See site in english Voir le site en francais
Website skin:
home  download  forum  link  contact

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Another question/comment/idea regarding the DGIII - power management.  (Read 11801 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Staiduk

  • Guest
06 November 2004, 07:29:27
Dan: While I've got you here; I've a question and comment regarding the DGIII's power systems:

I like the startup; however I believe - especially on long trips - the APU is a bit of a cheat - by that I mean; it's free
power - it provides power without any cost. I was wondering about the possibility of making a slight change in future
editions; if people agreed, thus:

Under normal operation; the APU provides all necessary electrical power for the ship as now. However it consumes
fuel to do so; likely at an extremely low level (Perhaps a couple pounds a day) but nonetheless creates a drain. For
extended trips; such as interplanetary runs or my week-long trips out to the prospecting ranges; a pilot would
manage his resources by shutting down the APU and running off the batteries; restarting the APU once in a while to
recharge.

This would require careful management on the part of the pilot; shutting down system's he/she's not using at the
time; such as the airlock, engine panel (while coasting or landed) etc. else the batteries drain too fast.

Is this possibly an idea people would be interested in, or even possible?

To be totally honest; I've been reluctant to ask; I can imagine just how much work you're already doing on the ship;
please know you've got the entire community's admiration on that - but it couldn't hurt to ask. :)

Cheers!


Offline canadave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • Country: Canada ca
  • Karma: 0
Reply #1 - 06 November 2004, 20:55:24
I know Dan's probably going to kill me for this, but I have to say I really like that idea.  Can I throw out another idea
based on that?......

If the DG3 is within a certain range of the Sun, it can draw power using the solar panel skin ("What solar panel skin?"
you ask?  Come on, people, didn't you know the DG3's panels are solar energy-absorbent?)

But beyond a certain distance from the Sun, the power is consumed by fuel onboard (as Staiduk suggests).

Just a thought.  It doesn't matter though--Dan's going to nod his head politely and say, "Great idea," and then he's
going to file both ideas in the waste recyclable disposal unit :)



Offline Simonpro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
  • Karma: 0
Reply #2 - 06 November 2004, 21:16:23
rather than having some on-off solar power system why dont we go to something that is actually realistic :p
Base it upon the power output of the sun and scale for distance - it follows a simple enough formula, if only i could
remember it :)
Ill repost when ive got it :p


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

Offline canadave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • Country: Canada ca
  • Karma: 0
Reply #3 - 06 November 2004, 21:23:35
Quote
rather than having some on-off solar power system why dont we go to something that is actually realistic :p
umm, so as to make it slightly easier on Dan, and he doesn't do this? :wall:



Offline freespace2dotcom

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 2251
  • Karma: 1
Reply #4 - 07 November 2004, 21:21:28
But if it isn't realistic, then it's kinda pointless to do, don't you think?

;)



Offline canadave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • Country: Canada ca
  • Karma: 0
Reply #5 - 07 November 2004, 23:42:59
No, I disagree.  Believe me, I'm ALL for realism.  I love realism.  Dan can vouch for how many times I annoyed him
during the DG3's development, hounding him for "realistic" things.  But there are times when a compromise is
perfectly acceptable.  If you think about it, everything in Orbiter is a compromise on realism to a certain degree
(although of course, its brilliance as a simulation lies in its attempt to get as close to realism as possible).  Then, too,
there are limitations as to what a programmer can do...or what a programmer wants to bother doing (it's not like
anyone's paid for this).  In short, to insist on having nothing short of some sort of "perfect" realism, or to refuse to do
something unless it can be modeled realistically, would be, in my opinion, unrealistic :) and somewhat stubborn as
well.



Offline Simonpro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
  • Karma: 0
Reply #6 - 07 November 2004, 23:44:10
Christ, its only about 5 lines of code to add over what you suggested - i mean its not exactly rewriting the entire
thing :)


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

Offline StarLost

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 683
  • Country: Canada ca
  • Karma: 17
Reply #7 - 08 November 2004, 01:01:17
Quote
Simonpro wrote:
Christ, its only about 5 lines of code to add over what you suggested - i mean its not exactly rewriting the entire
thing :)


Yeah, five lines here, five lines there. Times the number of requests. Easy to ask for when it's not your time you're talking
about. Eventually Dan would have no time for eating, sleeping, Orbiter, ... friendly exercise ...

Dan took the original and has made two versions since, progressing each time. Alex Blass took the Shuttle A and redid it to
make the Shuttle A2 and improved on it.  

There is nothing that says someone else can't take the DGIII and remake it into a DGIV or DGIII mk2 and present it to the
rest of the community. Doesn't mean Dan has to do it.

Might be a good opportunity to rehone your programming and artistry skills.  Or to learn new ones.



Offline Simonpro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
  • Karma: 0
Reply #8 - 08 November 2004, 01:42:11
wowowow, i was just making the suggestion that if dan could be bothered adding new lines of code to add in solar
panels then he probably wouldnt mind adding a couple of extra lines (which'd be less than the number needed to
create the solar array powering) to make it realistic.
If i wanted to create my own DGIII then i would do, but i dont really want to as i have enough other orbiter related
projects as it is.


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

Offline canadave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • Country: Canada ca
  • Karma: 0
Reply #9 - 08 November 2004, 02:56:41
If it's only five extra lines, then that's great, go for it.  I was merely trying to point out that going an extra mile solely  
for the sake of exact realism is not always necessary.  If the extra mile in this case is only five lines of code, then
more power to Dan if he wants to do it.  Far be it from me to stand in the way of realism.



Offline freespace2dotcom

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 2251
  • Karma: 1
Reply #10 - 08 November 2004, 10:53:23
I don't really think we have to worry wither way.

I think dan isn't going to do the solar thingy. ;)



Offline DanSteph

  • Administrator
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 15407
  • Karma: 256
  • Hein, quoi !?
    • FsPassengers
Reply #11 - 08 November 2004, 13:09:09
The main reason is that I don't have time to work on the DGIII yet
and the second main reason is that the solar thingy is ... a radiator :)

Anyway taken the work I have currently I can't on my live work on the DGIII yet.
if by any chance I would have time in the future, any improvment would be done
on a "DGIV"  I'm fed up with the DGIII model and its lack of possibility due to
it's size.

Search about DGEX from schimz there is somes pic on those forum.

here for example: http://orbiter.dansteph.com/forum/index.php?topic=632.msg7290#msg7290

Dan



Post Edited ( 11-08-04 13:20 )


Offline Schimz

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 1598
  • Karma: 1
Reply #12 - 08 November 2004, 15:58:50
Quote
DanSteph wrote:
Search about DGEX from schimz there is somes pic on those forum.
Dan




:gift:


Offline canadave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • Country: Canada ca
  • Karma: 0
Reply #13 - 08 November 2004, 17:27:15
DeltaGlider3?  What's a DeltaGlider3?

Wow.  Put side windows on that puppy and you've got yourself a spaceliner, my friends!  That thing rocks.  Dan, I
can't read French...what's the gist of the thread you pasted in here?

Is the DGEX designer going to use the same panel and functionality (EVA, realistic life support, etc.) as the DG3?

Coool...



Offline Atom

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 1099
  • Karma: 0
Reply #14 - 08 November 2004, 18:23:28
WAH 8o



Intel Pentium 4 630 3Ghz|1024mb 400mhz DDR RAM|ASUS P5P800-VM|Nvidia GeForce 6200 256mb|Creative Sound Blaster Pro Value!|Windows XP SP2

Offline DanSteph

  • Administrator
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 15407
  • Karma: 256
  • Hein, quoi !?
    • FsPassengers
Reply #15 - 09 November 2004, 02:42:22
Quote
canadave wrote:
DeltaGlider3?  What's a DeltaGlider3?

I hope you noticed there is a new DGII since your work on the doc:
it's the dellagliderIII DeltaGlider3 much know as DGIII.

It have many improvment over the "old" DGII see the download page.

Quote
canadave wrote:
Is the DGEX designer going to use the same panel and functionality (EVA, realistic life support, etc.) as the DG3?

Mhhh this sentence make me think that you are aware of the DGIII anyway
I let my first quote on this post... too lazy ;)

Panel adaptation an improvment (more animation, jettisonable payload etc etc)
should be made by me ... no way that anyone can adapt the DGIII panel on
one others ship. It's because the animated part should have a precise name
and place in the mesh to work.

(the only solution would be to make a model with the parts named EXACTLY
and the SAME place like the DGIII mesh, in others word you can take the DGIII mesh
and if you don't add any poly but just move them around, the panel will work)

So to answer your post Schimz's model isn't finished and as I said already
I don't have time right now to work on a new model.

Dan


Offline canadave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • Country: Canada ca
  • Karma: 0
Reply #16 - 09 November 2004, 03:38:32
Quote
I hope you noticed there is a new DGII since your work on the doc:
it's the dellagliderIII DeltaGlider3 much know as DGIII.

It have many improvment over the "old" DGII see the download page.
Hmm...I'll have to have a look at that.  I kinda liked the old DG2.  The DG3 has too many features :P

As to the rest of it....I look forward to seeing Schimz's model with bated breath :)  But I'll always have a soft spot in
my heart for the classic DG3 (which I now realize exists).



Offline reekchaa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
  • Country: United States us
  • Karma: 2
Reply #17 - 10 November 2004, 19:01:36
Quote
canadave wrote:
I kinda liked the old DG2.  The DG3 has too many features :P
Ahhh.. then you must have missed the 'stewardess call' button, that brings you a moist towelette and application for
the mile-high-club.  ...Just for you, dave.


~ the Reekchaa

Offline canadave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • Country: Canada ca
  • Karma: 0
Reply #18 - 10 November 2004, 19:08:49
hahahaha....yeah I definitely missed that one! :)



Offline freespace2dotcom

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 2251
  • Karma: 1
Reply #19 - 13 November 2004, 13:01:27
exactly how big is that model in comparison with the current one we've got. if it's too big a change, I might suggest
you label it as a DG series model, but not as a direct descendant of the DG3. perhaps something like the "DG
Chassigny" line of DG's.

that sounds really cool. :)



Offline canadave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • Country: Canada ca
  • Karma: 0
Reply #20 - 13 November 2004, 16:56:42
Nah, I like the idea of the much bigger ship sharing the same prefix.  Look at the Saturn rocket series...the Saturn 1B
doesn't have much in common height-wise with the Saturn V! ;)  Besides, we're going from numbers (DG2, DG3) to
letters that imply "extra big" or "extra large" (DG-EX)....and it does sort of share the same basic shape.

I love it, personally :)  But by any name, any at all, that ship REALLY looks awesome.

Something that just occurred to me.  With the EX (or whatever name)...will we need a bigger landing pad??  I think
those enhanced runway/landing pad textures that preacher_mg just released on Orbithangar might be needed once
that puppy comes out.  The new texes are 4 times as big as the defaults! :0



Offline DanSteph

  • Administrator
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 15407
  • Karma: 256
  • Hein, quoi !?
    • FsPassengers
Reply #21 - 13 November 2004, 22:07:05
It's really a DeltaGlider
it's really EXtended

why not DG-EX ? :)

Anyway nothing done yet and perhaps never... gimme 30'000$ so I can live 6 month
without working like a fool for money as I do actually and you 'll have a wonderful
brand new DG-EX in 6 month with plenty of gorgeous features :)

Come-on isn't this appealing ? ... 30'000 small dollars only ? for such a lovely ship :love:

what ? ... no ? :sad:

Dan :)



Post Edited ( 11-14-04 03:31 )


Offline canadave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • Country: Canada ca
  • Karma: 0
Reply #22 - 14 November 2004, 02:02:01
LOL...

Tell ya what, Dan...if you design and build a *REAL* DG-EX, and fly it over here for me, then I'll pay you $30,000 ;)



Offline DanSteph

  • Administrator
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 15407
  • Karma: 256
  • Hein, quoi !?
    • FsPassengers
Reply #23 - 14 November 2004, 02:55:09
*shake hande with dave*
*start to grab various material in trashcan to construct a real DG-EX*
*Look at Dave that start to perspire a bit looking at his bank account*

:)

Dan


Offline canadave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • Country: Canada ca
  • Karma: 0
Reply #24 - 14 November 2004, 06:31:39
Maybe I should mention here really quickly that your real DG-EX has to be able to fly into SPACE!  It can't be some
papier-mache model!!