Search results

Aeadar - is this in the "native" Orbiter, without D3D9 client? If yes... I am not even sure if this addon will work decently without the separate graphic client. Never tried :-). It is just too loaded for any reasonable performance anyway...

I am actually quite aware of the popularity and the need for "repaint" customization options for addons :-). This current version of Soyuz does not have an "easy" option for that, but this feature is pretty much on the top of priority list, and hopefully will be ready for the next update...

Voskhod... Sorry,s till unlikely in near future. For that, the underlying library I use for these addons needs to be significantly updated. Even though it is successfully used in a number of addons by now, it is still in a very immature state. Improving it takes at least half of my already...

MS should not be really that different from this TMA within the accuracy of current model. AFAIK, just one antenna, rotating one, was replaced with a fixed array.

Sure we do! Will be nice addition to the historical side. But it may be going a lot of work, and maybe more custom meshes. Existing meshes might not be fully suitable for a lot of custom actions. So, there is always a trade-off on where the best to put efforts in the next iteration. New Soyuz...

An updated version is out, with MarkerPath fix and, with the help of Kulch, some new scenery added around modern Baikonur Pad 1.

Great news, thanks!

thammond - I just was able to test the "dual" scenario, and it worked for me, without messing up with Mission config files. Here's what I did: 1. Flew Sp1 into orbit, flew it for for some time there and exited; 2. Opened the auto-saved scenario, opened a copy of Sat2 scenario, and copied two...

What you are trying to do is totally doable. Just not as easy as simply adding another vessel in scenario - more changes are needed... and they are undocumented yet :-(. I should be too busy this week to try to do it myself, but hopefully next week I'll be able to make such a scenario and post...

I think I know what the problem is, but solving it may be not that straightforward... 'First in Space' and 'R-9' addons introduce a special notion of 'Mission' that is not present in the regular Orbiter scenarios. Mission combines a 'loose set of Orbiter vessels' that relate to the same...

Great, thanks! I did not use the feature yet, so did not notice the problem. But it is nice to be able to add custom set of markers, independent from the other addons. Great flexibility here! I am planning to release an update to Spaceports fairly soon, and I'll add the MarkerPath fix to this...

Hm. I thought that was enough. Will have to check when i get home in the evening, don't have Orbiter at work.. ---------- Post added at 07:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:37 PM ---------- Got it! Mea culpa! In the custom Earth.cfg file, there is a field for custom Marker directory -...

Yes - config/spaceports/earth/marker directory is still there for the "customized" Earth, and any MKR files dropped into that directory will be loaded in scenarios using this separate Earth model.

What you see is correct (however strange it may seem), and your installation is perfect. The reason you see different set of objects in Spaceports (and First in Space, and in R-9 addons) is that they all act in the "parallel universe" inside Orbiter. It is described in more detail in the...

I see :-). This is exactly what it looks like - an HF/VHF automobile radio :-). Probably slightly modified for space flight. Not sure if is is a separate backup system, or if it is hooked to the HF/VHF controls on the big left console. We were hoping to make it "active and operational" in the...

It was not "Auto-Radio" - all radio functions were fully manual. They are actually briefly documented in the addon document. Many functions, like transmission and recording, are not applicable to simulation (without implementing a multi-user mode with manned ground stations :-) ) For receiving...

Yes, it will explode into pieces. It will also destroy the object it strikes. If that object is a third-party vessel, it will be simply 'deleted' from scenario. Whether the third-party vessel can handle such "external deletion" without crashing Orbiter, depends on particular third-party addon...

Of course we plan... someday. It takes more time, so we did not want to delay the release "until the whole universe is included" :-)

Aha! Here it is: that addon is required as a prerequisite, it contains the actual surface tiles, my addon only references them (see the manual in the doc folder).

Not sure... Comments in the Earth.cfg should not be a problem: they indeed cause these 'ERROR' messages in the log file, but do not have any 'material' consequences to simulation. And I'd rather live with them - as the list of the bases in the config file will become totally unmaintainable...