking care of that. :thumbup:

Update TransX development

Mostly harmless

Tutorial Publisher

ele2png user

Addon Developer

Mostly harmless

Donator

ele2png user

Tutorial Publisher

Donator

Scientist

Well-known member

Tutorial translator

New member

Donator

New member

New member

Mostly harmless

ele2png user

Mostly harmless

ele2png user

Similar threads