Flight Question Approaching Runway after Re-Entry

bradfirj92

New member
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I've used BaseSync and Aerobrake MFD to de-orbit and land the Vanguard a couple of times now, and I'm getting used to it, I can usually end up within visual range of the runways at Wideawake (Ascension Island).

Problem is I always end up at a horrible angle off the runway, and since the XR5 is pretty difficult to maneuver at low alt + low airspeed I usually switch to hovers and glide in before stopping with retros and going straight down, an I'd like to land a bit more 'profeshnally', and do a rolling landing along a runway, like one would expect from a spaceplane landing on earth.

Is there any way I can tune my approach heading with BaseSync, or is there a smaller scale map than the Map MFD that I can use to do a go-around by hand?

Thanks

EDIT: Just realised what a pants thread title this is for my particular question :( (changed)
 
You might want to look at chapter 13.4 of the orbiter manual.
Once you are in visual range and know the orientation of your landing runway you can easily approach the runway with the HSI when you are in athmospheric flight again.
 
Thanks, I hadn't used the HSI before. Thing is it's still pretty useless if you're coming in at ~90 degrees but I guess I just need to work around that.
 
While the HSI is useful enough, it doesn't appear to be useful beyond about 10km or so - which is too late to start turning, really. <_<
That being said, as soon as you get visual range on WIA, you can bank so that you're pointing about 50km to one side or another of WIA. Once you're closer, you can bank pretty slowly and line up on the runway. I don't even use the HSI anymore - I just eyeball it and pray. >_>
 
Well, the key for most winged vehicles is to cross over your runway at a sufficient height and airspeed to allow you time to circle around onto final approach. In another thread I wrote that for the X-20 Dynasoar 20km alt. and mach 1 was good. But I'm not familiar with your Vanguard, so I can't say for sure. It may be the case that it has a wide turn radius and a lousy glide ratio which makes it difficult for anything but a straight-in approach.
 
The XR-5 Vanguard? Yeah, that's about the size of it. It's a wide-bodied cargo space-plane. Turns like a pig. xD
(even though I ran the gate-racing course in one on a dare...)
 
This is why I'd like a GPS MFD so that you can plug in GPS co-ords and work out the turn radius (HAC) without messing with the HSI.
 
I also had problems with the landing.
Practise, practise,practise...
 
This is why I'd like a GPS MFD so that you can plug in GPS co-ords and work out the turn radius (HAC) without messing with the HSI.

You do realize that you can customize the Landing Site Table for the current version of the GPCMFD to assign any landing site. Then, by selecting the runway you've assigned, the HAC is generated for you. See page 11 of the GPCMFD manual V4.1.5 that is included as part of the Shuttle Fleet V4.1.5 distribution, under the directory "Add-on Docs".
 
Yes I do and that's fine for the shuttle fleet but I like to fly the HAC using a DG or other ship.
 
Anyone have any ideas about changing orbit to so you have a specific heading? I know plane changes are very fuel hungry but i usually end up dumping main fuel anyway.
 
I'll give you something from experience. This uses the Map MFD. If you're landing at Cape Canaveral, align your orbit (via Nml + or Nml - Autopilot and full throttle starting at the east cost of China), until the orbital path goes right through the base. Then go Retro Grade autopilot and go full throttle again until the orbital path turns red over Cape Canaveral. Next, hope you have a good heat shield. Using the Zoom feature on the Map MFD will help. Make sure you cut your engines before you go retro grade or your alignment will be off. You may find it helpfull to align your course slightly south of the base to align yourself with the runway once you've finished reentry. And it may also help to cut your engines just before the red line reaches the base.

Right, but if you don't have damage turned off (in which case you're not really learning anything, are you?), that's not a realistic re-entry profile. The fact that you're going to burn to a crisp from the heat aside, you'll also be generating lift that's going to toss you off course. :P

As far as the question about how to do plane changes, you want the MapMFD targetted to whatever your target object in orbit is. After that, launch when the target's orbit is passing over your position, and bank/turn until the line of your orbit is close to the line of your target's orbit.
A poor explanation, I'm afraid. <_<
 
A poor question as well, sorry. I meant changing my orbit so when i re-enter i'll be heading a certain way (down the runway hopefully) :P
 
That's somewhat easier, really. You don't. Can you? Sure, but you'll blow a -lot- of delta-V for not a lot of gain, especially if you're flying something aerodynamic like an XR5. It's not practical and not efficient to burn for the purpose of syncing up your orbit to a base. If you were to do so, you'd probably get it cheaper by using lift in the atmosphere to change your plane, but you'd still have to "spend" your dV to get back into a proper orbit. The HAC (Heading Alignment Circle) mentioned above by garyw is probably your best bet if you want to do it the "right" way.
 
A poor question as well, sorry. I meant changing my orbit so when i re-enter i'll be heading a certain way (down the runway hopefully)

You could eyeball it using MapMFD, or get a bit more precise with BaseSync (in "closest approach", heading should be 90 degrees away from the runway heading) but this is really a poor way to go about it. I'm not a pilot IRL, nor even an experienced flight simmer (other than Orbiter) but I've practiced this a LOT. It probably isn't the "textbook correct" methods, but it works.

I haven't found HSI to be useful; as noted above, by the time you're close enough for it to give you a clue you are too close to use it! You'll be within visual range of the runway by then anyway.

First, for any who don't already know, you can find a runway's heading by adding a zero to the ends of it's designation. For instance, a runway with the designation 15/33 would have approach headings of 150 or 330 degrees, depending on which way you will be landing.

Second, you'll need to decide if you'll be using a HAC manouver, which I will call an alignment turn about 270 degrees, or coming "straight in". Generally, I'll use a HAC if my heading is more than 50 degrees from the runway heading.

An example of a HAC approach would be returning to Cape Canaveral from the ISS, when approaching from the south-west. In this case, I'll use Aerobrake to set my "endpoint" about 20k south of the Cape. I'll drop out of high AoA reentry into normal flight at about 800 m/s at about 20k altitude, and try to cross south of the runway at close to a 90 degree angle. I'll use external view, or aim the internal camera (with right mouse and drag) so I can see when I cross the runway's plane. Then I'll return to normal view, bank at least 60 degrees, and begin turning away from the runway. I'll watch the G-force reading on the 2D panel and try to hold a consistent G-force of about 2.5 Gs. The exact number isn't crucial, just keep it consistent through the turn. As you decellerate, if you keep the G-force consistent you turn will "tighten" as you go along, creating an inward spiral. 270 degrees later you'll be fairly closely aligned with the runway. It helps to use the Z and X keys to widen your FOV during the HAC so the runway comes into view sooner, then narrow it back down for precision tuning on final approach.

An example of a "straight in" approach would be returning from the ISS to the Cape when approaching from the north-west. Make sure that Cape Canaveral is targeted in MapMFD. Use Aerobrake and set your "endpoint" about 45k north by northeast of the Cape. Keep an eye on the "heading to base" on MapMFD, or the carat on the surface HUD's compass. Transition to normal flight like you did for the HAC approach, but turn toward the runway. Time the turn so that you are heading 150 degrees at the same time the carat is at 150 degrees, and adjust a bit right or left when the runway becomes visible. Once again, change your FOV as needed.

For final approach, try to fly fairly level until the end of the runway is about 15 degrees down (use the pitch ladder) then drop the nose to put the velocity ball a bit short of the runway, and use airbrakes as needed to reduce speed. NOTE: Some vessels such as the shuttle or DGIV need a steeper approach angle to avoid losing to much velocity and stalling short of the runway. As you get close to the runway, move the velocity ball gradually up to the end of the runway to reduce VS.

I suggest practicing getting the alignment correct and not worrying about the landing at first. Once you can get lined up on a regular basis, start experimenting to see when you should use airbrakes, and how much, so that you cross the end of the runway at a good landing speed (this varies with vessel and load). Managing the velocity is probably trickier than getting lined up, and will take a bit of practice with each vessel.
 
I was in the delta glider when I did that thing. Although I couldn't keep the reentry angle above about 5 over the decent slope angle, I also found myself making a sharp turn at reentry speeds over Cuba which killed my momentum and I had to thrust my way to Cape Canaveral. Damage was turned on, but Universal Breakup was disabled.


To be honest, the stock Delta Glider has piss-poor damage modelling. >_>
If you want a realistic (well, relatively so) flight experience, I'd suggest either the DGIV (DanSteph's site), or the XR2. In that case, you'll have all the tools you need to do a good re-entry, and you'll know -exactly- when you screw it up. >_>
 
Although I couldn't keep the reentry angle above about 5 over the decent slope angle, I also found myself making a sharp turn at reentry speeds over Cuba
I am completely unsure what you mean by that. The reentry angle is the slope at reentry interface (usually considered to be about 120k alt for Earth, and should be around ONE degree). While a 5 degree reentry angle is survivable, it's VERY steep. The whole part about reentry angle OVER descent slope makes no sense whatsoever. Also, what do you consider to be "reentry speeds". Sharp turns at over 3000 m/s just don't happen. Also, if you are reentering from a prograde orbit, trying to land at Canaveral, and are traveling over Cuba you have missed by a long shot!
 
If you are approaching runway from a bad angle you can just aim for a spot few km before or after the end of a runway, once you are soon to cross a runway plane do a quick turn toward the runway and you should be more or less lined up.

Besides XR5 is the easiest craft to reenter, it`s nearly impossible to burn up. With empty XR5 you can hit the atmosphere at 700 m/s VS 1000 km from your base and still reenter and land without your hull temps ever going red
 
If you are approaching runway from a bad angle you can just aim for a spot few km before or after the end of a runway, once you are soon to cross a runway plane do a quick turn toward the runway and you should be more or less lined up.

After is better if you are doing an unpowered descent as it gives you a little more energy to play with in the final stages.
 
Damn. Use proper terms instead of wobbling around with one new definition per sentence for hiding the OSI layer 8 problem.

The angle between velocity vector and local horizon is flight path angle. The flight path angle at entry interface is reentry angle. The angle between local horizon and longitudinal axis (nose, Z axis) is pitch. If you use a 2D projection of the spacecraft from the side, and measure the angle between projected long. axis and projected velocity vector, you get angle of attack. If you look at the spacecraft from above, the same angle between the projections of velocity vector and long. axis is side-slip or crab angle.

And if you are too fast for using aerodynamic control surfaces you are burning up. The aerodynamic control surfaces become more effective at higher dynamic pressure, while the attitude control thrusters loose effectivity at higher static pressure. What you experienced is the torques of the DG hull overloading what control surfaces can compensate alone - the torques also depend on dynamic pressure. If you have damage enabled, the control surfaces fail at higher dynamic pressures, leaving you only with RCS. Reading the manual helps in that case.

"Descent slope" is no proper term. The only slope existing in Orbiter is the glide slope, the angle between a virtual plane and the runway horizon, used as guidance target for reaching the runway.

The best way to prevent this is using a more shallow reentry angle, so the dynamic pressure does not get too high.

Mack-Tuck is no proper aeronautical term as well. What you mean is the in-effectivity of control surfaces at supersonic speeds, the cause is known as "compressibility".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compre...rg/wiki/Compressibility#Aeronautical_dynamics
 
Back
Top