STS-88 (56Kers warned)

[PeriscopeDepth]

Screens from STS-88 in Space Shuttle Mission 2007 sim. Will update as I complete more of the flight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STS-88

PD

[PeriscopeDepth]

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/8075/capture31102008145620iw4.jpg

http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/8004/capture31102008150223gp8.jpg

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/4819/capture31102008150313ez2.jpg

http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/9418/capture31102008150639su5.jpg

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/6029/capture31102008150937mu2.jpg

[PeriscopeDepth]

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/3392/capture31102008151040qa3.jpg

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3457/capture31102008151210zz0.jpg

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/4953/capture31102008151237sc2.jpg

http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/1064/capture31102008151553hz5.jpg

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/994/capture31102008151645qp7.jpg

[PeriscopeDepth]

http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/1854/capture31102008151735ks8.jpg

http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/4442/capture31102008151748wi7.jpg

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/4713/capture31102008151906bv5.jpg

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/3845/capture31102008152008yc5.jpg

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/5742/capture31102008152103ip2.jpg

[PeriscopeDepth]

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/442/capture31102008152118hg3.jpg

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/2738/capture31102008152210cf9.jpg

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/441/capture31102008152242gz5.jpg

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/358/capture31102008152500zq0.jpg

http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/9636/capture31102008152754px7.jpg

[PeriscopeDepth]

http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/5597/capture31102008152817vz5.jpg

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/4417/capture31102008153126fy9.jpg

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/7353/capture31102008153132mv2.jpg

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/3025/capture31102008153135is9.jpg

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/6789/capture31102008153200ac5.jpg

[PeriscopeDepth]

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/638/capture31102008153330xx2.jpg

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/6564/capture31102008153427se2.jpg

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/1192/capture31102008153429vz7.jpg

http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/312/capture31102008153533rc2.jpg

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/9284/capture31102008153549bo2.jpg

[PeriscopeDepth]

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/9304/capture31102008153708sa2.jpg

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/361/capture31102008153808ys8.jpg

http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/9990/capture31102008160653gv1.jpg

http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/3561/capture31102008160657et6.jpg

http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/7345/capture31102008160717nx2.jpg

[PeriscopeDepth]

http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/9215/capture31102008160749dw0.jpg

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/8619/capture31102008160812ph7.jpg

http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/4829/capture31102008160908ae8.jpg

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/1403/capture31102008160935xg3.jpg

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/8025/capture31102008161003zb1.jpg

[PeriscopeDepth]

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/9956/capture31102008161152bo2.jpg

http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/1202/capture31102008161403cj0.jpg

http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/913/capture31102008161458qg2.jpg

http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/715/capture31102008161536xe6.jpg

http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/7631/capture31102008161550nh6.jpg

[PeriscopeDepth]

I'll try and make this a bit less cluttered and more sensible...

OMS circularization burn in 10 minutes. OPS105 tells us the burn will move us 103 miles and last 1 minutes and 9 seconds.
http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/6754/capture01112008163445gw7.th.jpg (http://img526.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture01112008163445gw7.jpg)

External shot of the burn.
http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/879/capture01112008163620we4.th.jpg (http://img526.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture01112008163620we4.jpg)

After the burn I manually rotate the orbiter to the proper orbit attitude.
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/3982/capture01112008164140wk9.th.jpg (http://img221.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture01112008164140wk9.jpg)

During this time I'm also setting up the computer for orbit, disabling the MPS and dumping its remaining propellant, activating all the heaters necessary to keep equipment at the right temperature, opening the payload doors, deploying the radiators, and activating navigation systems (star trackers, GPS, KU antenna). Here is a shot from the commander's seat looking out the window.
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/8284/capture01112008164300pp4.th.jpg (http://img201.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture01112008164300pp4.jpg)

View of the payload bay doors coming open from the rear window.
http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/5886/capture01112008165030yb6.th.jpg (http://img444.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture01112008165030yb6.jpg)

Monitoring the fuel cells after they were purged using the aft CRT.
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/7674/capture01112008165619eu7.th.jpg (http://img221.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture01112008165619eu7.jpg)

Endeavor in orbit on the dark side of earth, payload bay doors open and radiators deployed. All the post ascent housekeeping is taken care of and my next task will by to grapple the Unity module with RMS and attach it to the shuttles docking system. Then I will rendezvous with the Zarya module and attach the Unity module.
http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/218/capture01112008170200yl8.th.jpg (http://img252.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture01112008170200yl8.jpg)


PD

[PeriscopeDepth]

More spam from me. Hi mom!

I usually move the Canadarm over above they payload bay and then set the attitude of the wrist to give me a better idea of the correct RMS positioning.
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/8524/capture04112008224521rh9.th.jpg (http://img255.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture04112008224521rh9.jpg)

MON1 and the two RMS camera's (one at the elbow, the next further down at the wrist) are my best friends during this stuff.
http://img378.imageshack.us/img378/1986/capture04112008224659kg4.th.jpg (http://img378.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture04112008224659kg4.jpg)

Gettin' there...
http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/9231/capture04112008225235ou4.th.jpg (http://img223.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture04112008225235ou4.jpg)


RMS capture!
http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/7681/capture04112008225526we9.th.jpg (http://img223.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture04112008225526we9.jpg)



Positioning the Unity module over the APDS (the Russian made docking system the Shuttle utilizes) is a pain. It's at the outer limits of the Canadarm's movement and I often move it too far, causing the yellow REACH LIMit light to illuminate. I then have to move the RMS one joint at a time back to its limits.
http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/8185/capture04112008231810zd2.th.jpg (http://img412.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture04112008231810zd2.jpg)

But finally, I get it and watch the APDS seal itself to the Unity. This only takes a few minutes.
http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/6026/capture04112008233608dd7.th.jpg (http://img520.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture04112008233608dd7.jpg)

To Zarya, and beyond!
http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/6721/capture04112008235425vm8.th.jpg (http://img412.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture04112008235425vm8.jpg)

PD

[PeriscopeDepth]

I'm half way through my first EVA in the mission (and my first ever in the sim) and will post more shots this weekend. EVA in the sim has proven to be a frustrating orbital game of pin the tail on the donkey that just doesn't add much to an excellent systems/procedures sim, and frankly I think the sim would be better off without it. But perhaps it's not as bad during other EVAs.

PD

[Skybird]

Quite some work to post that plenty of shots!

If they would not have ingored my questions and the activation sequence after installation would not be like it is (limited number of reinstallaton, hardware-depending code-genheration), I would be into this sim myself. I love button-pressing. :D

[PeriscopeDepth]

If they would not have ingored my questions and the activation sequence after installation would not be like it is (limited number of reinstallaton, hardware-depending code-genheration), I would be into this sim myself. I love button-pressing. :D Small sim developers aren't likely to stray from rigorous activation methods anytime soon. With their small audience and piracy being as rampant as it is, you'll be locking yourself out of a lot of good sims. I guess paying $50-$70 and being subject to wacky DRM is just the price of admission these days. I stay away from the really malignant stuff (Starforce), but the rest is just how things are now for the most part.

And this one's especially a good one, been a long while since I've gotten this into a sim. :)

PD

[Lurchi]

I really like this Simulation too. In the past i had the old Shuttle Sim from Virgin and i was pleased when i discovered SSM2007 this summer. The Copy Protection didn't cause any problems so far although it is a bit disappointing that i cannot run it on my notebook because of the way it works.

EVAs are a bit tricky but the new updates makes the sim are a little bit more forgiving when it comes to reach the correct position for making the next step in the mission.

I played all missions up to STS-93 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STS-93
which is a nice mission to relax and do some sightseeing in camparison to the former tougher ones :D.

http://img379.imageshack.us/img379/7997/shuttle01082008195948bb3.th.jpg (http://img379.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shuttle01082008195948bb3.jpg)http://img379.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/1607/shuttle16082008161059pm3.th.jpg (http://img147.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shuttle16082008161059pm3.jpg) http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/6786/shuttle12082008204425rl3.th.jpg (http://img134.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shuttle12082008204425rl3.jpg)http://img134.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)

[PeriscopeDepth]

I played all missions up to STS-93 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STS-93
which is a nice mission to relax and do some sightseeing in camparison to the former tougher ones :D. STS-93 sounds interesting with those system failures during launch. Glad you're enjoying SSM as well, a few nice shots you have there. :)

And some more from STS-88:
The 2d rendezvous panel.
http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/8269/capture08112008141515jt5.th.jpg (http://img530.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture08112008141515jt5.jpg)

Just about to start translating down here. Perhaps I started a little late. :oops:
http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/9311/capture08112008142925fg9.th.jpg (http://img223.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture08112008142925fg9.jpg)

External shot of me almost getting Zarya to dock to Unity using the Canadarm during an orbital sunrise.
http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/3668/capture08112008150326au9.th.jpg (http://img243.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture08112008150326au9.jpg)

Two from the EVA.
http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/4779/capture08112008152033sx3.th.jpg (http://img527.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture08112008152033sx3.jpg)
http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/9853/capture16112008173402ob7.th.jpg (http://img223.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture16112008173402ob7.jpg)

PD

[Lieste]

I've found their customer service to be extremely offhand to prospective customers.

It isn't possible to register on the forums (even in read only mode) unless you have already purchased the 'game'. As anything even remotely technical gets swept off the front public boards into the member's only area as soon as it is posted I have no idea of how well they treat their paying customer's, what limitations with the currently available demo (some of which are show stoppers for me) are going to be addressed in the product lifetime.

Problems I have, some trivial, some showstoppers:
Significant freezes during the lift off section.
Orbital insertion is usually not at all accurate.
Orbital mechanics are wacky - if an insertion goes wrong and the 'mach' is ~16 the mission can be flown to completion. This is just silly, as the minimum orbital velocity for a low earth orbit is in the region of 24,000 ft/s (ie 'mach' 24).
The inertial frame is continually reset, so you can't just fly the numbers on the ball. (probably because the graphics for the ball are weird and only go up to ~+/- 120 in azimuth.)
The roll/yaw/pitch axes get horribly confused if you aren't facing 'towards' the current 'correct' heading.
The HUD isn't collimated to the outside world, in a 6dof cockpit.
The 2d and 3d HUD have different scales and information.
The flightpath information provided in the HUD doesn't reflect the real world guidance cues for the landing. It is possible (even easy) to land, but you have to deliberately 'cheat' the approach.
Drag in the approach phase is too low, I guess this is to make landings 'easier' but it just makes it impossible to fly the nominal approach path within RL limits.
If you pause the mission during the takeoff, then the SRB seperate after a fixed amount of 'real time' and not after the correct burn time in simulated time... I've had SRB seperation at ~200ft.


The 'development' appears to only be about adding 'new and exciting' missions, and tinkering with internal lights and other 'switchology', and doesn't appear to address any of the 'simulation of flight' stuff.


Which isn't to say it isn't fun (in a strangely compulsive sort of way), but I can't get excited enough about where it might be going to actually pay to find out if they have or have not fixed any of the above stuff...

[Skybird]

I've found their customer service to be extremely offhand to prospective customers.

It isn't possible to register on the forums (even in read only mode) unless you have already purchased the 'game'. As anything even remotely technical gets swept off the front public boards into the member's only area as soon as it is posted I have no idea of how well they treat their paying customer's, what limitations with the currently available demo (some of which are show stoppers for me) are going to be addressed in the product lifetime.

Problems I have, some trivial, some showstoppers:
Significant freezes during the lift off section.
Orbital insertion is usually not at all accurate.
Orbital mechanics are wacky - if an insertion goes wrong and the 'mach' is ~16 the mission can be flown to completion. This is just silly, as the minimum orbital velocity for a low earth orbit is in the region of 24,000 ft/s (ie 'mach' 24).
The inertial frame is continually reset, so you can't just fly the numbers on the ball. (probably because the graphics for the ball are weird and only go up to ~+/- 120 in azimuth.)
The roll/yaw/pitch axes get horribly confused if you aren't facing 'towards' the current 'correct' heading.
The HUD isn't collimated to the outside world, in a 6dof cockpit.
The 2d and 3d HUD have different scales and information.
The flightpath information provided in the HUD doesn't reflect the real world guidance cues for the landing. It is possible (even easy) to land, but you have to deliberately 'cheat' the approach.
Drag in the approach phase is too low, I guess this is to make landings 'easier' but it just makes it impossible to fly the nominal approach path within RL limits.
If you pause the mission during the takeoff, then the SRB seperate after a fixed amount of 'real time' and not after the correct burn time in simulated time... I've had SRB seperation at ~200ft.


The 'development' appears to only be about adding 'new and exciting' missions, and tinkering with internal lights and other 'switchology', and doesn't appear to address any of the 'simulation of flight' stuff.


Which isn't to say it isn't fun (in a strangely compulsive sort of way), but I can't get excited enough about where it might be going to actually pay to find out if they have or have not fixed any of the above stuff...

Yes, their customer treatement (and treatement of potential customers) made me turning my back on them in some anger, too, after having tried the demo. I strongly refuse to put my money on a blind bet, I want to know what kind of support and future acvtion I am in for BEFORE I separate from my money. They also did not react to two direct emails when I requested some specific info to direct and clearly formulated questions. Too bad for them - I was very close to give them my money. Well, their behavior results in their loss - not mine, for I have good simulations enough, and can happily live on without this sim. :up: But just imagine what this could have turned into if they would have been more customer-friendly and would do a better marketing job! AVSIM's review was extremely positive, and some other reviews as well - but they really do a good job in keeping people away. Stupid to waste all their effort and work so headlessly. They should take eSim as an example of how to do it.

[PeriscopeDepth]

I've found their customer service to be extremely offhand to prospective customers.

It isn't possible to register on the forums (even in read only mode) unless you have already purchased the 'game'. As anything even remotely technical gets swept off the front public boards into the member's only area as soon as it is posted I have no idea of how well they treat their paying customer's, what limitations with the currently available demo (some of which are show stoppers for me) are going to be addressed in the product lifetime.

Problems I have, some trivial, some showstoppers:
Significant freezes during the lift off section.
Orbital insertion is usually not at all accurate.
Orbital mechanics are wacky - if an insertion goes wrong and the 'mach' is ~16 the mission can be flown to completion. This is just silly, as the minimum orbital velocity for a low earth orbit is in the region of 24,000 ft/s (ie 'mach' 24).
The inertial frame is continually reset, so you can't just fly the numbers on the ball. (probably because the graphics for the ball are weird and only go up to ~+/- 120 in azimuth.)
The roll/yaw/pitch axes get horribly confused if you aren't facing 'towards' the current 'correct' heading.
The HUD isn't collimated to the outside world, in a 6dof cockpit.
The 2d and 3d HUD have different scales and information.
The flightpath information provided in the HUD doesn't reflect the real world guidance cues for the landing. It is possible (even easy) to land, but you have to deliberately 'cheat' the approach.
Drag in the approach phase is too low, I guess this is to make landings 'easier' but it just makes it impossible to fly the nominal approach path within RL limits.
If you pause the mission during the takeoff, then the SRB seperate after a fixed amount of 'real time' and not after the correct burn time in simulated time... I've had SRB seperation at ~200ft.


The 'development' appears to only be about adding 'new and exciting' missions, and tinkering with internal lights and other 'switchology', and doesn't appear to address any of the 'simulation of flight' stuff.


Which isn't to say it isn't fun (in a strangely compulsive sort of way), but I can't get excited enough about where it might be going to actually pay to find out if they have or have not fixed any of the above stuff... Hey Lieste,

I don't know when you last tried SSM (I wasn't aware there was even a demo :)), but I haven't experienced any of what you've listed. There is some times a barely noticeable pause around Max Q during ascent, which can be annoying. As I've already noted, I do find the EVA's pretty "gamey" and frustrating though. I tried recreating your early SRB sep with a pause and wasn't able to. Would you mind explaining how the orbital insertion isn't accurate? As for the approaches and landings, I just try and keep the diamond centered in the box and things seem to work out ;). I've never flown a space shuttle before, but from watching youtube videos of the landing and approach sequence things seem to be believable enough to me. I had a hell of a time at first (always landing with too high a sink rate or short of the runway), so it feels pretty heavy and draggy to me. I'd be happy (and interested myself) to test a few specifics out for you.

As for their customer service, the only interaction I've had with them is sending the forum admin an email asking for an exception on a non freebie (Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail etc) and the forum admin replying that the non freebie email only applies to non customers. Their forum regulation is rather rigid, but I don't find it terrible.

As for further development, why would expanding the historical mission set and choosing interesting missions not be a priority? They add about a new historical mission every month. I find the flight/orbital dynamics convincing enough, but perhaps I just don't know better. The last service pack added:
New Mission – STS-98
New SPEC 96 GPC SM mode for RMS LIM management
Virtual Cockpit enhancements
Performance tuning
Adjustments across all missionPD

[Lieste]

Well, for any given orbit there are prescribed combinations of velocity and altitude.

SSM2007 will often not acheive the nominal values during ascent, which is fine, as there should be plenty of delta_v remaining for an OMS-1 burn to recover all but a very bad insertion. However, the 'game' assumes a nominal orbit, and only adds the nominal delta_v. The OPS 105/OPS 202 pages show the supposed 'nominal' profile and performs burns using these nominal values, but the shuttle itself can follow completely different profiles throughout the mission (including orbiting at < 75% the correct energy).

An example would be an insertion with an apogee of <60nm, while OPS 105 is indicating perigee of 75nm and apogee of 107nm.

The ADI error can be seen simply by rotating to 0,0,0 then setting the reference attitude using the panel switch. Return to the nominal attitude, and then set the ADI mode to 'Ref'. You *should* see a yaw angle of 90 degrees, and level 'ball'. (which incidently is the correct attitude for INRTL mode, the white-bar forwards should be obtained by programming the reference attitude, not by altering the inertial frame of reference.) As far as I am aware, you will still see a value of '60' on the ball.

If you are currently upside down, and facing the opposite direction to that required (as for example after the deorbit burn) then it should be possible to re-orient by either yawing 180 degrees then rolling, or by pitching 180. However attempting to yaw will result in wild meanderings. (Yaw pitch and roll do work correctly when facing 'forwards' to the reset INRTL ball though).

[PeriscopeDepth]

Pardon me for asking so many questions. I am not doubting your assertions, I just don't fully understand them. I can be rather dense when it comes to orbital mechanics. :)

Well, for any given orbit there are prescribed combinations of velocity and altitude.
Got it, I'm with you so far. I was under the impression most shuttle ascent profiles were pretty similar. I do get the feeling SSM more or less "rides the rails" and just tries its best to match historical ascent profiles for the given mission selected.

SSM2007 will often not acheive the nominal values during ascent, which is fine, as there should be plenty of delta_v remaining for an OMS-1 burn to recover all but a very bad insertion.However, the 'game' assumes a nominal orbit, and only adds the nominal delta_v. The OPS 105/OPS 202 pages show the supposed 'nominal' profile and performs burns using these nominal values, but the shuttle itself can follow completely different profiles throughout the mission (including orbiting at < 75% the correct energy). An example would be an insertion with an apogee of <60nm, while OPS 105 is indicating perigee of 75nm and apogee of 107nm. On any particular mission, or does it happen on every ascent? How do you know the OPS 105/202 values are erroneous? I'm assuming by looking at the MCC screen?

The ADI error can be seen simply by rotating to 0,0,0 then setting the reference attitude using the panel switch. Return to the nominal attitude, and then set the ADI mode to 'Ref'. You *should* see a yaw angle of 90 degrees, and level 'ball'. (which incidently is the correct attitude for INRTL mode, the white-bar forwards should be obtained by programming the reference attitude, not by altering the inertial frame of reference.) As far as I am aware, you will still see a value of '60' on the ball.

If you are currently upside down, and facing the opposite direction to that required (as for example after the deorbit burn) then it should be possible to re-orient by either yawing 180 degrees then rolling, or by pitching 180. However attempting to yaw will result in wild meanderings. (Yaw pitch and roll do work correctly when facing 'forwards' to the reset INRTL ball though).
I'll try the ADI stuff another time on just focus on understanding the orbital glitches now. :)

PD

[Lieste]

Well, the orbit is an ellipse, with minimum altitude at perigee, and maximum at apogee. If the current shuttle altitude reads below the value listed at OPS105 or OPS202 as the 'current perigee' then I see a problem ;)

[Lieste]

As far as I can tell, the 'simulator' does in fact run on rails... but it can get confused by pauses in simulation rate (either by explicitly pausing, or due to poor optimation - hell they know exactly what textures and sounds are going to be needed during ascent... it can't be too hard to ensure that you perform these prior to lift off, rather than at the point of highest dynamic change?

Once it has got itself out of sync the lack of proper simulation calculation>display>perform correction is painfully obvious. How they manage to fudge the rendevous navigation with this sort of simulation methodology I can only guess at, but I think it may not be pretty ;)


( I still find this 'fun' sometimes..... just I usually give up in frustration at basic physics flaws where the cues don't agree with what is happening out of the window.. Doesn't happen everytime, but often enough to put me off.)

[PeriscopeDepth]

Well, the orbit is an ellipse, with minimum altitude at perigee, and maximum at apogee. If the current shuttle altitude reads below the value listed at OPS105 or OPS202 as the 'current perigee' then I see a problem ;)

Resounding doh! I should've guessed you were looking at the orbiter instruments, tricky guy you are. :lol:

As far as I can tell, the 'simulator' does in fact run on rails... but it can get confused by pauses in simulation rate (either by explicitly pausing, or due to poor optimation - hell they know exactly what textures and sounds are going to be needed during ascent... it can't be too hard to ensure that you perform these prior to lift off, rather than at the point of highest dynamic change?

Once it has got itself out of sync the lack of proper simulation calculation>display>perform correction is painfully obvious. How they manage to fudge the rendevous navigation with this sort of simulation methodology I can only guess at, but I think it may not be pretty ;)
I'm going to try to throw a bunch of pauses at the sim during launch and see what dirty tricks rear their heads. The sim is certainly VERY mission time governed in its dynamics and procedures. I think if errors happen the sim irons itself out and puts everything back on the rails when you hit the "next action" button and fast forward a few hours/days forward into the mission to the next player action.

I don't mind the riding the rails, as enough of spaceflight is computer controlled anyways and the sim does make for a convincing experience. And the physics manual orbital rendezvous/formation maneuvering seems to be legit when your rotating/translating around objects. But I suppose that's just a matter of relative speeds/simple energy impulses and can't be that hard too pull off. I've been playing for about 50 hours I'd guess, and only had one "huh?" moment when doing an orbital rendezvous (the farther off portion, which starts after a few burns, you hit next action and the sim spits you out about 45,000 feet from the rendezvous target and you manually translate towards it using the rendezvous panel. It was fixed by me just selecting the "next action button" again and being properly spat in to visual range of the rendezvous target. :damn:

Annoying, but tolerable to me. It's the only real game in town for a detailed Space Shuttle sim.

PD

[Lieste]

I think I did a 'uh-oh phone call' followed by 'I'd better make a coffee and grab some food' type pause, immediately after launch...

When I came back 20 minutes or so later the SRB detached on restart.

I could replicate at will by repeating the long pause. The oribter doesn't go awfully high on main engines only...

I've also managed to 'run out' or not start the shuttle main engines a few times.

[Lieste]

What are your impressions of the new 2.30?

Are there any improvements to physics consistency?
Does AOA now work correctly in TAEM/Finals?

[PeriscopeDepth]

What are your impressions of the new 2.30?

Are there any improvements to physics consistency?
Does AOA now work correctly in TAEM/Finals? v 2.30

-Added: STS-51A (New mission)
-Added: "Shakes" FX during roll out.
-Added: "Bouncy" landing FX
-Added: New sound FX at liftoff.
-Change: T:-00:00:12 start, changed to T:-00:01:00.
-Change: Shuttle attitude check more forgiving.
-Fixed: Astronaut leaves flight deck too early
-Fixed: Fuel cell restart no longer needs to be made by timeskipping.
-Fixed: Minimal vertical screen resolution is now 768 pixels.
-Fixed: Graphic bug on VC overhead low panel.
-Fixed: LVLH functionality of the ADI
-Fixed: Aft ADI defaults to Inertial
-Fixed: Misc. mission checklists text

I'm about to do the deorbit phase of STS-88 and will post shots of it, but the fix list makes no mention of physics/AOA. But then again it does refer to fixing the LVLH ADI mode. TBH I think that's something farther down the road, and something we'll more than likely have to pay more for. Which I think is fair. And I don't seem to have had consistency problems nearly as badly as you, and have been paying a lot more attention to that since you mentioned it. Only one "huh?" moment for me so far still. You have to remember this is made by a few guys when they are not at their day jobs, it's a good sim as it is and they certainly seem to be committed to making it as complete as their talents/time will take it.

PD

[Lieste]

I'm glad to see the start time has shifted for the T -0:0:12

That was one of the list of suggestions I made ;)

They may have fixed the ball at the same time as they altered the behaviour of the LVLH mode, but I can't check that.

I'm still planning to buy 'sometime' but I want to see more fixes for the stuff that isn't working properly first.

I'd quite like to see the new landing features, so I'll keep my eyes open for Youtube videos... so far they are all waaay off parameters though ;)

[Lieste]

I'd be more than happy to help them. Detailed bug reports, reproducible errors etc. I trained as an Aero Engineer many moons ago, and have been developing simulation flight models for a while...

But as I said they were off-hand and slightly dismissive, and they don't make it easy to get involved in the 'community'

[PeriscopeDepth]

I'd quite like to see the new landing features
Any particular points you'd like me to snap the AoA gauge for you during the approach/final? I don't know how to make videos.


I'd be more than happy to help them. Detailed bug reports, reproducible errors etc. I trained as an Aero Engineer many moons ago, and have been developing simulation flight models for a while...

But as I said they were off-hand and slightly dismissive, and they don't make it easy to get involved in the 'community'
Well I suppose your engineering background explains your precision. :)

Who did you send your suggestions to? And do keep in mind, talented people tend to be sensitive about their work ;). If you'd like, I could ask/PM a forum admin and try and get you the email addy of the proper person.

PD

[Lieste]

On finals the AOA gauge should be 'free' and mostly lie between 4 and 8 degrees, with excursions to perhaps 12 during the flare and hold-off.

In previous versions the transition from high drag (20 < AOA < 40) to low drag TAEM mode (0 < AOA < 15) was wrong, and AOA on finals would lie in the range (0 < AOA <1)

[PeriscopeDepth]

On finals the AOA gauge should be 'free' and mostly lie between 4 and 8 degrees, with excursions to perhaps 12 during the flare and hold-off.

In previous versions the transition from high drag (20 < AOA < 40) to low drag TAEM mode (0 < AOA < 15) was wrong, and AOA on finals would lie in the range (0 < AOA <1)
I'm at REI now for STS-88, so I should be flying the approach/final either today or tomorrow and will take note of the AoA for you.

PD

[Lieste]

All the above, depending on IAS, of course, and with the lowish drag this tends to be a bit high even with the airbrake fully open. (Real approaches are flown at ~65% spdbk)

[PeriscopeDepth]

On finals the AOA gauge should be 'free' and mostly lie between 4 and 8 degrees, with excursions to perhaps 12 during the flare and hold-off.

In previous versions the transition from high drag (20 < AOA < 40) to low drag TAEM mode (0 < AOA < 15) was wrong, and AOA on finals would lie in the range (0 < AOA <1)
I've been practicing my landings some tonight. AoA of 8-10 from ~15K down to the flare where I stop glancing over at it. I think you're right about the drag, speed doesn't decrease as much as it seems it should from the HUD videos on final. It's not too bad, but definitely noticeable. I fly the approach at 100% brake for the most part unless I am getting too low I'll pull it back briefly. I pull the brake back to a little under a quarter for final (seems to be how they do it on the youtube HUD videos). The mains hit at around 230 to 255 depending on how good a job I'm doing.

I do rely on the diamond too much on approach and should probably spend a little more time heads down before final.

PD

[Lieste]

Well from that it sounds like they have fixed the AOA tape not reading during the finals, but it would be nice if they mentioned it when they 'find'/fix something useful like that as well as when they add a (single use) twiddle for the cockpit lights...

I fly the TAEM and upper finals using the F3 mode, with view panned slightly right and down from the commander's seat. This way I can see the HAC, Energy, and both the Commander's MFD. I reconfigure these to be the Combined ADI/HSI and the Surfaces config (on the left one). This way I can fly the S-turns to bleed energy (HAC should only be flown subsonically IRL) transition to the HAC and fly the upper approach.
Due to the lack of collimation and lowish resolution, I can't easily read numbers on the HUD (but the diamond is clear enough, and progress is checked using the HDD, and the approach diagrams). I therefore change to the 'fixed' HUD for the touchdown phase...

The two HUDs have different fields of view, angles of projection and relative sizes of symbology (unless they've fixed it quietly... ;) ), and the flight path vector (which should be the primary 'instrument' usable during the finals/pre-flare/short-finals/flare/hold-off) doesn't provide a consistent cue especially when the guidance mode changes near the ground. Following the velocity vector cue will result in a crash almost everytime, and it can be quite disconcerting to watch what happens to the VV when you fly the 'successful' approach that SSM-2007 prefers...

Given that the shuttle 'autoland' system uses these guidance cues it doesn't seem to be correct that following them should consistently destroy the shuttle. (On the other hand IIRC NASA flies all the shuttle approaches on manual so maybe they know something :D )

[PeriscopeDepth]

Payload bay doors coming shut. I've left the beginnings of the International Space Station in orbit.
http://img389.imageshack.us/img389/5738/capture22112008033744xz4.th.jpg (http://img389.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture22112008033744xz4.jpg)

Deorb burn after almost twelve days in orbit. Slows us down just enough for our orbit to decay. IIRC only a few hundred MPH.
http://img389.imageshack.us/img389/5738/capture22112008033744xz4.th.jpg (http://img389.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture22112008033744xz4.jpg)
http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/8186/capture22112008033932uw5.th.jpg (http://img392.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture22112008033932uw5.jpg)

Reentry will commence over the Pacific ocean. View of Papua New Guinea(?) from the PLT's window.
http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/9759/capture22112008035038ws3.th.jpg (http://img56.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture22112008035038ws3.jpg)

OPS30x will take us home. Kennedy Space Center is 5110 nm off the nose. We'll get there relatively fast at Mach 20+.
http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/6695/capture23112008232626pf2.th.jpg (http://img75.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008232626pf2.jpg)

RCS jets pitch us up so the thermal tiles on the belly will take the brunt of the heat.
http://img78.imageshack.us/img78/5875/capture23112008232948yq6.th.jpg (http://img78.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008232948yq6.jpg)

At the very edge of the atmosphere, starting to get some real decel. KSC still over 3,000 nm ahead. I think the TACAN system starts seeing it here. ~ mach 24.
http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/2541/capture23112008233125be1.th.jpg (http://img241.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008233125be1.jpg)
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/6285/capture23112008233346zt2.th.jpg (http://img149.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008233346zt2.jpg)

Continued...

[PeriscopeDepth]

A little mood setting with a two minute youtube clip :):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECpXS_vi15E

Orange plasma is now visible swirling around the flight deck windows.
http://img357.imageshack.us/img357/9149/capture23112008233431es7.th.jpg (http://img357.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008233431es7.jpg)

Exterior view.
http://img389.imageshack.us/img389/7585/capture23112008233439le9.th.jpg (http://img389.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008233439le9.jpg)

The orbiter crew passes the camcorder around.
http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/15/capture23112008233445zt0.th.jpg (http://img392.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008233445zt0.jpg)
http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/3149/capture23112008233506kv5.th.jpg (http://img56.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008233506kv5.jpg)
http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/9564/capture23112008233524rt2.th.jpg (http://img399.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008233524rt2.jpg)

Out of the fire, but still hot to the touch.
http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/1064/capture23112008233650bo3.th.jpg (http://img75.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008233650bo3.jpg)

[PeriscopeDepth]

First roll reversal to the left off the coast off of SoCal/Baja California. 225K and just over Mach 20.
http://img78.imageshack.us/img78/552/capture23112008233949tc0.th.jpg (http://img78.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008233949tc0.jpg)

Just under 1200 nm to go to KSC, coming out of 200K and rolling right.
http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/1064/capture23112008234435cx4.th.jpg (http://img241.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008234435cx4.jpg)

Sorry for the boring 2D pit pics, but it's dark and there really isn't much to see down there. 184K, Mach 13.4 . I'm in a right roll again. Endeavour is starting to issue commands to her aerodynamic surfaces for the first time in nearly 12 days. RCS jets are firing in the background.
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/6402/capture23112008234610em0.th.jpg (http://img149.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008234610em0.jpg)

Mach 10.4, 171K. 660 nm to go. Endeavour's computers command speed brake deployment.
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/6002/capture23112008234909nw5.th.jpg (http://img149.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture23112008234909nw5.jpg)

Approach is next...

[PeriscopeDepth]

83K, Mach 1.45. I've just turned the autopilot off and am flying (gliding) Endeavour down to KSC manually.
http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/2016/capture24112008000024uj5.th.jpg (http://img56.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture24112008000024uj5.jpg)

Into the HAC and heading north just off the Flordia coast trying to catch the diamond.
http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/5360/capture24112008000743ve6.th.jpg (http://img399.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture24112008000743ve6.jpg)

"On at the 90." My favorite picture that I've snapped, even if it's dark and you can only see the outline of Endeavour.
http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/1841/capture24112008000839em6.th.jpg (http://img75.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture24112008000839em6.jpg)

I'm off center line left and low, but the diamond seems to think I'm correcting all right.
http://img372.imageshack.us/img372/5220/capture24112008001013fh0.th.jpg (http://img372.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture24112008001013fh0.jpg)

Coming out of 7K I stumble upon the glideslope.
http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/7219/capture24112008001132os3.th.jpg (http://img241.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture24112008001132os3.jpg)

On final and time to start my flare. I'm coming in high, but for an amateur like me this is the best landing I've done.
http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/5789/capture24112008001241iw8.th.jpg (http://img291.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture24112008001241iw8.jpg)

Chute!
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/7268/capture24112008001335wx9.th.jpg (http://img149.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture24112008001335wx9.jpg)

Rollout.
http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/5651/capture24112008001400af8.th.jpg (http://img185.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture24112008001400af8.jpg)

STS-88 comes to an end. You can see the VAB and shuttle launch pads in the background.
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4935/capture24112008001457xt7.th.jpg (http://img20.imageshack.us/my.php?image=capture24112008001457xt7.jpg)

Landing in SSM is fun as hell! :)

For whatever reason, SSM seems to capture the landing experience far more accurately playing the mission through rather than just skipping ahead to landing like I was doing for practice. Everything felt more "right" compared to the youtube videos. I can't explain why, but the approach and landing felt much different than just using the landing practice mode. I felt like speed bleed better than in practice mode. I notice my AoA is also substantially different on finals than it was using the practice mode (seems to be more inaccurate). The HUD VV still doesn't function properly on final though, shouldn't it uncage?.

PD

[Lieste]

The Velocity Vector should uncage once off the HAC, and it sort-of does... at least in the vertical plane.

But the guidance symbology doesn't function correctly around the VV.
IRL, the triangles pair indicates the correct glideslope and roll, in combination with the guidance diamond, and is freely displaced from the VV in the vertical plane. When correctly guiding the triangles are aligned with the VV, and the guidance diamond is gently oscillating inside the VV centre.

When off guidance, the triangles indicate desired 'ground impact point' ;) and the diamond is swept in the direction for returning to the correct flightpath. (ie to command a roll to the right and a pull up, the diamond cycles up and to the right on the HUD. This is not a static cue, but is continually moving - possibly just jitter and noise, but also appearing like an 'attention getter'.)

During the pre-flare, the lower guidance triangles appear and sweep up towards the original guidance triangles. Once they have merged, the single guidance triangle pair remaining moves smoothly up the HUD commanding the pull-up, and guidance is followed by pitching to keep the VV between them.

After the final flare, the top arc of the VV is held on the horizon as the Shuttle settles at ~0.5 degrees descent angle. In practice, this is flown by comparison with the outer visual cues, but SSM2007 doesn't have sufficient visual information to make this very reliable, with the ground textures (especially at Edwards) being a blurry mess at times. 3-4 degree excursions of the VV without any physical cause are disconcerting at best and from my experience downright dangerous..

The closer you fly the nominal approach and guidance information, by my experience with the Demo, the more likely you are to come to grief on the final flare and touchdown, and off-nominal approaches are intrinsically harder to make consistent.... So it seems to be a choice between random (but safe) landings or consistently fatal ones :( Colour me confused, but shouldn't it be a choice between consistent and safe or random and risky?

[PeriscopeDepth]

The Velocity Vector should uncage once off the HAC, and it sort-of does... at least in the vertical plane.

But the guidance symbology doesn't function correctly around the VV... Lieste, your knowledge here leads me to believe you must be a flight simulation program yourself. Truly impressive/enlightening to hear you talk about the real world shuttle specs/systems/operations and how it compares in SSM. :know:

And yeah, I hate landing at Edwards.

The closer you fly the nominal approach and guidance information, by my experience with the Demo, the more likely you are to come to grief on the final flare and touchdown, and off-nominal approaches are intrinsically harder to make consistent.... So it seems to be a choice between random (but safe) landings or consistently fatal ones :( Colour me confused, but shouldn't it be a choice between consistent and safe or random and risky?
Of course. I didn't code the thing. I'm just doing my best to have fun playing it. I don't foresee NASA having a need for liberal arts educated astronauts, so it's the next best thing as of now for me. :)

PD

[Lieste]

Once on the ground (but while still rolling) you can see some problems with the HUD symbology and other instruments.

The F3 HUD (when zoomed out and centred) shows the datum cross just a fraction below the horizon, indicating a shuttle pitch of -1 degree or thereabouts. This is a bit low compared to the external view, which looks (non measured, but ish...) like -2 degrees, but is at least sensible...

Now if you move your head you will see that the datum cross moves relative to the runway and horizon. Ok, not a biggie, as they acknowledge that they haven't got a proper working collimated HUD, and it is passable most of the time when in the default F3 position.

However, the F6/F7 HUD shows the datum cross 3-4 degrees above the horizon, which is a serious error IMO. The Aspect ratio of the HUD is completely different and the symbology doesn't agree between them.

In the demo at least, the vertical velocity tape lurches downwards just above the ground for no obvious reason, and settles at -1200 fpm while rolling along a flat runway at considerably less than 1200 fpm forwards... On halting it sensibly returns to 0 fpm.

A feature that should be retained though is the small error in reading for the altimeter, which indicates a non zero value even once landed.

[Lieste]

Lieste, your knowledge here leads me to believe you must be a flight simulation program yourself. Truly impressive/enlightening to hear you talk about the real world shuttle specs/systems/operations and how it compares in SSM. :know:



I have had suggestions taken up by simulation developers over the past <eek> 25 years, including Digital Integration and Microprose when they were still going - though I promise I didn't break either of them ;)

I've been involved with development of 3d wing code and downwash improvements for a simulation, but this project is on hold while the new engine, to accept the results of research and testing in the previous engine, is completed.

I'm currently a beta-tester for Esimgames, working on the next update for Steelbeasts ProPE.


There are heaps of technical manuals for the orbiter systems available online, and some of the cockpit videos are just possible to make out what is being displayed. Most of the systems and aerodynamic principles are deliberately similar to normal piloting techiques for the approach and landing, with the proviso that you have no power, so you have to have a 'moderately draggy' high speed nominal approach to allow the approach to be extended, and one that remains close to the desired touchdown point in case of arrival low on energy. A reserve of usable IAS and additional deployable drag, and the possibility to expand the HAC turn is required to prevent overshooting too, as you don't have the option to go around.
The whole of the shuttle range-energy-speed-drag information for various phases in the entry/approach is reasonably accurately displayed on the MPDS, and the flight instrumentation can be compared to the nominal guidance progress.