• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

269 Excellent

About VaPaL

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

2,698 profile views
  1. VaPaL

    Dawn at Ceres Thread
  2. VaPaL

    JWST: it's done!

    I heard that, even servicing not being planned, JWST has a docking ring So it's not completely discarted by NASA the idea of maintenance. A robot could use RCS to dock "under" the sunshield and move around JWST using some sort of arms. That (maybe) would prevent RCS damaging the mirror or the instruments EDIT: From the article
  3. I'm working on a contract for a satellite constallation. The initial idea, to avoid multiple contract types (one for each orbital plane), is to do the longitude of ascending node dependent on something. Is the following possible? [...] maxCompletions = 3 [...] BEHAVIOUR{ name = OrbitGenerator type = OrbitGenerator FIXED_ORBIT{ SMA = 2431280 ECC = 0.0 INC = 56 LAN = ActualCompletions() == 0 ? 0 : ActualCompletions() == 1 ? 120 : 240 REF = 1 } } [...] Or should I use the persistent store and increase it's value after each completion? if so, there's an event that triggers at completion that I could use to increase the counter? Thanks
  4. Excellent work @Katten will check when I got home. Is it known if this conflicts if Konstruction? It seems unlikely though. If it's unkown, I can check for it tomorrow (I think) EDIT: EDIT2: spelling
  5. I haven't checked, I still playing 1.2.2, but I'll upgrade soon. But if you find any, just let me know and I'll fix it
  6. Steam Workshop connection? Maybe even version bought brom the Squead Store tries to connect to it in some way
  7. VaPaL

    Dawn at Ceres Thread

    Dawn reached its final orbit with perigee of 35km
  8. Every space hardware seems to live longer than expected and I think some factors are involved. Uncertainty factor cause the safety factor to be higher, there are a handfull of rovers in Mars, that's not enough to know exactly how every factor impacts the life of the hardware, let alone the difference in regions they are. A little of overengineering, is better to have something a little less capable that does the job than one that brakes on arrival, so even if the conditions are very well known, they will go a over the top to be sure. So in the end will make a rover that is expected to live some months and you make your mission duration as so. If it endures more, you extend your mission. There is no point in making a 10 year mission if your hardware is not expected to survive that long. Also, if this was planned obsolescence, they wouldn't extend the mission for so long. This could be due to the risks of scratching the solar panel. The martian dust in the region could had been more abrasive than expected, over the time the scratches would build up and reduce the capacity of the panels. A safer solution would be a dust blower, but that would also be heavier. And after all, it was shown that cleaning the dust is not needed
  9. Maybe also mass/size. Curiosity is a lot bigger than Opportunity and all RTG I ever saw in photos were big (but I never looked much into it) EDIT: this one from Apollo 14 ALSEP looks smaller, but it's hard to say in terms of power generation:
  10. Is this still valid? Sorry if not, I may have missed the post about. in case it is valid, is possible to do it this way? Create a orbit with 1/3 of the period of the desired orbit, same inclination, matching Pe (waiting orbit) Once this orbit is reached ask for the desired orbit, so Sat 1 would decouple, burn retrograde Once this orbit is reached, ask do the waiting orbit, so the player has to move to the other vessel Repeat until Sat 3 is decoupled If the player fails, after Sat 1 and Sat 2, it would only be needed to launch a new sat direct into the final orbit (providade that's possible to do this in multiple launches). And if is possible to prevent the same Sat to fulfill the same parameter twice the player would be prevented from exploiting the contract EDIT: posted a duplicate that got merged.
  11. VaPaL

    Sea-Level on Oblate Spheroid

    I was talking about delta energy = 0 only, I should have clarified better
  12. VaPaL

    Sea-Level on Oblate Spheroid

    That's what I said here: EDIT: Above I queted myself from you reply, so the quote is attributed to you, and I'm not able to add quotes in a edit for some reason, so the post I quoted myself was:
  13. VaPaL

    Sea-Level on Oblate Spheroid

    Negligible =/= nonexistent, if you punch the numbers with enough precision you will get an inbalance. Also, some time it's ignored because others errors (measuring, manufacturing, control, etc.) are grater than the imbalance, therefore more important. Providade that you add or subtract the energy the entered or left the system (for open systems) or the system is closed. YOU CANNOT apply it to open systems, bacause, by deffinition, energy can enter or exit the system.
  14. VaPaL

    Sea-Level on Oblate Spheroid

    You cannot ignore something and argue that something doesn't made sence or is missing. From the start, if ignore something that shouldn't your analysis is doomed or you will have to make for it somewhere else. But you cannot ignore the system as a whole. Your just said that the energy goes into a increase in angular velocity, so if you just consider the person, it's energy will no be the same from the start, because part of it, as you said, went to increase angular velocity. Ignoring part of a system is the easiest way to get unbalanced energy. You only have energy conservation in a closed system, in a open one, there's no problem with energy being "lost" or "gained". It's the same if you said that by stepping on a cars trhottle you as a person gain knetic energy and you energy increase so there's must be something... You can't do that
  15. VaPaL

    Sea-Level on Oblate Spheroid

    I think this ^ together whit this: Resumes pretty much what @Snark said. In your model, you are approximating gravity as a constant and Earth as a ellipsoid, this wont match. Your model is incoherent because you are using to different approaches. If you want to use real Earth shape, you should user real Earth gravity, or use matching approximations. Ellipsoid Earth and Ellipsoid gravity as Snark said: