How to show "What you did": Mission Profile Notation

[Pecan]

I don't agree that the diagram needs to show all the time relations. What is the functional difference between the SSTO landing before or after the mothership leaves? All that matters is that it undocks and lands.

To a large extent I think it depends on whether you're trying to use the diagrams for mission-planning or mission-reports. If you're reporting then it probably doesn't matter. If you're planning then working-out exactly when you should be paying attention to any particular vehicle (KAC and all that) might be really important - have I got time to de-orbit and land X before Y needs to circularise its orbit.

...snip...

Is exactly what I'm thinking of. For me, time and sequence is more important that place - that's why I'm designing the diagram for that and why I asked before exactly what the sequence was meant to be in yours. Time/place is a matter of preference and utility of course, but one of those things that'll bite later if we don't discuss it now.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Pecan

[Thunderous Echo]

Given that there has been little support for the flowchart style,

1) Should I phase it out?

2) Should I not put it in the generator? (Or do flowchart mode after release)

[Alias72]

I really like the original posts notation. perhaps the only change I would make would be a two letter code for each major celestial body. Asteroids can have a special designation #C where the letter represents the asteroid class.

unfortunately I have little else to contribute at the moment other than general approval. I would, however, like to point out that no system is perfect. There will likely be two systems, one for position, the other for time depending on the focus of the flowchart. Anyway a very simple sketch is appropriate for describing in a very simple overview what it is your report is about. More detailed diagrams should be contained within.

One more suggestion. when denoting very simple missions with a clear goal I suggest using a shorthand. The primary focus of the mission is the only icon displayed and everything else is implied. Again not for use in all missions but useful for munar landings. just show the munar landing with orbital command module symbol.

[Thunderous Echo]

Sorry for repost, but no one saw the original:

Given that there has been little support for the flowchart style,

1) Should I phase it out?

2) Should I not put it in the generator? (Or do flowchart mode after release)

Edited December 18, 2014 by Thunderous Echo

[Superfluous J]

Sorry for repost, but no one saw the original:

Given that there has been little support for the flowchart style,

1) Should I phase it out?

2) Should I not put it in the generator? (Or do flowchart mode after release)

text

I saw the original, but didn't understand it so I let it pass, assuming I just didn't know something that everybody else did

What do you mean by "Flowchart Mode"? The images in the first post, and images like mine? Where there are circles and lines and arrows? If that's Flowchart Mode then no, I support it. If there is another mode you're talking about, then I don't know if I support it or not because I don't know what it is.

[Thunderous Echo]

If there is one person who wants to keep it, I won't get rid of it. So it will be in the final release.

The other mode would be linear mode, so here's a brief explaination:

1) Manuevers are arranged chronologically-ish from left to right. Planets need to be drawn multiple times.

2) Each horizontal row represents 1 craft.

3) Crafts move between rows during docking/undockings.

[Superfluous J]

I can see incidents where that would be good, and incidents where a more time-relaxed ("there and back" being one example) approach would be better. I mean, I used both in my little diagram

[Eddlm]

This would be helpful for planning missions, too. I like it.

Looking forward for that generator.

[Highlad]

I too would like to show my support for this. Looking forward to the generator!

[Pecan]

Really sorry I've been absent, just too much going on to get anything done.

"Flowchart style" is definitely a good idea as it should be more compact and easier to display (bodies only shown once, presumably).

[Quiana]

Really sorry I've been absent, just too much going on to get anything done.

"Flowchart style" is definitely a good idea as it should be more compact and easier to display (bodies only shown once, presumably).

I stumbled upon this, it's a very interesting concept. Mission notations as a whole let people communicate it much more clearly and rapidly when everyone knows the particulars. I would like to see flow-chart remain, because it also has an additional use beyond after-mission reports.

Preplanning phase.

I imagine 'breakoff' ships could go up/down in a vertical sense and flowchart along with the main ship until they rejoin (or do not) the main 'timeline'. This would assist large missions when planning out how to accomplish them as it lets you see at a glance where your ships are (possibly even have a basic timeline notion for preplanning but not mission report phase). It might also be worth building it to allow a vertical format (where there are multiple ships but fewer active events). That would conserve space that might be consumed by a horizontal timeline of the method I mentioned about 'breakoff' ships.

[briansun1]

Seems like a good idea.

[Mister Kerman]

This thing isn't finished yet is it? I'm bookmarking this page for later if it isn't!

[Thunderous Echo]

It's coming!

(This is a hobby, I don't have as much time to do it as a professional.)

[Thunderous Echo]

The story so far:

Some notes:

The planet names are emanating from the Planets tab as a drop-down menu.

The craft editing window is specific to the currently selected craft.

I did not get a picture of the color selector, but you can look at it here: http://jscolor.com/

The windows labeled "A thing!" are slots for more windows.

More features are to come.

Please give me feedback on the UI so far.

[Superfluous J]

Hard to tell based just on an image but it looks pretty friendly to me. I can't tell though how to use it just by looking at it.

Can you drag those planets around? How do you put your ship into orbit around one of them? Can you have 3 "Kerbin"s on the screen? If so, how do you specify which one you're talking about?

[Thunderous Echo]

Hard to tell based just on an image but it looks pretty friendly to me. I can't tell though how to use it just by looking at it.

Can you drag those planets around? How do you put your ship into orbit around one of them? Can you have 3 "Kerbin"s on the screen? If so, how do you specify which one you're talking about?

1) Yes.

2) Haven't gotten that far yet. Probably a dragging system.

3) Yes.

4) Does it matter which Kerbin you're talking about?

[Thunderous Echo]

HELP ME I CAN'T STOP

Remember that scene from Airplane?

In related news, I have just offered Ezrillic the position of UI Re-Organizer.

Don't worry, the final version is going to be easy to use. This is not necessarily an indicator of the final version.

Edited January 18, 2015 by Thunderous Echo

[Thunderous Echo]

I would like to formally announce that the Mission Overview Generator is over 50% done!

(It's probably more like 70%, but I'm not sure how long trajectories will take.)

Ahhh. Much better.

[Superfluous J]

I would like to formally announce that the Mission Overview Generator is over 50% done!

(It's probably more like 70%, but I'm not sure how long trajectories will take.)

http://i.imgur.com/lHWksli.png

Ahhh. Much better.

Looks good. Can't wait to see it in action.

[Thunderous Echo]

The Thunderous Echo Mission Profile Notation Astronomical Society of People in Charge of the Notation System Who Totally Know What They're Doing has officially decided that the "Defuel" icon unecessarially increases the complexity of the notation system and has been repealed. It has been removed from the OP and will not appear in the MOG.

Good News: Now that I don't have to program in a defuel icon, the MOG will be completed about 1 hour sooner. Hurrah.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Thunderous Echo

[FishInferno]

The Thunderous echo Mission Profile Astronomical Society of People in Charge of the Notation System Who Totally Know What They're Doing has officially decided that the "Defuel" icon unecessarially increases the complexity of the notation system and has been repealed. It has been removed from the OP and will not appear in the MOG.

Good News: Now that I don't have to program in a defuel icon, the MOG will be completed about 1 hour sooner. Hurrah.

How does having a defueling icon make it more complex? If there is a refuel icon the there should be a defuel icon as well.

[Superfluous J]

How does having a defueling icon make it more complex? If there is a refuel icon the there should be a defuel icon as well.

Every icon makes it more complex.

I can't think of* a situation where you couldn't signify defueling ship A by instead showing you refueled ship B.

* Doesn't mean there isn't one. I can be dense sometimes.

[Thunderous Echo]

Every icon makes it more complex.

I can't think of* a situation where you couldn't signify defueling ship A by instead showing you refueled ship B.

* Doesn't mean there isn't one. I can be dense sometimes.

The only significance of the defuel icon was to indicate that a ship's fuel supply was completely exhausted, which is not really important to a mission profile.

[Thunderous Echo]

It has to be Mission Overview Generator, right? I mean...I just want to say "Mog" in general conversation. Maybe that's just me.

Thank you for naming the generator. After all this time I realize that it does, in fact, have to be MOG.