3 ms·

Can anyone comment on the fact that you seem to directly influence your speed, and not your acceleration? Is this also the case in reality? Compared to my firs

by icoder 5y ago

Can anyone comment on the fact that you seem to directly influence your speed, and not your acceleration? Is this also the case in reality? Compared to my first flightsim experience this was much easier, the speed with which you can 'stop' any motion seems only limited by how fast you click. In flightsim I found myself easily overcompensating, if impatient or stressed even oscillating to increasingly bigger extremes.

nexuist 5y ago
This would work in real life, the only hitch is that you'd run out of fuel much quicker. There's no fuel constraints in the simulator so you can use the RCS thrusters to kill your acceleration as much as you want.
numpad0 5y ago
RCS thrusters often has fixed thrust and used in pulses, like a PDM or PWM analog output from a digital pin in a microcontroller. So it's normal to mash buttons or bump joysticks in space to achieve desired rates, rather than gradually adding and maintaining force on the joystick to keep attitudes as done in airplanes. In real life, there is also 'coupling' between axes, e.g. trying to move towards top of your head might cause spacecraft to somehow point slightly sideways while at it. That used to be taken care of by pilot's skill in Apollo era and before, but today it should be mitigated by software. Ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLeLSo0lK8w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLeLSo0lK8w
- icoder 5y ago
  Ah right, especially in space, 5 'pulses' one way and 5 the other will cancel eachother out even if there's some time in between.
- jcims 5y ago
  This could be a really cool teaching platform if they would provide a more robust physics emulation (including the gyroscopic effects you mention) as well as direct interface to a simulated RCS control system with realistic operating inputs and constraints (eg you ask for a 120ms burn at 75% throttle and you get 125ms at 85%). Then gamify various operations like IIS docking, JWST repair mission, deorbiting X37 via momentum transfer.

by icoder 5y ago

nexuist 5y ago

This would work in real life, the only hitch is that you'd run out of fuel much quicker. There's no fuel constraints in the simulator so you can use the RCS thrusters to kill your acceleration as much as you want.

numpad0 5y ago

RCS thrusters often has fixed thrust and used in pulses, like a PDM or PWM analog output from a digital pin in a microcontroller. So it's normal to mash buttons or bump joysticks in space to achieve desired rates, rather than gradually adding and maintaining force on the joystick to keep attitudes as done in airplanes. In real life, there is also 'coupling' between axes, e.g. trying to move towards top of your head might cause spacecraft to somehow point slightly sideways while at it. That used to be taken care of by pilot's skill in Apollo era and before, but today it should be mitigated by software. Ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLeLSo0lK8w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLeLSo0lK8w

icoder 5y ago
Ah right, especially in space, 5 'pulses' one way and 5 the other will cancel eachother out even if there's some time in between.
jcims 5y ago
This could be a really cool teaching platform if they would provide a more robust physics emulation (including the gyroscopic effects you mention) as well as direct interface to a simulated RCS control system with realistic operating inputs and constraints (eg you ask for a 120ms burn at 75% throttle and you get 125ms at 85%). Then gamify various operations like IIS docking, JWST repair mission, deorbiting X37 via momentum transfer.