World of 2001 v3.1 released

[Sputnik]

 
   Finally, it's done!
 
   I'm having a problem updating with OrbitHangar, so for now it's just available at AvSim:
http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=orbships&DLID=95597

   Enjoy!

[Schimz]

Cool : )
Danke

[Momo]

[80mileshigh]

Well, it was some time coming, but at least we got it out in 2006... just!

[80mileshigh]

OK, I figure this announcement could do with a visual accompaniment...



And here's and image to give an idea of the progress since version 3.0...

[StrangeVortex]

Message modifié ( 17-12-2009 11:35 )

[Sunhillow]

Wow!
Looks really fantastic

[Marvin]

Great!
*downloading*

[EDIT] Oh [censored]! This download will take months at this download-speed (30kb/sec)!

[EDIT] Now it's gone down to 25kb/sec! Is there another download-place e.g. orbithangar?



Post Edited ( 12-30-06 17:34 )

[Sputnik]

 
   Well, I'm still working on getting it to OrbitHangar.  No luck so far.

[Moser]

Awesome, Sputnik!

Is there anyway to make the lunar landers LandMFD compatible? I just hate trying to do it manually! I loved 3.0, in
fact, after I downloaded the Dynosaur not too long ago, I got World of 2001 and watched the movie.

[Urwumpe]

Marvin a écrit:
Great!
*downloading*

[EDIT] Oh [censored]! This download will take months at this download-speed (30kb/sec)!

[EDIT] Now it's gone down to 25kb/sec! Is there another download-place e.g. orbithangar?

Hey!!!!!

I managed to download it using only 6 KB/s, a ISDN flatrate and some patience. I was the first to download it, but surely not
the first to test it.

Sputnik: Was it intentionally that you made the first scenario of the new storyline timed so well, that the aircraft first
flys into the rising sun and later towards the rising moon? Really a great look

[80mileshigh]

Urwumpe wrote:
Sputnik: Was it intentionally that you made the first scenario of the new storyline timed so well, that the aircraft first
flys into the rising sun and later towards the rising moon? Really a great look

Urwumpe, I made the M-53 and those scenarios. In this instance the location of celestial objects is coincidence. The dates of
the scenarios are however, designed to fit with what we know from the film about the Soviet team at Tchalinko.


Happy New Year everyone!

[Moser]

Well,

Got the moon landing down! This is such a great addon. One more question. Why is Station V in such a relative high
inclination to the moon? Is this to keep Station V in reach of the Russians?

[Spence]

Probably the best addon available for orbiter, if not in the top three.
One minor bug, the busy day at station V scenario and the russians at station V scenario gives a white screen when i
attempt to load it, and I can't seem to find a good reason (as I have both a airly high-end computer and dbartle's
discover v5.0).
Nonetheless, thanks an awful lot.

[Sputnik]

 
   Okay, it's up on OH.

   Spence,

   GROAN!  The culprit for the "busy day" scenario is the pod.  In v3.0, we made you modify dbartles' pod to add a docking
port.  In v3.1, we just included a pre-modified version in the config/vessels/2001 folder.  Unfortunately, the "busy day"
scenario references the old pod location, at config/vessels.  Since we also took out the instructions on how to modify the
pod, this doesn't work.
   I've uploaded a fixed version to OH.  Alternatively, you can just change the .scn so that references to Pod are changed to
2001/Pod.  That simple.

   I don't know what the problem is with the "Soviets at Station V" scenario, though.  That has no pod, and I can't think of
any other reason.  Anybody else having problems?


   Moser,

   Yup, "International Space Station V" is in a high-inclination orbit so that the Soviets can get there.  Station IV is in a
similar orbit, but with the plane inclined so that one or the other isn't usually too badly aligned for a moon shuttle.
   We can't modify the Aries, Gagarin, etc. to work with LandMFD, but LandMFD can be modified to work with them.  That's one
of the improvements LazyD is making to his new MFD.  I don't know the status, but I do know he got the new version working.
So it's on the way.  Hopefully.

   Urwumpe,

   Alain is presumably working hard at taking the sketchy notes I gave him and converting it into the "tech" page on the
World of 2001 website at http://www.worldof2001.com
   Virtual cockpits are baselined for v3.2.
   "Last mile" cargo handling (setting it down on the moon, trucking it to the Mars base from where you landed it)  is also
something for the future.  We could presumably also do "first mile" cargo handling, where you put in in the bay and tow the
ship out to the catapult.  Is there any interest in that sort of thing?

[Urwumpe]

sputnik: there sure is interest, the addon is really something which calls for a elite-like "free play" mode, like doing some
cargo runs around the solar system. But what would be enough for the first start would be a way to unload the cargo
containers from the Gagarin or Aries to a place next door to the landing area.  

Maybe i can simply do a simple cartesian container robot for the moon bases in anim8or to satisfy my dark desires, only need
to research a good standard height for the ships. Any recommendations?

I already wanted to complain that the wheelbrakes on the M-53 are not working well - until i read the manual and saw that it
does not use the old orbiter standard binding (',' and '.' for left and right wheel brake). A bit unusual, but no problem
afterwards.  And i promise next time i also don't land at Mach 0.5. :D

[Sputnik]

 
   You can always just hit "J", and ignore the fact that the cargo containers are dropping right through the ship....

   A lunar-landing Gagarin has the platform height at 14.7 meters above the ground.  The box is attached to a point on its
bottom, directly to the flat face.  However, you probably want to grab an attach point on the top (there is one), 2.475
meters higher up.
   The Aries is a bit trickier; presumably we'd want to offload cargo that's inside the bay, mounted on the floor.  These are
actually attached by a horizontal attachment halfway above the floor, so that you can also stack upper stages and satellites
with it.  Those points are at 15.3 meters height; the floor height should be about 1.2 meters less than that.

[Sputnik]

 
   OBTW, here's an easter egg:  the boxes can also be carried by Kev33's NASA Skycrane at
http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=2230
 
   So you COULD load up an Orion II on the ground.
 
   Nautilus also reported success towing the Orion to the catapult with the shuttle tow vehicle, but Alain and I never got a
good tutorial out of him.  So if you learn something doing this, teach me!

[80mileshigh]

   Nautilus also reported success towing the Orion to the catapult with the shuttle tow vehicle, but Alain and I never got a
good tutorial out of him.  So if you learn something doing this, teach me!

The existing attachment points, as changed since the 3.0 Orbiter 2006 patch, will permit the kind of operations Nautilus
demonstrated though, right?

I think the only problem was Nautilus was using Pylon MFD, which neither Sputnik nor myself had used too much to that point.

These fantastic screenshots, by Nautilus, show some of the ideas he was working with, in the development of the add-on.
In fact this was very soon after the release of 3.0, and I think some of these good ideas got a bit lost as we sought to
establish a theme and narrative for the new version...








If end users report getting a kick out of these possibilities then I guess we should put something in the documentation about it.

By the way, I should have the tech page up on the website by the end of the week, if not sooner.



Post Edited ( 01-01-07 01:12 )

[Urwumpe]

So, my first guess of 15m platform height was not too far off, by using shipedit.

So theoretically, it would be enough to have two work platforms on each landing pad, which move towards the landed spacecraft
and enclose it. 0.6m is sure no problem for such a platform to adapt in height, but landing orientation could be a big
problem for a fixed system.

Something like that would be a nice mobile solution, but the problem would be getting into the cargo bay with such a design:



Somehow all my solutions get close to a 15m high forklift... how much space is above the containers in the Aries? My
currently best solution consists of a forklift platform with cockpit, which sits on a cherry picker like robot arm. The
vehicle would transport the containers between vehicle and a terminal area. The platform would be stabilized so its always
horizontal, balancing is done by moving counterweights in the back of the work arm. The arm would extend the length of the
vehicle a lot like it is currently (roughly 10m extra...), too much IMHO.  If i could fit the total length of the vehicle to
18m (length limit on trucks on german roads) and the stowed height on 4m, it would feel better to me.

Well dropping to the surface would be OK, if you like to have the same cargo directly into your flames at lift off... sure
feels strange.

[Sputnik]

 
   There should be plenty of clearance above the boxes in the Aries...there's enough to stack boxes; in fact, there are two
attach points that allow you to do exactly that.
   Now, if you go ahead and USE those points to stack boxes four and five in the bay...well, you're in trouble; there's just
about no clearance at all.  OTOH, you probably can't land an Aries with five, or even four, boxes on the moon, so it
shouldn't be a problem.

[Urwumpe]

Well, the problem of getting a forklift and transport truck into one vehicle has been solved on the paper... and i don't like
it. The vehicle would be at least 5-6 m wide and 12-16m long (but only 4 - 4.5 m high when driving with a container). The
dimensions are pretty large for a single 6m long container, and getting two containers on the truck would make it pretty
unrealistic to keep it balanced.

Maybe a separated approach would be better... A simple mobile lift system, 20m high and a electrical wheeled truck which
could dock to the lift system, gets raised into the cargo bay and uses its own forklift system to load one of the cargo boxes
on its cargo platform, gets lowered again to the ground and drives to the container terminal... This increases the complexity
of the operation, but makes the the vehicles simpler...


damn tradeoffs... can somebody make me stop thinking like an engineer on new year...

Any idea which would be the most Clarkesque solution for the problem?

EDIT: OK, maybe i was not engineer enough... if the Aries has the highest cargo bay, and the Gagarin has a open top, A simple fixed crane like manipulator could be enough. just two or three joints for bringing the arm into the cargo bay or above the gagarin and grap the cargo... No height adjustment needed for the arm, landing accuracy could be pretty low, and as we have a vacuum on the moon, the safe distance between crane and landing spacecraft can be pretty small... OK... back to the drawing board...



Message modifié ( 01-01-2007 03:34 )

[Missioncmdr]

I'd just like to say that this is a great add-on. The amount of ships that there are to fly and the amount of detail is
amazing. Although I could use some help on one part. I have been attempting the Artificial Comet 5 mission. I can't
seem to get the apogee at three times the orbit of Neptune, as described. I can't even get the apogee near
Neptune's orbit. Is there something I might be doing wrong?

[Sputnik]

 
   Urwumpe,

   I was thinking in terms of a scissor lift, which would fold down onto a flatbed truck.  You probably couldn't get the
boxes to roll across the bay onto it, though this would be the simplest thing in real life.  Instead, you'd probably just
teleport the thing two or three meters sideways when the scissor lift's code "grabs" it.
   But the crane idea works well too.

   OBTW, the solution should work on Mars, too.  It makes to difference with an Aries, but a Gagarin-M is 1.75 meters longer
due to the aeroshield.


   Missioncmdr,

   I just did it two weeks ago or so, so I'm sure it works.  Did you "fling" the payload with the Taurus as described in
scenarios two and three?  If you just launch the Artificial Comet with Centaur-O from the bay of the Orion, you won't get
anywhere near the Delta-V you need.

[Missioncmdr]

I am using the Taurus to fling the spacecraft. But now that I think about it, the timing of the burn is probably just off. I
will try some more attempts.

EDIT - It is probably just the timing. But I still can't seem to get it right. The scenario 3 works right, but I can't seem to do scenario 2 correctly. Any tips on how the Taurus burn should done?



Post Edited ( 01-01-07 07:50 )