Outerra forum

User mods, screenshots & videos => Aircraft => Rockets & Spacecraft => Topic started by: Uriah on November 26, 2014, 10:04:47 pm

Title: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on November 26, 2014, 10:04:47 pm
Hey everyone!

I have spent the past few days researching how to implement a mod which I'm calling AeroKinetics. It will introduce a number of procedural aerospace components, including everything to assemble multistage rockets and put payloads into orbit. The concept may sound far fetched or unrealistic, and indeed it may be difficult, but I believe it is achievable in a series of smaller steps. The concept is inspired by Kerbal Space Program, if you have never played I highly recommend it. KSP is great, but I have been disappointed in a number of aspects including how difficult it is to mod and how poor the aerodynamics and flight controls are. I have also modded in Digital Combat Simulator (DCS), but the maps are finite so going into space doesn't really work.

Instead of making hundreds of components, as in KSP, I'll make a procedural component for each standard type (listed below) which allows the player to construct complex assemblies of all shapes and sizes, with a Rocket Stage Calculator to help compute empty/gross weight and delta V per stage. Everything, including rocket design, operation (aerodynamic center, center of mass and center of thrust) and orbital mechanics (semi-major axis, inclination, periapsis, apoapsis, ecentricy, etc...)  will be based on real world data and equations and the gameplay should look and feel as authentic as possible. I plan that all of the components can be damaged or destroyed, via strain, impact or excessive heat, making dynamic pressure of ascent or reentry, critical for successful design and operation.

Download the Jupiter 246 Demo for Outerra: J246.GNU.OTX (http://www.mediafire.com/download/l5fl1vghciz1hcu/J246.GNU.otx)

Controls:

P                   Information display
. (period)      Hold-down force (on=1, off=0)
pgup            Increase throttle
pgdn            Decrease throttle
enter            Exit/enter rocket
G                  Google Maps

To enter a prograde orbit with minimal inclination, spawn the rocket using Google Maps to face due West. This will orient the autopilot to make an Eastward gravity turn. To make sure the rocket does not have pitching moments or go into a spin directly after launch follow these instructions carefully. After spawning the rocket, press '.' (period) to take off the hold-down force. This will allow the rocket to rotate into a vertical position. Wait until the rocket stops moving completely before turning back on the hold-down. By pressing 'P' you may see the status of the hold-down force, (on=1, off=0). Slowly increase the throttle until above 70%, this will fire the four SSME RS-25 engines, wait a few seconds for the thrust to stabilize, increase to 100% to fire the two SRBs. Release the hold-down force after the SRB thrust has stabilized. After the SRBs burnout, they will be jettisoned in JSBSim, and the mesh hidden (separation still not working). When the main External Tank is empty the first stage will be jettisoned. Enjoy your flight!

(http://i.imgur.com/NeTYQhi.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/MFk0WJb.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/TJGOlRh.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/7Gjv8eW.jpg)

Procedurally Generated Components:

Liquid Fuel Tank (insulated or uninsulated)
Liqui Rocket Engine/Nozzle (light, regular, heavy)
Solid Rocket Booster Tank
Solid Rocket Engine/Nozzle (light, regular, heavy)
Reaction Control Thrusters
Fairing/Payload Bay (multiple shapes)
Interstage/Decoupler
Nose Cone (multiple shapes)
Aerodynamic Fin (fixed)
Aerodynamic Wing (multiple airfoils and complex leading/trailing edge options, i.e. smooth or sharp edges)
Aerodynamic Control Surface
Heat Shield (adjustable ablative tile thickness/weight)
Retractable Landing Gear
Multi-stage Parachute (add chute stages and adjust canopy sizes)

I will begin by building a simple rocket, which is put toghether from all of these components, but the components ARE NOT procedurally generated. I will need to develop the vehicle assembly user interface and flight dynamics/orbital mechanics first, and the procedural parts will of course follow with time. If anyone would like to contribute to this mod, please contact me. I would also appreciate you thoughts and suggestions!

Lastly, I would just like to say, the Outtera procedural environment is of course breathtaking, the attention to detail exceptional. I am specifically impressed with the fact that I was able to navigate the area where I grew up in North Central Washington and, without using the Google Maps panel, was able to identify many landmarks and features which I did not expect would be consistent, not to mention mountains such at Mt. Rainier which are unmistakable, very impressive! My only disappointment is the Mig was unrealistically easy to fly, but hey, its only an Alpha! ;) Fly with the Oculus Rift DK1, it is amazing even at low resolution.

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on November 27, 2014, 01:07:45 am
THIS POST WILL BE CONTINUALLY UPDATED:

JSBSim FGRocket:
http://jsbsim.sourceforge.net/JSBSim/classJSBSim_1_1FGRocket.html
http://wiki.flightgear.org/JSBSim_Engines#FGRocket
http://jsbsim.sf.net/JSBSimReferenceManual.pdf
http://wiki.flightgear.org/Vostok-1

Rocketry, Physics, Orbital Mechanics:
Development of an Open Source model rocket simulation software: http://openrocket.sourceforge.net/thesis.pdf
http://www.braeunig.us/space/
http://www.braeunig.us/space/orbmech.htm
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on November 27, 2014, 07:52:13 am
Sounds like a great plan mate !

  ... for the procedural part - if ya meant the model, maybe for the starters, a set of components would do - lets say some basic mesh and some additional for all of the possible interconnections for it (connecting bridges and structural parts, or just sizes if bases for the cones have different diameters). Those additional would be than scripted visible, if viable other components would be added at the certain positions around it. ... Slight aerodynamic influences of those would be then adjusted by the set of visible parts.

P.S.: That vostok cockpit rocks ! Id like to ride that baby down the OTs atmosphere !
Title: A Little Something I Cooked Up Over Night!
Post by: Uriah on November 27, 2014, 02:18:09 pm
1
(http://i.imgur.com/AJvCwdj.png)

2
(http://i.imgur.com/hQNZG9W.png)

3
(http://i.imgur.com/b2Iq3D1.png)

4
(http://i.imgur.com/RcG3D6P.png)

5
(http://i.imgur.com/o3VYcsz.png)

6
(http://i.imgur.com/C4mPrcy.png)

7
(http://i.imgur.com/yUym0cv.png)

8
(http://i.imgur.com/qfliXqR.png)

9
(http://i.imgur.com/B1QJaOe.png)
Title: Re: A Little Something I Cooked Up Over Night!
Post by: PytonPago on November 28, 2014, 04:55:33 am

 ... you probably posted stuff whyle being logged onto the google+ service (you have to post addresses loged-off, otherwise it wont register guests and wont proceed -- the same as if ya post youtube vids from your page on it)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on November 28, 2014, 06:30:10 pm
I apologize about that, I thought using two browsers, Chrome logged into my Google account, and Firefox for posting the links would work, apparently not. It has been corrected!

-Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: necro on December 03, 2014, 07:04:00 am
Wow, thats impressive. I appreciate this mod! Are this ingame screenshots of the UI and the AK overlay?
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 03, 2014, 02:41:31 pm
Also, do you plan to do some enhanced outer-space interactions ? ( Atmosphere bounce-off etc. )
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 03, 2014, 08:14:17 pm
necro, no the UI is an overlay I developed, simply conceptual at this point.

I had no problem configuring a new aircraft model and defining its FDM, etc..., yet I am having a lot of difficulty getting the JSBSim FGRocket/FGNozzle/FGThruster to work, and confused how to setup the aircraft script and objdef files to include all of the rocket components from JSBSim.

(HELP ME! :D)

I would really appreciate some help if there is anyone who is more experienced with the FDM models, I cannot find detailed information, or any for that matter about implementing rockets for Outerra.

Pyton, JSBSim has a great deal covered already if we can figure out how to implement it. Using an atmosphere model of Earth, (elevation/pressure table), reentry by means of aerocapture and a series of parachutes or propulsive landing is the only thing that will physically slow you down enough from orbital velocity. If that isn't the case, it isn't being simulated correctly.

I do plan on using the volumetric effects coming soon to Outerra to create reentry plasma-shock boundaries (angle/Mach number), as well as write a script for thermal and aerodynamic damage and failure modes for each part. Ablative coatings, tiles, and heatshields will be needed for reentry, as well as multi-stage parachutes which deploy a small drogue chute first at high velocity.

In terms of bouncing off the atmosphere, having too shallow of a reentry angle, and too high of a velocity, your point of apoapsis (farthest orbital point) will not have been reached as you begin aerocapture during descent. So the velocity will drop from atmospheric drag, but shortly you will begin to gain elevation again, until you reach the point of apoapsis. Once you begin to descend again, and if you've lost enough velocity from the short aerocapture, your point of periapsis (closest orbital point) will have been reduced enough to reenter unharmed.

Honestly, I hope OT implements these features, but I am willing to get a head start.

I'm doing more research on the JSBSim physics model, to see what is the best method for realistic orbital mechanics, including Lagrangian points. I believe it is all possible, the model seems to be comprehensive enough from what I have read so far.

-Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 04, 2014, 05:30:45 am
Yes ... im not much good in JSBSim sadly, but i know that aircrafts had some issues beyond a certain altitude. Hope there isnt something engine based in it to stay in your way.

 Still ( and this is probably for Cameny and co. ) once Sun n other solar objects are implemented, wont be there some change in coordinate systems ? Cause yet is all bound to Earth center, if im not wrong. Or will stuff positions on planets (ground vehicles and ships) be handled towards theyr centers and beyond a certain distance on a Sun based center ( or just a separate one ) with some kind of switching between them done for space-capable crafts, escaping them?
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 04, 2014, 01:40:51 pm
Indeed, I am trying to ascertain what kind of base physics model is used to see if multibody simulation (n-body) to calculate the gravitational forces excerted on an object by multiple planets is possible.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 04, 2014, 05:25:22 pm
By the way, aircraft using turbine engines will loose propulsion at high altitudes. The Mig29 in Outerra uses a fuel mix to extend its altitude ceiling, but oxidizer deprivation will reduce efficiency and max thrust. The JSBSim Rocket, Nozzle and Thruster should have no problem in orbit.

I need to be able to determine the orbital elements of the vehicles trajectory; Semi-Major Axis, Eccentricity, Inclination, Argument of Periapsis, Time of Periapsis Passage, and Longitude of Ascending Node.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: necro on December 04, 2014, 11:51:31 pm
Probably you are the first one who needs that. So these parameters wont be accessable because of no implementation yet. You will have to calculate them by yourself. Its possible to calculate the relative velocity and altitude. This should be enough to calculate the orbit and its apo and per. And with these dudes it should be possible to calc the incl/exccentricity.

I only know vehicle scripts yet, and in these i know you can get the position of the vehicle by get_pos() which is enough for the alt. And you can measure the difference pos to the last frame in update_frame() to get its velocity.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 05, 2014, 06:38:38 am
There are a number of methods I could employ using the velocity and position state vectors which contain three components each, respectively; X position, Y position, Z position and X velocity, Y velocity, Z velocity.

I could use Gauss, Euler or Fourth Order Runge-Kutta method (RK4). RK4 is the most stable and least computationally intensive.

http://jsbsim.sourceforge.net/JSBSim/classJSBSim_1_1FGRungeKutta.html
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 05, 2014, 06:52:25 pm
(http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/D3.jpg)

The AeroKinetics Mod will also include static objects with which to build your own custom launch complex anywhere in Outerra. I am working on all the buildings and structures of the Delta IV Launch Complex 37 in Cape Canaveral. The mod will  load the real launch complex to scale at the precise Lat/Long coordinates, which can be found by using Google Maps.

I contacted with Jon Berndt of JSBSim, and Cameni to get some answers and I am making good progress.

It sounds like multibody physics will indeed be supported in the future.

I plan on having the launch complex done and a flying rocket within a few days!

Not sure about volumetric smoke and flames. I believe the clouds update may include support for that, as OT specifically mentioned rocket trails in regards to volumetric clouds being released. I already have an animated model with material for liquid rocket shock diamonds.

(http://jazzroc.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/shock-wave-diamonds.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 06, 2014, 12:17:56 am
Hey ! Is that the little rocket fired several hours ago ? I watched the module ascend to the sea.  ;D
Do they use the good old known Shuttle platform to move the rocket into place ?


Also, could i peak on that rocket shock model ? Id like to use something like that on my 9M28 rockets when OTs ready for such.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on December 06, 2014, 04:23:25 am
You seem to know perfectly what you are doing and your UI mockup looks really good :)

I hope you'll be able to make it in Outerra, maybe with the help of Cameni and Angrypig (they seem to be drowning under projects, but this may be interresting for them)  ;D
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: necro on December 06, 2014, 09:32:52 am
why wasting time with creating models? Let me create them and you develop the logic stuff. May i introduce to you the liquid h2-storage?

(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-juhT9sVJhTw/VIMTJ8FLMoI/AAAAAAAAEDE/JuNJ3ZBXbps/w1556-h875-no/screen_1417876219.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 06, 2014, 11:03:40 am
I think he wants some model parameters match the physics ... but your model is great. Exept, why so many lamps around each ot them ? :D
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 06, 2014, 11:22:48 am
Acetone, thank you, I appreciate the enthusiasm! I've seen your work with the scenery mods, Talkeetna AK is superb! Do you have any knowledge on modifying the local elevation of the terrain around a static object? (see more at the bottom of this post)

Pyton, you must be talking about Orion's inaugural launch yesterday atop a ULA Delta IV Heavy from SLC-37. The Delta IV Heavy is the third biggest launch system to date, next to the Shuttle, with the Saturn V taking first, and soon the Space Launch System (SLS) will take the crown once it is launched, and it is designed to take Orion far beyond LEO, to Mars.

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/01/15/article-0-1AB083C200000578-537_634x339.jpg)

necro, NICE WORK! I like your attention to detail!!!

Would you like to collaborate on modeling the first Launch Complex?! Given that SLC-37 is extremely detailed and complicated, we could go with something more modest for starts, such as Space Launch Complex 41. It is used for launching the Atlas V primarily, but the launch pad is big enough for larger vehicles. The Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB off in the distance), is in alignment with the track from the VAB to the pad. You can Google it for more detailed images.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/92/Atlas_V_551_at_Launch_Pad_41.jpg/1280px-Atlas_V_551_at_Launch_Pad_41.jpg)

(http://www.capcomespace.net/dossiers/espace_US/lanceurs_US/atlas/SLC41%2005pd2400.jpg)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5c/Atlas_V_launch_complex_LC41.jpg)

All of the static objects around the launch complex can be individual objects, even placed by hand, or by coordinates, and we can use the Outerra roads obviously. The Launch Pad and Crawlway ramp (track) must be one model, and I have come to the conclusion that the only good way to create the raised grass berm around the launch pad is proceedurally by modifying the Outerra terrain, much like the roads. I need to displace negative and positive height, because the flame trench actually goes underground, and I plan on having volumetric smoke and flame generators inside the flame trench which is activated at launch. A lot of these details can come later, as they are not functionally important, but important nonetheless.

Does anyone know how to make a static object modify the terrain? I haven't had time to look into the road building system yet to see how its done. Can a heightmap be used and the displacement range defined, i.e. -10 meters (black), 0 meters (grey) to +10 meters (white).

Regards,
Uriah George
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 06, 2014, 12:29:41 pm
Lightning Tower

(http://i.imgur.com/jcOOrDe.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/TB1di6C.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: necro on December 06, 2014, 01:32:58 pm
Sure we can collaborate. Simply post some pics of what especially you need. And mark the part you mean, i need exact instructions. Otherwise i could build the wrong one ;) I also dont want to create buildings which you have already. So you dont have the VAB?

Lol, I also started the lightning tower but yours is further and more detailed.

I know that you can press the "Level selected" button in the object spawn menu (after placing the object on the ground). There are some sliders. Surely you will be happy with them.

@pyton: The lamps are taken from the source picture. There this many ^^ And I'm not even sure if that are lamps. Or maybe water splashes.
And the detail is not very high. Outerra creates the self ambient occlusion which creates the illusion of detail. 7k triangles are many, thats true, but the most of them are creating the spheric silhouette.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 06, 2014, 02:03:16 pm
Yes, the ULA, seems it was going good ... also, now Saturn V was mentioned, soviets did they N1 moon-landing rocket, witch ended bad. But give birth to the closed-cycle engine NK-33 (if someone wonders, its offspring was questioned by a recent rocked-blast). Saturn has H2 vs O2 fuel, i thought it was for the N1 too, but strangely, they had KEROSENE vs O2. Is it normal to other rockets ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLg1QUq5GQM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLg1QUq5GQM)

Also i wondered, why they left the stage-intersections open (can imagine some turbulations are a thing there at those speeds and lift power).

(http://i878.photobucket.com/albums/ab347/tridentdwarfman/Historic%20and%20Modern%20Space/SovietN12d.png)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 06, 2014, 02:08:46 pm

@pyton: The lamps are taken from the source picture. There this many ^^ And I'm not even sure if that are lamps. Or maybe water splashes.


Oh right - temperature control water dispensers - forgot on that !

Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on December 06, 2014, 03:50:57 pm
Acetone, thank you, I appreciate the enthusiasm! I've seen your work with the scenery mods, Talkeetna AK is superb! Do you have any knowledge on modifying the local elevation of the terrain around a static object? (see more at the bottom of this post)

It's a bit tricky for the moment, and really depends of the scale of what you want to do.
When you level the terrain under an object, the engine create in fact a road wich can be modified using the road tool. You can manualy modify the elevation of each node, but you are limited to a 2 meters range by the GUI. The trick is to modify the elevation of the road, save, exit the road tool, open it again and reselect. You will be able to increase or decrease the elevation of this layer for 2 meters once again, etc., etc.

There is no other tool ATM, and no heightmap support yet.

Roads are limited to 204 meters, but you can extand the road area of effect with the transitional value (around 180 meters). You can also use the lead-in and the lead-out profile for the first and the last node of road in order to make them blend nicely with the terrain :)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: ZeosPantera on December 07, 2014, 12:19:50 am
More Sweet future stuff! Need some more H2 storage tanks!

Also you need to turn on Anti-Aliasing for your screenshots.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 07, 2014, 11:34:27 am
necro, there is honestly a ton of modeling to do. I am primarily focused on getting the rocket working in-game. If you would like to work on a detailed launch pad model, either from Space Launch Complex 37, 39A or 39B or 39, images are available on Google if you search SLC-37, SLC-41, KSP LC-39A, etc... Besides the launch pad, each has a flame trench with mobile Flame Deflector, Fixed Umbilical Tower (FUT), sometimes a Mobile Service Tower (Delta IV SLC-37), as well as the crawler ramp, launch platform, and fuel towers. Those are the primary elements of a launch pad that I can think of off the top of my head, and those will need to be contained in one model, with some animated parts (FUT), which I can do later. If you go to Google Maps, find the Launch Complex you want to model, zoom as close a possible and take a screenshot, I like to apply it as a texture to a flat plane and build my model from that orthographic projection. It really helps to get the dimensions to scale and keep everything proportionate. Also a fuel tower, as at Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39A and 39B. Those facilities were purpose built for the Saturn V and Space Shuttle. I can upload images and give you a link, as not to flood the thread with reference images.

Acetone, thank you for those landscaping tips, that helps a lot. I am convinced an object can directly modify the ground, I just need to figure out how it is done. Lead-in, lead-out is good to know about for roads,

PytonPago, Kerosene is a very good rocket fuel when burned with Liquid Oxygen (LOX) it is up there with Hydrogen + LOX. Although uncommon, like Liquid Methane, but very efficient and powerful. Usually used on upper stages for special applications, however it could be used for a main first stage engine as well. Elon Musk is a big proponent of Liquid Methane, for other reasons.

I contacted Jon Berndt, of JSBSim, and he told me where to find a fully functional rocket, buried in among all the aircraft files. It is located under aircraft/J246, and engines/RL10, SRB and SSME. The Jupiter 246 (aka ARES 4) is a launch vehicle derived from re-purposed Space Shuttle components, including the Solid Rocket Boosters, External Tank, and Space Shuttle Main Engines (SSME). The second stage uses six RL-10B-2 engines and includes a small third stage thruster behind the Orion Crew Module (inside the fairing) and Launch Abort System.

(http://www.directlauncher.org/documents/Baseball_Cards/J246-41.4004.10050_CLV_090606.jpg)

So without hesitation, I threw together a model using parts from the free NASA Space Shuttle 3d models, and waa-laa! No, it wasn't that easy actually, but I'm making progress! Really need to talk to Levi, with his experience on the Airbus files.

(http://i.imgur.com/hene2zG.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/0odvrpz.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/rGaaSnx.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/4FGCwMR.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/hffVWe8.jpg)

ZeosPentera, Anti-Aliasing 8x!!! ;)

Best regards,
Uriah George
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 07, 2014, 12:00:41 pm
That will be a good fly !
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: necro on December 07, 2014, 12:06:53 pm
Did you apply normal maps or is this true detail?


And which kind of tank is this dude here?
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-NNoOIqVi_u4/VISI0fw78nI/AAAAAAAAED4/s1VcXkTLIbo/w1479-h832-no/screen_1417971846.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 07, 2014, 12:17:59 pm
Without normal map at the moment, I made norms with the Nvidia tools, but I am not as concerned with textures until I am off the ground.

I believe that is a Liquid Oxygen fuel tower.

Did you pull the VAB off the NASA website?
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: necro on December 07, 2014, 12:42:25 pm
I thought LOX tanks are looking like the LH2 tanks. But good. I will rename it to that.
I took the VAB from g-maps and osm. But not bing. Bing sucks. Wikipedia gives the dimensions for it and the rest is approximated by eye. I'm not satisfied yet, because i think its more symmetrical as my one. Therefore i restarted it with more symmetry. So the building on the screenshot is ye olde one. Also additional buildings are not started. The launch control center for example. But probably this should be separated though



Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 07, 2014, 12:49:08 pm
Awesome great work! Things are really starting to take shape, it is always nice to have help too.

How do you load normal maps in the material for 3ds Max export to DAE? I haven't had any luck using the typical method.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: necro on December 07, 2014, 01:36:38 pm
I dont know. I'm doing it by hand in the material file. The blender exporter doesnt export the textures but the relative names. So its close enough to ctrl+v the files each time in the outerra package folder.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 07, 2014, 02:21:25 pm
Weird, I pasted the normal maps into the package/J246 folder and edited the J246.mtl file like so:

{
      "name" : "srb_all",
      "color" : ".725,.725,.725,1.0",
      "f0" : ".027",
      "roughness" : ".498",
      "no_light" : false,
      "alpha_masked" : false,
      "tex_albedo" : "6_SRBColor.dds",
      "tex_normal" : "SRBNorm.dds",
      "tex_roughness" : "",
      "tex_opacity" : "",
      "tex_reflectance" : "",
      "tex_environment" : ""
   },

Still nothing. :/ But I did get the rest of my textures working.

(http://i.imgur.com/y39XhY1.jpg)

Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: necro on December 07, 2014, 03:41:35 pm
could you upload all files? the normal map in true colors please. i will convert them by myself
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: ZeosPantera on December 07, 2014, 04:00:11 pm
Nice.. 8X barely touches the framerate of OT.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 07, 2014, 05:20:11 pm
Interstage fairing removed, reveling the six second stage RL-10B-2 engines and thrust structure. More detail will be added in the future.

(http://i.imgur.com/e7IQuC7.jpg)

Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle cabin interior... I think it is a must.

(http://telstarlogistics.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/12/13/orioncabin_2.jpg)(http://d1jqu7g1y74ds1.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/228245_147902085279532_129562970446777_298017_4422615_n.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: M7 on December 07, 2014, 05:47:41 pm
Cool stuff!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 07, 2014, 06:42:35 pm
Why thank you M7! I see you are also a fan of rockets.

Orion Launch Abort System

(http://i.imgur.com/Bn2AUZp.jpg)

Just noticed this, so I can cross one item off my list:

Code: [Select]
    <event name="Vehicle state:" persistent="true">
      <description>Output message at 10 second intervals</description>
      <notify>
        <description>Vehicle state:</description>
        <property caption="Mission Elapsed Time:    "> guidance/executive/MET </property>
        <property caption="ECI Velocity (fps):      "> velocities/eci-velocity-mag-fps </property>
        <property caption="Orbital apogee (miles):  "> guidance/executive/apoapsis </property>
        <property caption="Orbital perigee (miles): "> guidance/executive/periapsis </property>
        <property caption="Orbital eccentricity:    "> guidance/executive/eccentricity </property>
        <property caption="Altitude AGL (ft):       "> position/h-agl-ft </property>
        <property caption="Alpha (deg):             "> aero/alpha-deg </property>
        <property caption="Pitch rate cmd:          "> guidance/executive/gravity-turn-pitch-rate-command </property>
        <property caption="Thetadot (rad/sec):      "> velocities/thetadot-rad_sec </property>
        <property caption="Roll angle (rad):        "> attitude/phi-rad </property>
        <property caption="Pitch angle (rad):       "> attitude/theta-rad </property>
        <property caption="Heading (rad):           "> attitude/psi-rad </property>
        <property caption="Hold-down discrete:      "> forces/hold-down </property>
        <property caption="Throttle (norm):         "> fcs/throttle-cmd-norm[0] </property>
        <property caption="GNC Mode:                "> guidance/executive/current-mode </property>
      </notify>
      <condition> simulation/sim-time-sec >= simulation/notify-time-trigger </condition>
      <set name="simulation/notify-time-trigger" value="10" type="delta"/>
    </event>
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 07, 2014, 11:55:32 pm
What I love about Outerra, is it makes even a shoddy model look good! Here is the KSP LC-39A Launch Pad, scale check and first test.

(http://i.imgur.com/Kqbofcc.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/KzwY0VG.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/ejt76E4.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 08, 2014, 07:32:34 pm
Thanks to Levi, we are about to have a fully functional rocket in-game!!!!!

He gave me some tips and was also able to test the J246 FDM using the Saturn V model. I have asked permission to post his message and link to the rocket here, so check back soon.

-Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: necro on December 09, 2014, 01:38:32 am
That sounds great! Does even decoupling work?
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 09, 2014, 02:21:39 am
That answer to that question is, not yet.

Levi used a solid model so it physically cannot decouple the parts, yet I believe that JSBSim zeros the mass and drag of the stage when the event jettisons it. The flight is completely automated temporarily until I figure out how to fly manual. Once you initiate the launch, the flight sequence is executed by the program. I also noticed the speed indicator in the HUD reads zero after the orbital turn is made at around 60,000 ft. This may be due to it cannot calculate ground speed, and would need to switch to orbital speed instead. Really I need a new HUD to display the orbital parameters instead of those used by aircraft. Also, the camera is way too close, but that is a simple fix.

We're so close!!! And thank you Levi! A million times.

Also necro, thank you so much for your help! I hope not to do any more modeling for at least a few weeks, at least until I get everything working correctly, and hopefully by then many others will be inspired to help with modeling so that I can focus on flushing out all of the features of have planned for this mod. I certainly appreciate you being actively involved, it keeps me inspired knowing that other people are interested and even contributing. How is your modeling coming along btw? FYI: I will setup a git for this project tomorrow, so you can access my models and also check your scale, so that we can get on the same page. I was way off scale initially, but now everything is precise to the mm. It doesn't really matter with ground objects, but things such as the VAB or launch pad need to be the proper scale. I'll of course keep you posted on the progress and commit to the git once I have the J246 working satisfactorily.

(http://i.imgur.com/0d2jA9Q.jpg)

As always, regards,
Uriah George
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: necro on December 09, 2014, 02:41:14 am
Awesome! And you dont have to thank me, bud. Your work is much harder. And I am interested in that, because i love KSP as you do. I will release the VAB these days. It depends on the time i have so far. The scale is taken by wikipedia, so the building itself has its correct dimension. Unfortunately i'm bad in textures because its very timeconsuming. Therefore i dislike it to make them. But working with several colored materials should work for the beginning.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 09, 2014, 03:15:48 am
Likewise, I am far better at modeling than texturing, however I am decent so I can revisit textures at a later time, or like I said I hope additional enthusiasts jump on the band wagon and help. I should have the J246 working by tomorrow!

-Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 09, 2014, 03:26:15 am
Levi just okay'd me to post his message including a download link for the J246 Test so you can see for yourself. You can edit the camera positions from: J246/FDM/aircraft/J246.xml

Quote
Hello Uriah,
Thank you for the compliment! And sorry for late reply.

As I'm not a fan of rockets, I'm not sure how those things work, and how you control them..., but that's definitely a very interesting project you have there, and nice models btw! ;)


Ok, I took a look at the J246 aircraft and engine files, and I assembled a test rocket with those to see if it works, and it does. Also, I've added five structure contact/collision points inside ground_reactions to avoid the rocket to sink in to the ground.

Here you have it to take a look and see how your rocket could be set up: Download http://www.mediafire.com/download/3yo02nn8tc1b9fi/J246_Test.rar (http://www.mediafire.com/download/3yo02nn8tc1b9fi/J246_Test.rar).
All necessary JSBSim files are located here: packages\Levi\J246\FDM
Btw, the 3D model is another rocket, not actually the J246, but Saturn V-C.

When you import the model inside Outerra, I would recommend you to use FBX importer (CTRL+F7) instead of Collada. In the importer you wont have to configure anything, just import the model with default settings.

After the import, you manually edit the .mtl file and most important, the .objdef file. Be careful, the .objdef file will be replaced with a default one each time you re-import your model, just as the .mtl file.

The script (.js) file is mainly used for animations and sounds. All the dynamics, control surfaces, etc... are managed within JSBSim .xml files.


Also, I must say that I'm not an expert at all regarding JSBSim, I'm just a novice. I would better ask user bomber (Simon Morley) for specific JSBSim questions, as He's much more experienced in this area.

Don't hesitate to ask me any other question you have, I'm always happy to help where I can.  :)

Regards,
Levi.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 09, 2014, 10:20:15 am
You can download the Jupiter 426 install here: http://www.mediafire.com/download/l5fl1vghciz1hcu/J246.GNU.otx

NOTES:

Rockets are not vertically stable before launch, even with ground-reactions, because J246 from JSBSim includes an XML script for jettisoning the stages, providing flight data such as velocity, and most importantly the "hold-down" force required to keep the rocket stable before launch. Since Outerra uses Javascript for this I am not sure how to implement these important features elsewhere or in Java. I must consult the oracle. ;)

Before launch you must wait a few minutes after you spawn the rocket, and it will cease to move. If you throttle up 100% first and then press 'E' to launch, it should have enough initial longitudinal stability to fly straight.... or else it will have uncontrollable pitching moments and go into a spin. If you can minimize that initial movement at launch everything works fine. Still trying to figure out why I cannot edit how far away the camera is positioned but no luck there yet either.

WARNING!!! Outerra froze up on me a few times after leaving a rocket in flight, re-importing the rocket and starting Outerra again. It fails to initialize the world because it is trying to load the model in flight which has been replaced by a new version. DO NOT DO THIS!!! I had to re-install Outerra to correct the problem as I cannot seem to remove it from the cache folder to erase it from the world. Again try at your own risk. I now make sure to pause the simulation (space bar), exit the rocket and delete it before closing OT.

Regards,
Uriah

(http://i.imgur.com/9E7GIu2.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/1F0Ag7B.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/UfNnVp1.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/4WdL1u1.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/8FTfyzl.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: HiFlyer on December 09, 2014, 10:44:57 am
I'm sure Cameni and Angrypig will help you with this. Working rockets can only be a plus for Outerra.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 09, 2014, 11:08:00 am
Likewise, I am far better at modeling than texturing, however I am decent so I can revisit textures at a later time, or like I said I hope additional enthusiasts jump on the band wagon and help. I should have the J246 working by tomorrow!

-Uriah

 ... more than just you hoping for Photoshop enthusiasts. ;D

Not sure if de-coupling is possible now. Physics would have to be computed for each part separated (something like a multiple vehicles with dynamic script and physics interactions). But im waiting for that too, cause cars could have carts and trucks be possible or trains a little bit closer.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: M7 on December 09, 2014, 11:10:23 am
This will be amazing when we get smoke and the possibility to attach/detach/jettison different models
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 09, 2014, 11:34:36 am
Plus multibody physics are supported by JSBSim so it has a higher degree of realism than other space flight simulators, and of course an exquisite environment at any scale.

By the way the stage jettison will work without question, I just need to figure out how to assign the release function to a part and trigger the event because the scripts/J2461.xml file is supposed to perform those actions but it does not work that I know of. It is doing decoupling in JSBSim and removing the mass, just the physical model is not released. The fairings around the Orions Module and Crew Service Module will also jettison to release that third stage.

Here are the core functions I want to get working within a few months in descending order of importance.

Launch Complex/launch pad with working collision body
Functional hold-down force on launch pad
Fully functional JSBSim J246 three-stage rocket into LEO and back
Decoupling stages (action group buttons)
Manual/Autopilot modes
Rocket HUD mode for displaying fuel, velocity and orbit
Fuel consumption and point mass reduction
Parachute (deployed in stages, drogue/main)
Orion module watercraft surface reactions (splashdown)
Rocket engine smoke and flames
Destroy-able parts (from impact, heat, dynamic stress)
Reentry plasma-shock boundary effect
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: ZeosPantera on December 09, 2014, 01:06:19 pm
How long does it take to get into orbit? I imagine a very realistic amount!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 09, 2014, 01:07:34 pm
Try it for yourself!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 09, 2014, 03:45:29 pm
Yes, know the script can do stuff, its the jettisoned parts that cant interact afterwards - except, you would do all the parts as separate models - making first hide the correct parts on the rocket itself and making an spawn script, that would at each separation, spawn those "sub-models" at right places , with right forces based on the main ones state ... i think, with a little leading hand from Cameni/Angry, such thing could be possible right now. The better thing of this would be, that you could play with the sub-models scripts extensively too - i thing, some kind of script (with a little flame animation) based on altitude could make the parts "burn off" in atmosphere too, where the animations could be this way largely individual. 

  ... doe, its true, that it would be simpler (well, rather more interesting) to make an engine extension - some kind of dynamic burning animation ( maybe based on the collision mesh form ? ) that would change fitting perfectly the objects form and vector. (so you would see the flame start from the objects surface as real life and not just a big chunk of flame with the object in its center flippin around) It wouldn't be bad, as re-entries will be quite often used when other planets of the Sol system are added and people fly around the space ...

Imagine people on multiplayer seeing in the sky that someone is getting to earth !

Also, nicely extensive plans! Will hold the fingers crossed that it gets done in a form as much it can get, based on your intended plans !
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 09, 2014, 08:14:46 pm
Pyton, you are talking about reentry plasma during aerocapture correct?

(http://wordpress.mrreid.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/reentry.jpg)

Along with smoke and rocket exhaust, this will.be implemented when the volumetric shaders are introduced to OT. That just isn't as critical to function at the moment with many other features demanding attention before visual effects. It will be done realistically when it comes I am sure. I am going to attempt to created a continuously looped particle system animation and apply an opacity mapped material for rocket exhaust, temporarily until those volumetric sharers roll in. These will be attached to each engine and only visible during the burn. It suffices for now.

That will come in the next upload as well as manual stage decoupling. Those jettisoned parts for a rocket break and burn up when they reenter the atmosphere, eventually parts will have collisions and damage.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: SilentEagle on December 10, 2014, 12:44:30 am
Excellent concept! I tried my hand at creating a working rocket for Outerra using JSBSim a few months ago.  Since staging and spawning multiple physical bodies is not possible, I had to settle for making a single stage rocket.  I chose to recreate the Redstone rocket from the Mercury program (The same one that carried Alan Shepard on his suborbital flight).  I was able to create a directionally stable rocket that matched acceleration, speed, and altitude test data, but it was a pain, due to the rotation of coordinate axes that was needed for launching the rocket vertically.

I have since written my own flight dynamics engine that I hope to someday implement into the Outerra engine to allow for more general modeling of air and space vehicles.  However, I would be interested in helping you out with this project if you get it off the ground.  I know that Cameni and the team are very busy these days with their military sim contracts.  I have also tried to implement some of my ideas, but the lack of a 3rd party SDK will quickly halt progress, unfortunately.  I hope that will change in the new year.

The current limitations that need to be overcome are as follows:

Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 10, 2014, 01:31:38 am
Hi,
Thank you for the detailed reply!!!

Yes, I agree a heliocentric solar system is absolutely essential, as well as a n-body unified physics model for the Outerra universe.

However in regards to staging, it was suggested to use vehicle forces, a temporary hack for sure, but it would have the same net outcome. I've been thinking it might actually be possible to develop a new vehicle force which holds components together, and can be released manually with a jettison force along the Y-axis. It might work. You would actually assemble the rocket out of separate components and when the snap points get within proximity they detect each other, snap to alignment and hold the two models together. One model would need to be the parent (command module), I was thinking the propulsion/vehicle forces could be applied to that body, and all the connected bodies are children, and just follow the parent. The ground reaction coordinates could possibly be calculated from a table of know part sizes. Initially the fasteners could have infinite or very high strength and friction, but could possibly have a breaking strength. I am not sure exactly how this would be implemented yet, I am just trying to think outside the box... I would like to know your thoughts.

I asked Cameni about n-body physics and his reply implied we can experiment with vehicle forces in unintended ways, even to calculate multibody physics as it stands. Until an SDK or these features are released, a hack might just do the job.

A few questions for you SilentEagle:

Did you use the J246 as a starting point, as I did?

How did you solve the problem of the ground instability? I tried adding aircraft/ground_reactions.xml and including it in the J246.xml aircraft file, but it doesn't seem to make a difference. The JSBSim hold-down force for keeping the rocket stable doesn't work either, unless it can be included in the aircraft file directly and not in the script/ file. Do you think that is possible? I asked Jon Berndt just a few hours ago but I haven't heard back about it yet.

Were you able use the functions provided by JSBSim in order to calculate the orbital elements?

Were you able to implement manual user controls instead of autopilot?

Were you able to make fuel consumption and point mass reduction work? I am pretty sure I am operating with infinite fuel like the other Outerra vehicles.

Would you mind sharing your rocket OTX, or is it top-secret?! ;-D

I am always into collaborating, let me know what you have in mind!

Best regards,
Uriah George
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: SilentEagle on December 10, 2014, 11:11:14 am
However in regards to staging, it was suggested to use vehicle forces, a temporary hack for sure, but it would have the same net outcome. I've been thinking it might actually be possible to develop a new vehicle force which holds components together, and can be released manually with a jettison force along the Y-axis. It might work. You would actually assemble the rocket out of separate components and when the snap points get within proximity they detect each other, snap to alignment and hold the two models together. One model would need to be the parent (command module), I was thinking the propulsion/vehicle forces could be applied to that body, and all the connected bodies are children, and just follow the parent. The ground reaction coordinates could possibly be calculated from a table of know part sizes. Initially the fasteners could have infinite or very high strength and friction, but could possibly have a breaking strength. I am not sure exactly how this would be implemented yet, I am just trying to think outside the box... I would like to know your thoughts.

I guess you are talking about how to hold different vehicles (components) together, instead of spawning new components and manipulating existing ones.  What I meant was to have the ability to change the state of components (mass, moment of inertia, center of gravity, add/remove thrust forces, etc) while spawning the discarded stage with initial conditions matching that of the parent vehicle.  I'm not sure how your idea would work, but I do not think it would be currently possible without a few changes by the Outerra team.

I asked Cameni about n-body physics and his reply implied we can experiment with vehicle forces in unintended ways, even to calculate multibody physics as it stands. Until an SDK or these features are released, a hack might just do the job.

Yes, I suppose you could add a fictitious vehicle force that was due to other influences of gravity depending on your position, but there is no point until other celestial bodies are added so that you can tell your relative position to each of them.

Did you use the J246 as a starting point, as I did?

No, I created it from scratch using examples of other rocket engines and the vostok from FlightGear.

How did you solve the problem of the ground instability? I tried adding aircraft/ground_reactions.xml and including it in the J246.xml aircraft file, but it doesn't seem to make a difference. The JSBSim hold-down force for keeping the rocket stable doesn't work either, unless it can be included in the aircraft file directly and not in the script/ file. Do you think that is possible? I asked Jon Berndt just a few hours ago but I haven't heard back about it yet.

It would tip over before launch all the time before I added 4 ground reactions with a VERY wide base.

Were you able use the functions provided by JSBSim in order to calculate the orbital elements?

Could be done, but there was no need for a suborbital vehicle.  I have made sci-fi style spacecraft in the past and always had a hell of a time figuring out where to thrust once in space.

Were you able to implement manual user controls instead of autopilot?

I didn't write any autopilot for mine, so it is all manual control (pitch,roll,yaw with axes rotated to support a vertical launch).  It's not a big deal since you aren't aiming for anything like a precise orbit, because the vehicle is only capable of suborbital flight.  I imagine making a multistage rocket would require some kind of automation since we don't have the cool node orbital planning features of KSP.

Were you able to make fuel consumption and point mass reduction work? I am pretty sure I am operating with infinite fuel like the other Outerra vehicles.

This should work like any other aircraft.  Outerra aircraft created using JSBSim do have limited fuel and changing center of gravity based on that consumption.

Would you mind sharing your rocket OTX, or is it top-secret?! ;-D

I'm willing to share the JSBSim xml files, but I am unsure where I sourced the 3D model from, so I'm unable to release the whole thing.

I am always into collaborating, let me know what you have in mind!

My plans were a little larger than just a mod for the engine and more in the realm of a sim built on the engine, but I'm sure we could work together.  Since our DCS project fell apart at the hands of ED, I've been itching to switch my efforts to a more promising platform, such as Outerra.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 10, 2014, 07:34:26 pm
My plans were a little larger than just a mod for the engine and more in the realm of a sim built on the engine, but I'm sure we could work together.  Since our DCS project fell apart at the hands of ED, I've been itching to switch my efforts to a more promising platform, such as Outerra.

Now we are talking! I am in 110%! I was disappointed in ED myself, they kind of dropped the ball in a number of ways. Outerra has real promise.

That would be great if you could share the XML files for your rocket! I would like to see how you implemented it and maybe something works better than I have so far.

I am convinced I can make decoupling work, just give me some time. I am not giving up any time soon.

I also found a script that exports particle systems through FBX into Outerra and am working on a rocket plume animation. The transparency map uses a seamless fractal noise texture, and I am using the illumination map ("tex_emmision") to make the flames glow. I did a static test, and now working on getting the animation loop to play, and be able to change the animation speed. This following renders are 3d Max, but it should actually look better in Outerra. I will add this into the next update, along with Levi's additions to the J246.js file, below!

(http://i.imgur.com/NX2ivuc.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/hkU7l9e.jpg)

I had some more questions for Levi, and he again delivers in a big way!

Hi Uriah, and sorry for the late reply again.

Levi,
I am going to contact bomber momentarily with the same questions, but I will also pose them to you.

It took me some time to import my model and get it working like yours. Funny thing is the FBX imported isn't working for me at all and COLLADA is. When I import using FBX all the parts are fragmented is all directions. I determined it has to be my model, because I was able to export your Saturn model side by side from the same MAX file with my J246 and the Saturn parts stay together. I linked all the parts to the Dummy, and the drag around with it in max but something breaks when it is imported via FBX. It is of no consequence to me because COLLADA works just fine.

You can download my J426.otx here: http://www.mediafire.com/download/l5fl1vghciz1hcu/J246.GNU.otx
Ok, I think you just need to use Reset XForm utility, because you may have changed the scale of your objects (all objects must have the default scale of 100x100x100), and the pivots location as well. Reset XForm sould do the trick.
Just go to Utilities > Reset XForm > Reset Selected. And then just collapse your modifier stack.
(http://i.minus.com/ibfNGFSgvJXfhc.png)(http://i.minus.com/i2SnhuE5qsQKN.png)

Warning: Before using Reset XFrom, it's better to not have the objects linked together.

The only key features missing are in the XML scripts to display the velocity and orbit, enable/disable the hold-down force and jettison (decouple) the stages. The script/J2460.xml and J2461.xml files with JSBSim seem to be incompatible with Outerra. Is there a way to implement these same features in J246.js, or manual jettison?

Also, there seems to be no way to manually control the rocket's flight, it is on autopilot. Any thoughts there?
I've modified the J246.js script file, and now some properties can be displayed in the console (press "P" key). Some of those are:

- Mission Elapsed Time
- ECI Velocity (fps)
- Orbital apogee (miles)
- Orbital perigee (miles)
- Orbital eccentricity
- Hold-down discrete

I left more within the script, just un-comment them if you want to be displayed.

Also, I linked the Hold-down force to "Gear" control (default key is "period"). This way you can engage and disengage Hold-down force.
Note: Just after spawning the rocket, you may prefer to disable Hold-down force until the rocket is in vertical position.

After some .xml file editing, now you can control the rocket's Pitch ("W" and "S" keys) and Yaw ("Z" and "X" keys). It's not as stable as I would like, but it's something. :D


As far as I know, the scripts J2460.xml and J2461.xml, are not compatible with Outerra. But I believe you can archive the same features with JavaScript.
Within JavaScript you can assign values to any JSBSim property. It's as simple as this:
Code: [Select]
//Jettison SRBs
jsb['inertia/pointmass-weight-lbs[0]']=0;
jsb['inertia/pointmass-weight-lbs[1]']=0;

I guess the problem would be the limited keyboard functionality... but for decoupling, I think you can do it based on "simulation/sim-time-sec" or "guidance/executive/MET" (Mission Elapsed Time).


Also, I think you'll need to set the correct location for the pointmass items and fuel tanks to match the visual model. Those are located inside J246.xml file:
  • Pointmass under "<ground_reactions>"
  • Fuel tanks/oxidizers under "<propulsion>"

Keep in mind that in 3Ds Max and Outerra, Negative Y == Positive X in JSBSim.


Here's the updated Rocket: Download (http://www.mediafire.com/download/yyp5exn1bc65jh4/J246.GNU.otx)


Lastly, can the camera distance in third person view mode be changed? It doesn't seem to be a parameter that can be changed or else you would have done so with your Airbus.

Thanks,
Uriah
I haven't changed at all the third person camera distance on the Airbus, just used the mouse scroll wheel to temporary change the distance once in game. As far as I know, there are no parameters you could modify for that.

Regards,
Levi.


Feel free to share this PM if you wish so. :)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: ZeosPantera on December 11, 2014, 12:20:12 am
That is some awesome looking underwater bubbly magic fire!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 11, 2014, 01:32:31 am
Ha ha, yeah I didn't bother making it realistic until I can get the animation in game or else I might have to re-do everything in the end. I promise it will look far more real once OT releases the volumetric shaders, and this is temporary in the long run.

-Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: The-Bean on December 11, 2014, 05:41:13 am
Just signed up to say this looks amazing. I'm a big fan of KSP but feel constantly let down with a lot of the decisions the developers make, luckily there are mods. I've been hoping somebody else would come along with something, there's so much untapped gameplay in a realistic spaceflight game, but everyone seems to go the sci-fi route.

Will be keeping a close eye on this, it's looking great. :)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 13, 2014, 05:03:45 am
Just signed up to say this looks amazing. I'm a big fan of KSP but feel constantly let down with a lot of the decisions the developers make, luckily there are mods. I've been hoping somebody else would come along with something, there's so much untapped gameplay in a realistic spaceflight game, but everyone seems to go the sci-fi route.

Will be keeping a close eye on this, it's looking great. :)

Thank you! Outerra is an amazing engine so far, with a lot of room and flexibility for improvement, and I hope my models do it justice. I will spend more time on texturing and detailed modeling in the future, for now I want to get more functionality working. By the way, have you downloaded the Outerra Tech Demo? (Top left above Home tab). First off, I would like to say that I think KSP is awesome in its own right, a very innovative game to be sure. However there are a number of short comings, in terms of the bad physics and unrealistic landscape/environment. I love the ability to build complex assemblies and essentially build anything you can think of. I hope to be able to provide much of the assembly functions in the future, and hope to minimize the number of unique parts I need by using procedural ones which can be completely customized. Procedural parts are something the KSP developers cannot take credit for as they were develop by the community independently. If you, or anyone has suggestions I am all ears. Once OT puts out an API things will be a lot smoother. We will be able to build a sim using the Outerra engine, instead of being within the extreme limits we are working with currently.

UPDATES:

Until I figure out how to make the rocket more controllable, autopilot is essential for the vertical ascent, zero alpha and gravity turn phases, after which it can be disengaged and flown manually to perform maneuvers. It would be nice if in the future for building custom rockets you could also create custom autopilot flight programs for each stage.

I believe I have found a feasible solution for multi-stage vehicle assembly and therefore stage separation! More on that in the next few days after I do some testing.

In the next release there will a couple of additional functions:

1) Control key to switch between autopilot and manual control. (working!)

2) Display fuel tank levels (percent). (working!)

3) Display fuel tank masses (lbs). (working!)

4) Display thrust and status of engines. (thrust working!)

5) Display orbital inclination.

6) Improved control with manual flight controls.

7) Rocket sounds for each engine. (working!)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 13, 2014, 06:11:35 am
Nice !

... also, saw some funny NASA vid :

www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHy08ZPav88#t=95 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHy08ZPav88#t=95)

Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 13, 2014, 12:35:55 pm
Success at last!!!

I am now absoletly sure stage separation is possible where Outtera is at. Everything is contained in FGAircraft so each stage needs a stage.xml file that contains its attributes, which is read by the script.js and current velocity, moments, CG, CP, thrust, drag, lift, etc, for all of the stages are applied to the command module, the final stage vehicle. If you do the math it doesn't matter which object the forces are applied to as long as the rocket components are attached and the centers are in the correct "relative" locations. As a set of stage engines burnout, this triggers stage separation and zeros the point masses for those objects (I have already scripted this and it works). At the same time the physical models are released (can't do this yet of course) and they fall away as the next engines fire after a short time delay. I have everything except a way to attached separate objects together and release the models for spend stages, the rest is done! I even did a demonstration of the script pulling data from stage files and updating the totals for the aircraft. It works too! Just have to write a script for manual control of stage seperation and engine firing for it to be complete.

If someone can help me find a way to attach/detach models, in the same FBX/DAE file or not, we are golden!

Fuel levels (in percent and pounds) are now displayed, along with total weight (current lbs) and thrust (lbs). I realize of course weight should be mass, but I need to be able to convert from the base units first, so weight for now.

With JSBSim now fully functional, I was able to get into an elliptical orbit with an apogee of 698 miles and a perigee of 103 miles, with 148208 lbs of fuel to spare. At over 2,000,000 feet the Mission Elapsed Time dropped to zero, and the rocket went into a slow spin from which I could not recover. Besides that everything was nominal. Eventually I will record all the flight data and compare it against real world data, my guess is the drag is not very realistic. I am also writing a script that reduces the volume with a cutoff at a certain altitude, because there isn't sound in space, however inside the pressurized cockpit the engines and atmospheric sounds can be heard.

Tons more coming soon!

-Uriah

(http://i.imgur.com/oY75HPh.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: ProGamer on December 13, 2014, 04:55:43 pm
This mod recently got a bunch of attention on the Kerbal Space Program subreddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/2ow9o7/ksp_is_getting_competition_in_the_form_of_a_mod/
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: aWac9 on December 13, 2014, 08:55:05 pm
I never imagined I go hunting in search of extraterrestrial females was so interesting ..
Why trata..o that I was not? :)

good job .. keep it that way

http://youtu.be/uUBhn3_P3hU

Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 14, 2014, 03:52:55 am
I read through the KSP subredit thread and it is certainly inspiring!. It is quite obvious there are a lot of people already interested in this concept who are looking for a more realistic simulator.

For someone who grew up building things and in love with astronomy and space exploration, KSP is one of the most innovative games I have ever seen. It is just limited for me because of decisions made during development to sacrifice realism/simulation for game-play. Maybe that is why KSP is so popular, because typically simulation is actually far more boring and difficult, requiring a lot of calculations. However I find real orbital transfers are impossible to calculate, such as the Hohmann transfer orbits, which is why they developed the orbital node system to perform such maneuvers in KSP because of the 'spheres of influence' system they use. I will be implementing true multi-body physics and setting up orbit transfers will take place in the cockpit flight computer, which allows you to define custom flight programs for each phase of a spacecraft's mission. You'll be able to select a destination, transfer orbit, and it will calculate the launch windows for you, with margins of error as well as the return launch window, for long duration round-trip missions. The flight computer will be loaded with the vehicle definition file, which includes all of the pre-calculated simulation data including delta-velocity for each stage, considering all of the factors including initial planetary spin velocity and atmospheric drag during ascent and descent. If you were to set the destination for Mars in the Ares IV/Jupiter 246 flight computer, it would tell you there is not enough delta-V to put the Orion module into the necessary transfer orbit. I am already working on the javascript for the flight computer. This way you will be able to design and build spacecraft and missions without leaving the launch pad, so you only have to launch one, maybe two test flights in order to refine the design.

Oh yeah, and just wait until you see the new HUD!

 ;D

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 14, 2014, 04:11:43 am
Copernicus seems a reasonably big housing module, doe, is it really big enough to hold a half and more year of provisions n/orr an space cultivation lab ? Also, in search for it, i found that Trans-Hab module project ...

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/53/TransHab_shell_cutaway.jpg/464px-TransHab_shell_cutaway.jpg)

An interesting idea of conserving mass. I see the apparent problems during space-construction (if any layer got cut or tangled due to manipulation or space-factors ( debris and tiny meteorites )), but recent material sciences had a lot of things happening, to make those layers being stronger and more resistant. Also, special packaging techniques may just need it to be internally pressurized to inflate them in a safe and proper way. The modularity capabilities of textiles is interesting in this :

http://www.archiprix.org/2015/index.php?project=2388 (http://www.archiprix.org/2015/index.php?project=2388)

But simply, making such light-weight modules for hydrophobic chambers or purely supply modules wouldn't be a bad cont reduction idea out there. Possibly, if such materials could be created in space conditions, making fitting modules at place could be and interesting addition (in form and structural strength aspect) to printing techniques. So, question is, is still NASA bound with the congressional ban on that program ? That would leave them depending on such a project purely on that commercial venture.



 ... thats some great news Uriah ! Im doe not sure if splitting objects from a single model file for such separations is possible. Doe, if all would be separate models, witch after spawn at the same location fit together, you could probably make somehow a projection of those modules to the position/rotation data of the main one, then at separation, cut this projection and give it proper forces combination to cut it loose and give its momentum.

... well, maybe, if you just make a separate set of physics data ... you probably could actually do that, but the problem is, that origin points(or pivots) of the models separate meshes are taken to account to the main hierarchy. That is, you have to make a script for ascending of each detached part (just simply give it the proper momentum and let it fall due to gravity with some altitude-bound buffers due to air density) as addition to what you have and trigger them at separation. The most problematic thing is, doe, computing the relative position difference from the main module ! First computing, the part of how the separated module would fall off and make the position projection re-calculated to the position of the stage separation from the main module +  a similar calculation for the main module prolonging its flight from that moment.

Its a really bulky way of doing this with lots of math involved due to the fact, that you have to refer the modules position to the main module pivot point and not the altitude/latitude/longitude towards Earth. And only reasonable, till modules burn off in the atmosphere (so you can cut that script then and make the mesh invisible after burning).

Problem could be too, due to LODs, that it probably makes them disappear at some distance from the main one (well, maybe not if its just a single LOD level  there).

Can imagine some script like this, doe, ill say there will be a lot of things to be computed, specially, if ya go on rotating with the main (or remaining group of them) module in some ways after the separation. ... thats why i would prefer them stages as separate models, getting theyr data from the main one till separation and letting the base engine physics then take the job off your hands.


... if ewer OT could separate some meshes from the model due to selecting some frome the hierarchy and create a separate model with physics "on the fly", than it would be awesome for such things, doe, im sure, in the future, those rockets will have other "payloads" and set-ups witch oppose the one model structure a little further too.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 14, 2014, 04:41:17 am
Pyton, that is exactly what I have in mind.  :D

Its not as difficult as it sounds, I just need to find the right java function to attach at spawn/detach for jettison, JSBSim handles everything else, so no math really. They will essentially act as individual aircraft, and the jettisoned stage will have the same position and velocity vectors. There is also a jettison force applied to the spent stage directly after the fastener is disabled. Since there is no API to speak of I can't talk to the game engine functions yet.

-Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: bomber on December 14, 2014, 05:45:56 am
This is going so fast I can't keep up never mind offer any help... Which by the sounds of it you don't need :-)

Well done.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 14, 2014, 06:06:45 am
Thank you very much! I can't take all the credit, Levi has been awesome!

Actually I really need help! Any ideas on attaching/jettisoning stages? I have been scouring the forum to no avail, and all my magical javascript spells haven't been able to attach/detach components.

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 14, 2014, 06:48:45 am

If someone can help me find a way to attach/detach models, in the same FBX/DAE file or not, we are golden!

Pyton, that is exactly what I have in mind.  :D

Its not as difficult as it sounds, I just need to find the right java function to attach at spawn/detach for jettison, JSBSim handles everything else, so no math really. They will essentially act as individual aircraft, and the jettisoned stage will have the same position and velocity vectors. There is also a jettison force applied to the spent stage directly after the fastener is disabled. Since there is no API to speak of I can't talk to the game engine functions yet.

-Uriah


Oh ... muffled myself in-between, doe, if separate models, then all should be as separate FBX/DAE imports. (otherwise, it will bound them all to the main object and pivot point and probably just the stupid back-referencing way i wrote would work because of it)

Could think of an "physical-mechanical" attachment, but it would involve custom collision meshes - hence OT update needed. Not sure if ya can say somehow the distance between two models pivot points to play with them aether (but would be a handy thing too).
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: pina_coladas on December 14, 2014, 07:01:42 pm
I also just registered to share my enthusiasm and gratefulness for this project.  In case you haven't stumbled across this already, here is a link to the thread for the Principia mod work-in-progress for KSP: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/68502-WIP-Principia-N-Body-Gravitation-and-Better-Integrators-for-Kerbal-Space-Program

It's all way over my head, but it is clear that the people working on that project really know their stuff when it comes to calculating and visually representing trajectories in an N-body gravity environment.  Hopefully that thread can be a good resource for the people here, whenever you get to that point in the development of your mod.

Good luck!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 15, 2014, 07:16:41 am
Thank you! I really appreciate all the enthusiasm!  ;D That is awesome to hear about Principia, I had no idea.

Download the Jupiter 246 Demo for Outerra: J246.GNU.OTX (http://www.mediafire.com/download/l5fl1vghciz1hcu/J246.GNU.otx)

Controls:

P                   Information display
. (period)      Hold-down force (on=1, off=0)
pgup            Increase throttle
pgdn            Decrease throttle
enter            Exit/enter rocket
G                  Google Maps

To enter a prograde orbit with minimal inclination, spawn the rocket using Google Maps to face due West. This will orient the autopilot to make an Eastward gravity turn. To make sure the rocket does not have pitching moments or go into a spin directly after launch follow these instructions carefully. After spawning the rocket, press '.' (period) to take off the hold-down force. This will allow the rocket to rotate into a vertical position. Wait until the rocket stops moving completely before turning back on the hold-down. By pressing 'P' you may see the status of the hold-down force, (on=1, off=0). Slowly increase the throttle until above 70%, this will fire the four SSME RS-25 engines, wait a few seconds for the thrust to stabilize, increase to 100% to fire the two SRBs. Release the hold-down force after the SRB thrust has stabilized. After the SRBs burnout, they will be jettisoned in JSBSim, and the mesh hidden (separation still not working). When the main External Tank is empty the first stage will be jettisoned. Enjoy your flight!

(http://i.imgur.com/KX9yKNk.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/kz6ajbJ.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/euUZUpe.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/wr3CYV1.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/zUfb7eM.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/MFk0WJb.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/CGkwhp5.jpg)


Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on December 15, 2014, 08:32:31 am
Beautifull !
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 15, 2014, 09:16:00 am
Let me know if the upper stage goes into an uncontrollable spin near the apogee, it has happened a few times for me. Also, the closer to the equator your launch site is the more initial velocity from the Earth's spin your rocket will be imparted with. Post your screens/videos!

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 17, 2014, 05:31:23 am
Illuminated semi-transparent rocket flames, (very basic), that turn on/off with throttle.

SRB, SSME and RL-10 rocket sounds working that turn on/off with engines.

Sounds decrease in volume with decrease in atmospheric pressure and cut off when the pressure goes below 0.01 Pascals. There is a persistent bug that turns sounds back on when SRBs are jettisoned.

Switch between Manual and Autopilot modes. (Fly-by-wire inertial stabilization coming soon in manual mode!)

(http://i.imgur.com/TJGOlRh.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 17, 2014, 01:49:22 pm
Thanks to necro for the Vehicle Assembly Building and O2/H2 Tank!

Thanks to Acetone for the awesome Alaskan scenery and the tips on working with the OT road tools. Finally figured out how to make a proper launch pad using nothing but roads.

And thank you Levi for all your help!

Last but not least, thank you to the Outerra team, Great engine!!!!

(http://i.imgur.com/7Gjv8eW.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/NeTYQhi.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/H4f67EN.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/DMc74V6.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/eKdLs07.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/uLkFLwT.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/gCYj2Cg.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/HTN1DO9.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/N2XupX6.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: M7 on December 17, 2014, 02:17:31 pm
This is looking great! The road painting works really well!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on December 17, 2014, 02:42:45 pm
Thanks to necro for the Vehicle Assembly Building and O2/H2 Tank!

Thanks to Acetone for the awesome Alaskan scenery and the tips on working with the OT road tools. Finally figured out how to make a proper launch pad using nothing but roads.

And thank you Levi for all your help!

Last but not least, thank you to the Outerra team, Great engine!!!!


Looks really cool, clever use of road paintings :)

One simple note : you can control road overlapping by selecting a road (with the road tool open) and pressing "make" again. The selected road will go under every other road it crosses. It can be usefull for the one in picture #5. However, be warned, in some situations this can modify the local roads elevation in a weird way, so be sure to make a backup of your cache folder regulary, in case of problem :)

Feel free to PM me if you want some help for scenery creation. I will have some work to do on Talkeetna in January, but after that, if you need some roads/city setting around your launch pad, I will be happy to help you if you need it :)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Levi on December 17, 2014, 02:53:26 pm
Great work Uriah!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 17, 2014, 03:57:04 pm
Thanks everyone!

Acetone, yes I've had mixed success with that technique, but I am starting to get the hang of doing it right the first time so I don't have to come back. Do you work in a fresh install of Anteworld so that the files in the cache folder are ONLY the ones you need? I figure it is very difficult to go in a pull what I just built out because it is mixed in with Talkeetna. It was just a practice run anyway!

I didn't mean to invade Talkeetna with a spaceport either, it just happens to be the biggest small town there is currently ;) ...and you put the radio telescopes in such a convenient location!

I would definitely appreciate your help on scenery for the final launch complex(s), that would be awesome! Once I build them I will send you the files and let you fill in the surrounding areas. We certainly have plenty of buildings, thanks to the likes of Levi. I figure that since static objects disappear after a certain distance that only scenery within the view of the rocket as it ascends would be necessary for each site. I am going to do SLC-37 and LC-39A in Canveral, FL and another somewhere else, maybe WA or CA. These will be installed with the mod. Since the mod will come with all the launch complex parts people can also build their own anywhere. Instead of spawning a rocket from the menu, I need to initialize the rocket on the launch pad in the vertical position next to the launch tower (JSBSim y-axis --> Outerra/Z-axis), that will be tricky.

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on December 18, 2014, 04:33:39 am
Thanks everyone!

Acetone, yes I've had mixed success with that technique, but I am starting to get the hang of doing it right the first time so I don't have to come back. Do you work in a fresh install of Anteworld so that the files in the cache folder are ONLY the ones you need? I figure it is very difficult to go in a pull what I just built out because it is mixed in with Talkeetna. It was just a practice run anyway!

Nope, but I can locate where are my scenery using this map (http://i1.minus.com/ibcrtObqwPVS16.png). If you open the Talkeetna otx, you fill find only the cache files of this region :)

I didn't mean to invade Talkeetna with a spaceport either, it just happens to be the biggest small town there is currently ;) ...and you put the radio telescopes in such a convenient location!

I didn't realized you had built it near Talkeetna :) It's a bit sad because the next update I will publish will erase your work if you install it (no way to "merge" lower level cache files for the moment) :(
From what I see here, it will not be hard to reproduce, did you use precise data for the lengh/width of the roads?

For reference, the telescopes site really exist near Talkeetna (https://www.google.fr/maps/place/62%C2%B019%2758.1%22N+150%C2%B001%2756.6%22W/@62.332805,-150.032401,221m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x0) :)

I would definitely appreciate your help on scenery for the final launch complex(s), that would be awesome! Once I build them I will send you the files and let you fill in the surrounding areas. We certainly have plenty of buildings, thanks to the likes of Levi. I figure that since static objects disappear after a certain distance that only scenery within the view of the rocket as it ascends would be necessary for each site. I am going to do SLC-37 and LC-39A in Canveral, FL and another somewhere else, maybe WA or CA. These will be installed with the mod. Since the mod will come with all the launch complex parts people can also build their own anywhere. Instead of spawning a rocket from the menu, I need to initialize the rocket on the launch pad in the vertical position next to the launch tower (JSBSim y-axis --> Outerra/Z-axis), that will be tricky.

Good luck ! Maybe a stupid suggestion, but is it possible to add an invisible collision mesh around the rocket wich will help to set it stable when placed? Since rockets are not really supposed to interact with terrain, it could be a good solution for you (if the launch terrain is flat).

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 18, 2014, 05:37:26 am
I didn't realized you had built it near Talkeetna :) It's a bit sad because the next update I will publish will erase your work if you install it (no way to "merge" lower level cache files for the moment) :(
From what I see here, it will not be hard to reproduce, did you use precise data for the lengh/width of the roads?

Not I was just developing a method to build the launch pad using the OT road rather than importing a launch pad model which was having zero success. I am already working on SLC-37 in Cape Canaveral and it sounds like you'll be the first to see it!

Good luck ! Maybe a stupid suggestion, but is it possible to add an invisible collision mesh around the rocket wich will help to set it stable when placed? Since rockets are not really supposed to interact with terrain, it could be a good solution for you (if the launch terrain is flat).

Not a stupid question at all, I've been working on that problem for three days with no luck, but I just found the solution to spawning the rocket or its side, and it will also allow stage separation finally!!! I would really appreciate some help on this, it could open up a ton of possibilities in Outerra, including armaments such as bombs/missile on aircraft. You could also write a script to calculate a part is destroyed given a collision and spawn/replace the mesh with a bunch of fragments/broken pieces of the original mesh, which are separately simulated. (Things could brake/explode!  :D)

Since JSB uses Y as the vertical axis and OT uses Z, the rocket is spawned laying down horizontally. I was searching the forum for a way to specify the position/orientation/translational velocity/rotational velocity of a vehicle/aircraft when it is spawned. I found this thread, 'External Dynamic Data' (http://forum.outerra.com/index.php?topic=2864.0), this thread, 'Real time GPS input' (http://forum.outerra.com/index.php?topic=2210.0) and this thread, 'Integrating with another sim' (http://forum.outerra.com/index.php?topic=2705.0) in which Cameni provides a means to do just that, such as the code below:

Code: [Select]
  var world,igc,vehicle;

  function ll2xyz(lon,lat) {
    const R = 6378135;
    const rad = Math.PI/180.0;
    var fc = Math.cos(lon*rad);
    var fs = Math.sin(lon*rad);
    var ac = Math.cos(lat*rad);

    return [R*fc*ac, R*fs*ac, R*Math.sin(lat*rad)];
  }

  if(!world) world = $eview.$query_interface("ot::js::world.get");
  if(!igc) igc = $eview.$query_interface("ot::js::igc.get");
  if(world && !vehicle) {
    var c = map.getBounds().getCenter();    //this is from google maps object
    var pos = ll2xyz(c.lng(), c.lat());
    vehicle = world.create_instance("outerra/ddg/ddg", pos, {x:0, y:0, z:0, w:1}, false);
  }

My plan is to spawn the rocket stages from separate aircraft files, first the command module, and using a modified version of the script above, set each stage to the position/orientation/translation velocity/rotational velocity of the command module. The command module (parent) will calculate all of the forces for all of the attached stages (children) and contain all of the functionality, and the pointmasses for each attached stage will be set to zero while attached to the parent (essentially non-functional). When the stage is jettisoned, an SRB for example, its mass will be set to the empty case weight and it will be initialized in JSBSim imparted with the initial position/orientation/translation velocity/rotational velocity.

If it is not possible to attach on aircraft to another from launch, than I can spawn the SRB_stage and hide the coorisponding SRB_mesh and the SRB_stage will be initialized in JSBSim as soon as it is spawned, again being imparted with the current position/orientation/translation velocity/rotational velocity at the moment of separation. I am not sure which method will work, maybe both, in which case I can think of many different purposes suitable for each.

The only piece of the puzzle that is still missing is how to get one aircraft (SRB_stage) to read the JSBSim position/orientation/translation velocity/rotational velocity of another aircraft, the command module. I know it can be done, just not sure how yet. Any thoughts?

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 21, 2014, 02:40:27 pm
Update: With help from Brano I am developing something akin to an assembly. There is a ton of integration to do, and a few problems to solve, but I am very confident it will work.

I am now able to run a script from the current rocket which spawns a second aircraft at the same position and orientation, and references the new object so I can call JSB variables and methods such as getting the tank capacity, empty weight, etc. Now I just need to figure out how to use external forces to fasten the two aircraft and integrate their total forces. Like the hold-down force, I need a 'hold-together' force which can be activated/deactivated. The integrator is actually fairly simple but the hold-together force, not so much.

I'll post updates periodically when I know more.

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on December 21, 2014, 02:48:39 pm
P.S. just to clarify, each stage will be a separate aircraft each with its own FDM, etc, and hopefully it will be modular so you could create an assembly using different configurations of components. :)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Voyager55 on January 25, 2015, 04:48:23 pm
Flabbergasted, i'm completely flabbergasted! Kerbal Space Program is basically my life, and this.... ohh boy this will be good. Is the simulation of the proper atmospheric drag already incorporated?
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on January 25, 2015, 08:09:37 pm
Hi Voyager55,

First of all, I hope you stick around, there will be some awesome things happening in Outerra in the near future. Second, I'm glad your interested in the rockets I'm developing and yes, aerodynamics are incorporated in the JSBSim Flight Dynamic Model, and it is easy to build your own FDM for new rockets with a little research and time. I will be releasing a full tutorial in the future which explains how to go about building your own FDM and importing a 3d rocket model. In terms of sim accuracy, I only have one serious bug in the way, and someone is helping me develop a solution to that at the moment. Compared with KSP, JSBSim has far more realistic gravitational and aerodynamic physics and since Outerra uses real-world scale, you don't have the scale problems present in KSP. I love KSP by the way! It is a great game, but I am looking for more of a sim environment, and less of a game. I understand there is a project,  Principia, which is developing N-Body physics and a better integrator for KSP. I am excited to see that happen. However, if you're trying to model real-world launch vehicles, I don't think KSP can ever quite match to what I can already do in JSBSim. Not to say JSB doesn't have its shortcomings too, a few bugs we are working on, but the flight data I am outputting from the Jupiter 246/ Ares IVf is already extremely accurate up until upper stage separation, at which point the sim data deviates from the real world data when compared side by side.

Don't let the recent lack of activity on this thread fool you either, I have not been posting a whole lot lately but I can tell you that we are building a massive real-world scenery, and I am developing five different launch vehicles; the Delta IV, Delta II, Atlas V, Falcon 9 and a "special project" I can't talk about yet. Buy yourself a copy of Outerra, (it is only $15 USD), and stay tuned. YOU WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED! :)

Best regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Voyager55 on January 26, 2015, 08:13:33 am
Thank you for such a well thought out post! When playing KSP realism was always a craving, Realism Overhaul was great , but it looks like KSP could truly pale in comparison. Can't wait to see what's coming!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on January 26, 2015, 08:31:23 am
If you read the beginning of the thread you'll know I plan on procedural components and assembly of launch systems. One direction I am considering is to make the user interface and experience for design/assembly that feels more like a CAD program, where you can look at the rocket in multiple views, and precisely place components and define their dimensions. During assembly there will be rocket specific design tools, and calculators to help you design a rocket to meet pre-defined requirements for its mission. This way you could define a rocket based on functional requirements, such as what type of orbit and payload mass, and the program calculates the delta V required, and helps with various design related processes involved in complex multistage launch vehicles. You'll be able to run a "simulation" without leaving the assembly building, that produces a report of the general flight characteristics, delta V, orbit, masses, etc... and displays graphs of the sim data. Those are some of the features I have planned.

Best regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Voyager55 on January 26, 2015, 10:29:18 am
Sounds great, the  hype is real! Another quick question, do you plan on implementing any sort of EVA component?         
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on January 26, 2015, 10:45:07 am
Probably, but it isn't on the proverbial Outerra horizon yet. There is some API support the engine does not have currently. I am more concerned with flight systems, guidance, cockpit display and such things at the moment. It won't so much be a "game", as a simulator, although I may develop game-play, or someone may come along and make a mod which does so.

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: meatsauce on January 26, 2015, 03:46:27 pm
Legendary thread. Thanks for the mod Uriah.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: The-Bean on March 29, 2015, 08:17:48 am
Are you still working on this mod? I've been checking back occasionally hoping for some updates and it's been a couple of months since you've posted. :)

Cheers.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on March 29, 2015, 07:16:52 pm
Hi,

I have been working on rockets for Outerra. Temporarily I've suspended work, just in the last month, because I'm busy working on something else related to Outerra, but plan to resume work on rockets in two weeks once I have some free time.

Outerra fixed some issues that were released in the most recent update allowing rockets to spawn in the vertical position (initial pitch angle) and desired heading (roll angle). I will release a demo of the J246 in the next few days with some improvements. In the upcoming release of extended controls and 3d click-able cockpit controls, as well as numerous other capabilities, I will be able to finaly realize the full scale and complexity of what I want to do with rockets. There have been some doubts as to Outerra's capability to support spaceflight simulation, but I would like to cast those doubts aside as both the Outerra engine and JSBSim are more than adequate.

As Outerra states:
Quote
[Outerra] uses the JSBSim Flight Dynamics Model library for high fidelity simulation of aircraft, and Bullet physics engine for simulation of vehicle physics. Terrain and fractal algorithms maximally utilize the GPU, leaving the CPU resources for simulation.

Essentially, just about anything is possible with Outerra, as there are no limits to scale or fidelity of the physics engine. With the CPU free for the physics engine, complex simulations involving many objects extreme distances apart is possible. JSBSim flight models for rocket and spacecraft need to be improved (in the front-end that I am working on), however the back-end is completely extensible to support anything you desire to build in the front-end. JSB simply calculates forces and integrates them, so splash-down, planetary transfer orbits, Mars aero-capture, lunar decent, multi-body (N-body) physics, it is all possible... and more!

So what have I been working on specifically? I teamed up with a few people, namely Acetone and M7, to build the vast Cape Canaveral Florida scenery, including Space Launch Complex 37 with the Delta IV Heavy, Orion Launch Vehicle Configuration, SLC-41 with the Atlas V 501 X-37B Launch Vehicle Config, and SLC-40 with the SpaceX Falcon9 Heavy Dragon 2 Launch Vehicle Config, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Kennedy Space Center (possibly SLC-39A and 39B) as well as the industrial and residential/urban scenery in the surrounding area.

I have been developing a better flight model architecture for rockets in general, including better definition of the aerodynamics, rocket engine and structural failure mode, accurate thrust curve tables, stage separation/jettison, advanced engine control, RCS thrusters,  supersonic reentry control systems, dynamic pressure (qdot-maxq) surface heat generation and material failure modes, deployment of drogue and main parachutes, and much more. As well, the countdown and control of the flight sequence can be fully automated or manual, and during launch there will be a mission control launch audio commentary played, which changes due to mission events. The Orion MPCV will also include a detailed and fully functional virtual cockpit, with interactive MFDs, buttons and switches based on the real NASA cockpit design and glass-cockpit interface of the Orion medium fidelity mock-up.

Below are a few screenshots I have decided to release as a "sneak-peak, but this is just a mere sample of what we are actually working on. I've hesitated on releasing these screenshots, but I have been getting a steady stream of inquiring messages and e-mails, so I thought it wouldn't hurt to post a few. I don't know when, or how, this will be released, but it will eventually be available in some form or another at the appropriate time when it is complete. Enjoy the screenshots!

We would really like to hear your suggestions! What features, spacecraft, launch vehicles, etc, do you want to see in a space flight sim built on Outerra?!?

Thanks for the support!

A special thanks to the Outerra team and specifically Cameni, who has been extremely helpful and inspires me every day! A sincere thank you to both Acetone and M7, you guys have been awesome and I'm honored to work with you! Also, thanks to necro for providing the KSC Vehicle Assembly Building and Liquid Hydrogen storage tanks!

Best regards,
Uriah

SLC-41, Atlas V 501 X-37B Launch Vehicle Configuration. Acetone's scenery skills are second to none!
(http://i.imgur.com/mdx0Ktf.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/FttGH57.jpg)

SLC-37, Delta V Heavy Orion Launch Vehicle Configuration, with Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and Skid Strip in the distance
(http://i.imgur.com/4OfWVtK.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/pUZACBk.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/OdwSa9S.jpg)

View facing South along Cape Canaveral.
(http://i.imgur.com/3WGAzHn.jpg)

View of Kennedy Space Center in distance (top right) from the CCAFS Skid Strip (bottom left). Note the runway lighting system.
(http://i.imgur.com/swouzd3.jpg)

Residential/Urban City Building System, extraordinary houses textured by M7!
(http://i.imgur.com/TYcLaA0.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/2pUrZJ0.jpg)

Isn't Outerra just incredible!?!?! Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona
(http://i.imgur.com/WSSEavp.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on March 30, 2015, 03:05:08 am
Well, I think anybody can thank you for your hard work Uriah :)

An outdated screenshot of the whole Cap peninsula :

(http://i.imgur.com/445U88r.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: HiFlyer on March 30, 2015, 03:49:52 am
Very interesting!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: The-Bean on March 30, 2015, 10:51:08 am
Well that was a lot more than I was expecting as a reply. :) It looks (and sounds) amazing.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: KW71 on March 30, 2015, 02:52:20 pm
Holy sh..!!!  This looks great!!!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on March 31, 2015, 03:31:12 am
BTW, if you are using the Alaska scenery (latest version), you can visit the small launch pad I reproduced here. It's located at the south of the Kodiak airport (in a small peninsula) :

(http://i.imgur.com/iLhXotv.jpg)

You will have missing buildings warnings. The real location is now closed since a test military rocket blew-up on the pad  :-X

(http://www.adn.com/sites/default/files/styles/ad_slideshow_940/public/online140815rocketlaunch-1.jpg?itok=63E9htKu)

There is also an other super-secret location, but it's not ready to be revealed  ;)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on March 31, 2015, 03:39:30 am
Silly military rockets ... they allways confuse the count-downs.  ::) Also, after all those booms till now, im sure they have some speedy-construction people at a calls distance.  ;)

P.S.: Whats that tower building ? ... is it some service-structure for rockets, as it seems to be able to rotate around the center ? Wold be interesting to have it animated ...
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on March 31, 2015, 03:51:10 am
Silly military rockets ... they allways confuse the count-downs.  ::) Also, after all those booms till now, im sure they have some speedy-construction people at a calls distance.  ;)

In fact, I think this launchpad will not be open anymore. Local inhabitants (the town is really close, at the other side of the hill) where ok when the site was build because it was supposed to be used by the Nasa. But at the end, majority of the launch were carried by the military, and there were protest about it. At the end, this accident (the rocket blew up just above the launch pad) may probably end this site launches.

P.S.: Whats that tower building ? ... is it some service-structure for rockets, as it seems to be able to rotate around the center ? Wold be interesting to have it animated ...

It's the launch service structure, where the rocket is stored vertically and prepared for the launch. The design is interesting, the rocket is static bur the structure move around it:

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/45jack_files/04images/Kodiak_Launch/14-LSS-doors-KStar.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on March 31, 2015, 03:55:11 am
How can they have a town near that thing ? What safety regulus ? :o
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on March 31, 2015, 04:11:47 am
Nice! I have a rough model of that Mobile Service Tower for KLC, just need to texture it, and animating is possible. The SLC-37 MST and Fixed Umbilical Tower are both animated.

Regards.
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on March 31, 2015, 05:53:56 am
Nice! I have a rough model of that Mobile Service Tower for KLC, just need to texture it, and animating is possible. The SLC-37 MST and Fixed Umbilical Tower are both animated.

Regards.
Uriah

Thats great !
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on April 13, 2015, 05:25:49 am
(http://i.imgur.com/UbpnISX.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on April 13, 2015, 07:11:14 am
Nice wallpaper ! ... any plans for a calendar ?  :D
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 13, 2015, 07:39:11 am
The primary objective currently is a fully working manned rocket/spacecraft with virtual cockpit and realistic operation from the launch pad into low earth orbit, retrograde burn for reentry, and splashdown.

Best regards,
Uriah George

Rendered images, NOT from Outerra.

(http://i.imgur.com/D8ZF6Ie.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/cuYuaVc.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/PdtLv3n.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 29, 2015, 08:04:38 am
Major breakthrough flight test!

Took the Delta IV Heavy Orion LVC into a 0 deg inclination equatorial pro-grade orbit around Anteworld Earth, and then performed the upper stage burn putting my eccentricity above 1.0 on a hyperbolic transfer trajectory. The simulation is still running at over 40 minutes (T+2400 seconds), and continues generating a CSV data output file with all of the Keplerian orbital elements and Cartesian coordinates for ECI position and velocity vectors for me to analyze.

(http://i.imgur.com/yjxi78v.jpg)

eccentricity > 1.0
(http://i.imgur.com/x6gCp8n.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/mEb3YTZ.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/BGkNEYH.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/8LiAb56.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on April 29, 2015, 08:53:20 am
Cool!  :)

Apoapsis and Periapsis are changing, even between the last screens. I guess It means these were taken while the engine were still generating thrust, right?
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 29, 2015, 09:33:38 am
Good eye Ace!

No the engine shutdown occurred after the transfer burn, so after the second screenshot. However, you are correct that Ap and Pa continue to change, and shouldn't as the orbit isn't changing. The reason for this is because a few of the current equations don't support hyperbolic trajectories exceeding e > 1.0 and therefore I must include a logic section in the flight_computer.js to switch equations once limits are exceeded. Regardless, once a spacecraft exceeds escape velocity on a transfer orbit, it is in a heliocentric orbit around the Sun, and of course OT doesn't support multi-body physics yet, so I can't calculate the semi-major axis to derive aphelion and perihelion in that case. I should actually have the string name for Ap/Pa change in the flight computer depending on the orbit, for Earth apogee/perigee, Moon apolune/perilune, etc. You'll also notice the value for Perigee is negative on a hyperbolic trajectory and this is also incorrect.

The long term plan for the flight computer is that you can not only calculate your current orbital elements, but input data for a future orbital state, or target TLE (two-line element), and calculate the required delta velocity and thrust vector for the transfer. You see that I am currently targeting the ISS, which isn't physically orbiting yet, however I can compute launch azimuth and simulate orbital rendezvous and phasing from those targeting parameters. The equations for ground track and a number of other navigation functions are coming soon.

Simulation is still running... T+7900 s and counting.

(http://i.imgur.com/vTgXzfm.jpg)

Best regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: HiFlyer on April 29, 2015, 09:57:27 am
Nice!! Looks like things are moving right along!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 29, 2015, 10:30:40 am
Thanks HiFlyer! Not much progress on the modeling front unfortunately, but scripts and FDMs are progressing in my spare time.

The simulation ended inexplicably at T+10064 seconds (2.8 hrs), possibly due to the 154 MB CSV output (@20Hz), or possibly due to the distance from Earth of 25189.4 miles, I'm not sure which.

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 29, 2015, 01:51:30 pm
Sneak peak of the AeroKinetics GUI under development. This interface is for displaying the ground track and selecting target (e.g. ISS) for orbital rendezvous. I'm using code shared under the MiT license that takes TLE data and plots the ground track for six orbits. For the rocket/spacecraft you are launching, I calculate the TLE from Cartesian coordinate vectors, and plot the position and ground track in real time.

TLE example:

Code: [Select]
        tle = [
        'ISS (ZARYA)',           
        '1 25544U 98067A   15119.57674883  .00015278  00000-0  21995-3 0  9997',
        '2 25544  51.6470 326.8384 0005314 280.3312 119.8189 15.56237854940478'
        ];

The other GUI I am working on will be the Orbit panel, for visualizing the orbit and target orbit in 2d, similar to how Orbiter 2010 does it.

Regards,
Uriah

(http://i.imgur.com/ahGhWRw.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/6AipHUA.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on April 30, 2015, 02:37:11 am
That looks damn good !
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: KW71 on April 30, 2015, 09:12:39 am
(https://scontent-atl.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/11173402_1462176930740953_1072414335600103196_n.jpg?oh=fc8fa6daf461d817fb36f8ab2b527f58&oe=55D7CB21)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 30, 2015, 09:28:36 am
Don't stare too hard!  :o

Just to clearify, that second screenshot in my last post with the MFDs that KW's cat is staring at, is from Orbiter 2010. For those of you who don't know, Orbiter is a free space flight simulator, arguably the best out there... yet.

http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/index.html
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/gallery.html
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/download.html

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: aWac9 on April 30, 2015, 03:34:06 pm
https://youtu.be/t-pOHIg5YJ4

:)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on May 01, 2015, 07:06:15 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/TQQRibJ.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/7FPz4UQ.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: KW71 on May 02, 2015, 01:21:32 am
Complex... intricate... detailed ... Really nice !!!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: aWac9 on May 02, 2015, 04:23:17 am
if it is able to fly ... I want a ticket for me.
really beautiful .. congratulations
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on May 03, 2015, 05:51:00 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJafDYeCsBU
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: josem75 on May 03, 2015, 07:10:58 am
You are doing a Great job. 
I cant wait for the fire, explosions, smoke, and other efects in the engine. It will make your job even more awesome.
By the way, anybody knows when we will have some of those effects? Driving with smoke in the asphalt, or sand while driving on dirt..  Or planes with smoke, and moving sand or water while near with a helicopter.. With that outerra will be an almost complex engine for enjoy in all. 
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on May 03, 2015, 10:25:38 am
You are doing a Great job. 
I cant wait for the fire, explosions, smoke, and other efects in the engine. It will make your job even more awesome.
By the way, anybody knows when we will have some of those effects? Driving with smoke in the asphalt, or sand while driving on dirt..  Or planes with smoke, and moving sand or water while near with a helicopter.. With that outerra will be an almost complex engine for enjoy in all.

 ... that will take some time ... certainly not soon ... also, effects are bad-ass, but the math and physics behind stuff !  ;)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on May 03, 2015, 11:00:25 am
Nice :)
What kind of sound these stage separation produce, from inside the capsule? A big *clunk* when the decouplers are activated?

Well, I guess it's pretty much that:

https://youtu.be/0sFviVTlAsE?t=2m16s
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: M7 on May 03, 2015, 11:12:32 am
Really nice work Uriah!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on May 03, 2015, 11:59:11 am
Thanks everyone! Wish I had more time to dedicate to this.

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: KW71 on May 03, 2015, 12:02:58 pm
After seeing videos like this one, I can understand how you feel about rockets. This inventions should be competing in the top list of the most impressive  in the human history.

Look at the fire in 1:00... Looks ethereal... like melted cristal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL1dEBZ6Vyc
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on May 03, 2015, 03:06:17 pm
They are certainly quite impressive controlled explosions aren't they! ;)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on May 03, 2015, 04:16:49 pm
They are certainly quite impressive controlled explosions aren't they! ;)
*a 254 million dollar explosion is always controlled ;)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on May 04, 2015, 05:32:14 pm
 8)

(http://i.imgur.com/cNR5R33.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/6qie7Rr.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on May 04, 2015, 05:44:01 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/hl45xNR.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/bKyiehL.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/Qejf08X.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: KW71 on May 04, 2015, 08:16:42 pm
What a f...!!!!

Where is my cat ?? !!


EDIT:

The fire is modeled, right? Looks beautiful!! So real!!

What if you put two meshes in the same place and make them turn quickly in z axis, in opposite directions?

... and perhaps a third one, spinning more slowly... and vibrating fast in z axis... don't know... trial and error.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on May 04, 2015, 10:29:05 pm
That's right the flames and shock-diamonds are meshes with diffuse and opacity textures. I already have a method to animate. First the engine glow lights will flicker rapidly using a random seed, as the impulse of a rocket does. Then I will have about 4-6 meshes per flame, and hide/show them, alternating at 10 to 20Hz :) I don't quite have that working yet, but almost.

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: KW71 on May 04, 2015, 11:16:22 pm
Sounds great!!! Can't wait to see it.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on May 05, 2015, 01:52:41 am
That's right the flames and shock-diamonds are meshes with diffuse and opacity textures. I already have a method to animate. First the engine glow lights will flicker rapidly using a random seed, as the impulse of a rocket does. Then I will have about 4-6 meshes per flame, and hide/show them, alternating at 10 to 20Hz :) I don't quite have that working yet, but almost.

Regards,
Uriah

Nice ... its not an actual animation, but im sure it will look quite nice ...
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: aWac9 on May 11, 2015, 01:01:34 pm
https://youtu.be/Bt5B7F_1Aek

:)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: aWac9 on May 15, 2015, 11:50:49 am
https://www.facebook.com/NASAOrion
https://youtu.be/uBMRYmP7Ves
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: KW71 on May 15, 2015, 08:41:15 pm
Awesome!!!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on June 04, 2015, 05:25:39 pm
Not Aerokinetics scope (more science fiction stuff), but a lot of switch porn and cool sounds. It's a one man work prototype.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vziIgAtD66s
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: HiFlyer on June 04, 2015, 07:41:09 pm
Mondo kewl!!  =D
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on June 05, 2015, 04:17:17 am
Not Aerokinetics scope (more science fiction stuff), but a lot of switch porn and cool sounds. It's a one man work prototype.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vziIgAtD66s

If StarCitizen lacks something ... its this level of starship-controll ... like it.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on June 09, 2015, 10:19:47 pm
That is pretty awesome!  8)

Can't wait for extended controls and 3d manipulators for OT!!! ;)

Going to have a demo video for you guys coming up very soon!

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: PytonPago on June 28, 2015, 01:34:39 pm
Thought about the falcon rocket to be an interesting one too ... for some bad reason, the last one just got pulverized in flight ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=28&v=u9gFDgJpuUY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=28&v=u9gFDgJpuUY)

... it looks strange, did there the last stage try to turn on or one of the fuel tanks got ruptured, with that gas-formation appearing ? Or should that be the sound-barrier passing, going wrong ?
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on June 28, 2015, 03:14:56 pm
Thought about the falcon rocket to be an interesting one too ... for some bad reason, the last one just got pulverized in flight ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=28&v=u9gFDgJpuUY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=28&v=u9gFDgJpuUY)

... it looks strange, did there the last stage try to turn on or one of the fuel tanks got ruptured, with that gas-formation appearing ? Or should that be the sound-barrier passing, going wrong ?

Yep, pressurization problem on second stage (fuel tank). Happened when the rocket was max Q (moment of the launch when the rocket is under a maximum amount of pressure).

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/615185076813459456 (https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/615185076813459456)
Quote
There was an overpressure event in the upper stage liquid oxygen tank. Data suggests counterintuitive cause.
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on November 09, 2015, 12:32:06 am
Can anyone guess which rocket this is?

(http://i.imgur.com/sJLtAAf.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/zAhzv8V.jpg)

Another successful flight model with reasonable accuracy, and a project I'm collaborating on with someone who's going to be doing the 3d model. I'll post more information to a separate threat soon if anyone can guess it correctly! :D
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Acetone on November 09, 2015, 02:18:12 am
Hmm... I was about to say Falcon 9 because of the engine pattern, but the fairing looks a bit different (could be the current state of the model).

Maybe it's something else :)

I'll post more information to a separate threat soon if anyone can guess it correctly! :D

Someone has been working too much these days ;)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: aWac9 on November 09, 2015, 03:36:42 am
Ariane 6 V601  ::)

https://youtu.be/n3z2aq7Zdfc
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on November 09, 2015, 04:09:15 am
Acetone, you got it, Falcon 9 v1.1 with the 5.2 meter Payload Fairing, and yes the current 3d model is just a placeholder! ;) My focus is the JSBSim flight model.

Working on a Procedural Rocket Assembly System, details coming soon.

Regards,
Uriah

Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: HiFlyer on March 24, 2016, 11:19:39 pm

You have a lot of balls in the air....... Have you ever considered a developers diary?
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on March 24, 2016, 11:56:05 pm
LOL! Should I take that as a complement?  :))

What do you mean by dev diary?

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: HiFlyer on March 25, 2016, 12:38:06 am
LOL! Should I take that as a complement?  :))

What do you mean by dev diary?

Regards,
Uriah

Developer diaries are articles, usually accompanied by screenshots and videos, showing the momentary state of development, describing features and explaining game design choices.

They are published more or less regularly by developers to let people know of a game's status. For instance, whats going on with the Aerokinetics mod? Videos of a flight? What are some of the problems you encountered? How are you solving them? What's it like collaborating on an Outerra project with other modders? etc.......

Whatever happened with the F-22?

Whats the Apache looking like?

How do the runway lights you are working on affect framerate?
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 21, 2016, 04:17:33 pm
I haven't posted much about rockets, or space flight simulation in general in a while, so I thought I would at least give a brief update.

So where are all these rockets?!  >:(
Good question! :D I've built flight models in JSBSim for about 10 different rockets, simple 3d models for 5, and released 0. Why? Am I just a tease, am I still working on anything, or is it just really hard? First of all, I do apologize, I have a slight case of perfectionism. Second, yes I am absolutely working on rockets and space flight simulation in general and have short term and long term plans. Lastly... yes... it is incredibly hard.

Navigation, Guidance and Control.
There is a major issue that I have been struggling with from the beginning, which is the automated guidance system as well as manual control during ascent. My conclusion has always been, since the guidance system needs to target a final orbit in order to maneuver, it needs to have a guidance and flight computer which calculates and plans the ascent trajectory and calculates the current and final orbital parameters. Since the original J246 example included in the JSBSim CSV repository had only three equations, for semi-major axis, apoapsis and periapsis, I needed to learn orbital mechanics and build a complete flight computer, which has been an ongoing project for more than a year now, and is finally nearing fruition.

Outerra Interface.
Another thing that has prevented me from releasing rockets in Outerra is that the JavaScript methods I needed to build functional rockets simply didn't exist. The exciting news is... since working closely with the developers, many of those methods have been added and released in the latest updates! This means I now have the tools needed to build a rocket worth releasing.

3d Models.
The last problem with releasing rockets in Outerra has always been the 3d modelling. I simply don't have time to build the flight models and guidance system as well as make detailed 3d models worthy of OT. So until an experienced 3d artist comes along with both the time and dedication for space flight to work with me, rockets will have to be relatively simple.

What Are My Objectives?
My final goal is to build a set of tools and resources and example with which other developers can build rockets and spacecraft. This includes orbital mechanics equations, a knowledge base for building JSBSim flight models including extensive documentation, and a plugin which provides back-end and front-end features for procedural parts, assemblies and flight models, as was always the original intent of this thread. I am always open to feedback and suggestions, and will release more information as my plans move forward and solidify.

Orbital Mechanics.
Before, I was working on a JavaScript function library which would include all of the equations to calculate the Keplerian Orbital Elements, and other orbital parameters for the guidance and flight computer, which will make it possible to perform maneuvers such as prograde/retrograde burns, plane changes and transfer orbits. Instead of continuing in JavaScript, I've taught myself C++ ported all of my code over, and done a complete audit of the equations to make sure everything is accurate. I found a number of issues where certain functions wouldn't work in certain cases, such as parabolic and hyperbolic orbits, among other use cases. Those are being corrected, and I'm now splitting up the functions into two parts, 1. General Orbital Dynamics Equations, and 2. Cartesian Coordinates to Keplerian Orbital Elements Equations. The product of this effort will either produce a plugin for Outerra, or be integrated directly in JSBSim, but I haven't decided which of those directions to take yet. Whatever the case, these equations will be universal for all rockets and spacecraft. It is a given that these functions will only take into account the two-body equations of motion, but multi-body equations would be the next step once N-body physics can be supported.

Legacy Launch Vehicles.
A number of real world launch vehicles will be released as examples. Upon a number of requests lately, I'll update the Jupiter 246 launch vehicle and release that first.

Procedural Parts and Assemblies.
Procedural rockets and spacecraft will require a C++ plugin/add-on, with both back-end and front-end features. This is my long term objective, and applies to both legacy and novel launch vehicles which would be assembled of multiple separate parts. Some progress has already been made, but the focus has been on orbital mechanics, which I felt were the first priority. I have documented the long term plan for procedural parts, assemblies, and flight models, including all of the technical requirements, which I may share an except of at some point in the future for feedback and suggestions. There has also been some brainstorming for a possible user interface and specific end-user features.

Now, to answer your questions HiFlyer.
I have never really considered writing a developer diary, I guess a lot of what I have done since joining Outerra has been a learning experience, and I don't really consider myself a developer in that sense at all. I hope this post serves to answer some of your questions about the "AeroKinetics mod". Maybe if I am ever able to work on Outerra full time that is something I would consider.

To collaborate, or not to collaborate, that is the question!
As for collaborating, it is always better that people collaborate instead of working alone. The biggest sins of collaborative projects are unquestionably; 1. time, 2. focus and 3. completion. I'm working with a number of people on various projects, and am guilty of all three of those sins. I do find that truly dedicated people will be far more efficient and effective working together if they can hold it together the duration of the project, but without making money, it is pure passion which moves those projects forward. Personally, I think my goal is to turn this into a full time job eventually, so my long term goal is to find a way to make Outerra projects financially equitable in order to make that a reality. If that isn't possible, such as has transpired with DCS and other communities, than the most dedicated artists and developers will probably turn elsewhere to collaborate other than Outerra. I say that because for those kind of people, it is more than a part time hobby, and for that to work they must also be able to make a living in order to work on it full time. Hobbyists can afford to mod part time, but they will never be able to reach the level of someone who is fully engaged, and they cannot be fully engaged without being able to put food on the table. So yes, in the long run, I would like to collaborate with others on projects to build paid content for Outerra and work on it full time.

As for your other questions, which may be slightly off topic, but I'll answer them here nonetheless.

Am I planning to release the F-22 and Other Aircraft?
The F-22 suffers the same fate as many other things I have dabbled in, without a good 3d model or artist to collaborate, there isn't much I can do. I found an extremely simple and free 3d model, and implemented the F-22 flight model included with the JSBSim CSV repo to experiment with thrust vectoring. Without a decent 3d model, that is probably where it will end, as with the F-35, UH-60 and many others. My focus is flight modelling and programming, so I really need people to collaborate with on the art side.

What's Up With the Apache?
On the Apache project, it would be better to answer that in detail on the thread, but in short I'm finishing an audit of all my code in general, just as with orbital mechanics, which will be used for all of the projects I work on and made available for others to use. There were a lot of changes made in the latest Outerra releases, and I felt that all of my code was out of date, becoming extremely cluttered and it was hard to keep each aircraft I was working on updated with the latest code because only scripts local to the package folder can be used, so there can not be scripts common to all aircraft. I've discussed this with the developers, and there are two solutions which could resolve this while not causing extensive compatibility issues with version updates.

Do Runways Light Mean Bad Performance?
The runway lights have been found to have some performance impact with upwards of a few hundred light sources, but the number is less of an issue, and the greatest factor is how much area the light source illuminates on the ground, causing the engine to compute shadows and illumination. So, for instance a single light source that covers a circle with a diameter of 1000 meters would have far greater of an impact than a few hundred lights each only illuminating a small area. The same goes for light on vehicles and aircraft, the greater the area illuminated, the greater the impact on performance.

So that is the past, current, and future state of my efforts, hope that fills in some of the unanswered questions.

Best regards,
Uriah

Here is a screenshot of the C++ FGOribtalDynamics application I've been working on with some test inputs and outputs.

(http://i.imgur.com/yfTMidv.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: HiFlyer on April 21, 2016, 04:59:48 pm
Well that is much more of a reply than I was hoping for, so thank you! When I didn't hear back, I just assumed it was the stupidest question ever
and you weren't going to answer.  :-[  =D

Interesting to hear your thoughts about others working on Outerra, as its been a constant surprise to me that more programs I see, (primarily) hobby projects with future commercial goals but which lack mostly a believable world as a backdrop, have not yet (at least publicly) taken an interest in Outerra. I could just imagine how much creativity could be released if they could concentrate their main efforts on the sim technical aspects and not building an engine as well.

As for the F-22, remember I did ask if you had seen any available models out there that would suit your goals. I would still be interested in taking a look at pricing as once upon a time you were interested in collecting funds for a purchase......

I've been waiting for that Apache for a while, and carefully not bringing it up except that once, because I didn't want to be the kid in the back seat asking every ten minutes "Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we..........."

Finally about the lights, I wonder what method X-plane uses for its lighting system that allows them to seemingly have just about limitless lights. I've always wondered why turning on all the lights in the Cessna (or some of Thesenergys vehicles!) could cause such a hit. Hope that gets worked out!

Again, thanks for the reply!

Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 21, 2016, 05:36:53 pm
Well that is much more of a reply than I was hoping for, so thank you! When I didn't hear back, I just assumed it was the stupidest question ever
and you weren't going to answer.  :-[

I've just been really busy, but I had been planning a post on this thread for a while any way.

Although this is really off-topic...  8)

I think you mean the Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (http://forum.outerra.com/index.php?topic=3200.60). There is an issue which goes beyond the licensing aspect. A vast majority of commercially available 3d models were intended for high-end rendering and not optimized for game engines, in fact from experience so much so that it would take less effort to build it from scratch than to fix the original. Many of Levi's projects encountered this problem even though they were built for games, but the texture draw calls were too high so he had to merge the textures, which takes considerable time and effort. Now imagine that the geometry has too many polygons, so to optimize it you need to not only work on the meshes, but also re-map the UVs which might mean completely re-doing the textures, and by the time you are done the time spent fixing it could be more than if you just built the whole thing yourself. Also, the cockpits are usually of far worse quality then the exterior, which should be the opposite for a game, where the cockpit should be of superior detail and quality to the exterior. Any further discussion on the F-35 should probably be carried out on that thread.

The reason X-Plane is able to seemingly render infinite lights with no performance impact is because there are two types of lights, one being essentially like the billboard trees in Outerra, which is exactly what we need for optimized lights that can be seen from a distance, and has already been discussed with the devs. X-plane also has lights which illuminate geometry, and they suffer the same performance impact as do those in OT. I don't have almost any frame rate drop with the Cessna at all, and even with the MiG-29 which has far more lights, very little performance impact, no sure why it would be any different. I can check what the illumination distance is, but that can be discussed elsewhere to stay on-topic here.

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: HiFlyer on April 21, 2016, 07:13:37 pm
What you're attempting brings to mind other projects I've been keeping my eye on over time (Like the Seven-G F/A-18 project) where essentially a single dedicated person has an idea and does an awful lot of impressive heavy lifting on it, though with Cameni, Angrypig and others you are in a much better position for success, I think.

I also think you have a very obvious potential market with Outerras other partners, and making these capabilities available can't help but make Outerra even more attractive. I was playing with your rocket about a week ago, but suspect I just suck, as I was successful primarily in making it fall over.  =D

Good luck!
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 21, 2016, 07:28:33 pm
Which rocket? Jupiter 246? I wasn't sure if the version I have for download would even work now or not, given the number of changes to the JavaScript interface since then. I will be upgrading the J246 and releasing a new version with special effects, stage separation and guidance, before anything else.

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: HiFlyer on April 21, 2016, 07:45:40 pm
Which rocket? Jupiter 246? I wasn't sure if the version I have for download would even work now or not, given the number of changes to the JavaScript interface since then. I will be upgrading the J246 and releasing a new version with special effects, stage separation and guidance, before anything else.

Regards,
Uriah

Nope. Don't think it works. I fiddled for quit a while before realizing that, though.  :P

(My basic assumption was that I had five thumbs)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 21, 2016, 10:24:51 pm
K, I'll get that fixed.

By the way, here is a glimpse at the evolution of the original AeroKinetics GUI concept. Note, the name "AeroKinetics" was always intended as a placeholder, and in all likelihood will not be the final name. In fact there is a real company with that name and I will come up with something much better in the future.

Always appreciate feedback and critique!  :))

Regards,
Uriah

Launch Vehicle Staging GUI

(http://i.imgur.com/AcS78s7.jpg)

Orbit Visualization and GUI

(http://i.imgur.com/p7gnmUu.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: HiFlyer on April 21, 2016, 11:15:15 pm
With you working to push the envelope on Rockets/Aircraft and SteelRat pushing on the ground vehicles, I guess the next thing is to wonder who will eventually tackle boats!  =D

(and trains)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 25, 2016, 05:28:37 pm
Re-post from original thread since I know a lot of people follow this one who may not sign into the forums regularly or have an account. The Atlas V thread can be found here (http://forum.outerra.com/index.php?topic=3444.0).

Some major progress I've made on the Atlas V launch vehicle, which is applicable to aircraft and rockets in general, made possible largely due to support from the Outerra developers.

While not complete, the launch vehicle is an assembly of separate parts, which can be attached in a number of configurations. The final version will include a user interface for launch vehicle configuration and customization, including selecting between the Atlas V 400 and 500 series, choosing a Payload/Flight Vehicle to launch, Payload Fairing size, up to five Solid Rocket Boosters and selecting between the Single Engine Centaur (SEC) or Dual Engine Centaur (DEC) upper stage. It will also support user-made payloads, and easily customized graphics on the Common Payload Fairing Module. Part of the GUI will be a mission planning interface, where you will be able to program the guidance computer for the mission, including different types of earth orbits or transfer orbits, and given a selected launch vehicle configuration and flight vehicle calculate and visualize the approximate trajectory and delta V.

Here are a few screenshots for your enjoyment!  :))

Best regards,
Uriah

(http://i.imgur.com/uE0ahxJ.jpg)(http://i.imgur.com/AI4trAW.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/OOzZ583.jpg)(http://i.imgur.com/2T4Bbs9.jpg)
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: HiFlyer on April 25, 2016, 06:08:08 pm
Very nice work! Is it possible yet to set objects onto stable orbits and then dock with them (fairly) realistically?
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 26, 2016, 07:00:19 am
Orbits yes, docking no. Using either Two Line Element (TLE) data or Keplerian Orbital Elements I can put an object into any orbit around Earth. Docking with another spacecraft or space station won't be possible without physics support, including collision and a force to hold the two objects together.

Regards,
Uriah
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: HiFlyer on April 26, 2016, 07:02:14 am
Orbits yes, docking no. Using either Two Line Element (TLE) data or Keplerian Orbital Elements I can put an object into any orbit around Earth. Docking with another spacecraft or space station won't be possible without physics support, including collision and a force to hold the two objects together.

Regards,
Uriah

Bullet physics rocket? (yells for Andfly)  =D
Title: Re: AeroKinetics Mod
Post by: Uriah on April 26, 2016, 07:23:50 am
With Bullet physics, while you gain object collision, you really loose everything that makes a rocket a rocket which is modeled in JSBSim, what we really need is another planetary body to land on!  ;)