Orbiter-Forum  

Go Back   Orbiter-Forum > Orbiter Space Flight Simulator > Orbiter Web Forum
Register Blogs Orbinauts List Social Groups FAQ Projects Mark Forums Read

Orbiter Web Forum A forum for general Orbiter-related comments and discussion. Post your questions about Orbiter and addons in the appropriate forums below. Upload your Orbiter screen shots to our gallery HERE!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-10-2009, 05:52 PM   #16
ar81
Orbinaut
Default

Everyone has a point of view.
It is not my intention to engage in controversy.

The point is: ITAR exists, and if it is ITAR compliant, then that's fine.
If it is not, then bad for some else, not me.
ar81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 05:59 PM   #17
Usquanigo
Orbinaut
Default

You guys really got stung by that Dr. Okun, didn't you?

You do realize you are just preaching to the choir, that he is nothing but a troll, and this is exactly what he had hoped for..... right?
Usquanigo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 06:06 PM   #18
ar81
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloodspray View Post
 You guys really got stung by that Dr. Okun, didn't you?

You do realize you are just preaching to the choir, that he is nothing but a troll, and this is exactly what he had hoped for..... right?
Indeed my first impression when I ran Orbiter for the first time, Checklist scenario, as I took off from KSC, was that the visuals were "not impressive" (yeah, I also beat myself for thinking that), but later I understood why, and later I discovered the richness of visuals in space travel, beyond anything I had seen before.

If I had said that back then, right after entering the forums, I bet would have been flamed. But I kept those comments for me, and then I flamed myself.
ar81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 06:43 PM   #19
wehaveaproblem
One step closer
 
wehaveaproblem's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloodspray View Post
 You guys really got stung by that Dr. Okun, didn't you?

You do realize you are just preaching to the choir, that he is nothing but a troll, and this is exactly what he had hoped for..... right?
What he said. Sorry, but this is a pointless thread. Though interesting ITAR debate, that would have made a better topic.
wehaveaproblem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 06:57 PM   #20
Hielor
Defender of Truth

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgep View Post
 
Weapons are also a big issue in Orbiter. There are those of us who design and build ships with functional weapon systems. We do this because we are military or prior military service members. It's a natural extension of our own intrests and lives. We strive to build the most realistic weapons we can within the Orbiter framework. We have been successful with chainguns, MK-82 SnakeEye retarded bombs , missiles of variouse size, and are now working on artillery shells.
Like it or not, warefare is a fact of life as old as mans dream of flight. You may not realize just how much of the technology you take for granted today was developed for battlefield use.
Orbiter is really not the best platform for wargames, for various reasons. Moreover, none of the weapons addons I've seen thus far have been very realistic at all, even compared to dedicated combat flight sims of thirteen years ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-10_Cuba!
Hielor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 07:08 PM   #21
ar81
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wehaveaproblem View Post
 What he said. Sorry, but this is a pointless thread. Though interesting ITAR debate, that would have made a better topic.
If you like, you may revive the ITAR debate, which is indeed interesting, but I would not be interested about saying more than I said. I am not interested in controversy nowadays.
ar81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 07:21 PM   #22
dkluempers
Orbinaut
Default

To be honest when I first downloaded Orbiter I was not really sure what to expect. It did not take long for me to understand that this was not some simple simulator that hand-held you through everything. I think I spent 3 or 4 days reading the information in the manuals for orbiter and the add-on's. Even then I realized that I had barely scratched the surface. I also knew I was in a bit in over my head.

I recall vividly my first attempt to launch into orbit and dock with the ISS. I had printed out the Orbiter manual as well a number of tutorials to help me. It took me a number of tries to successfully do it. Step by step I finally got into orbit, aligned with the ISS and then managed to get close enough to dock, thanks to all the help of the MFD's and tutorials. It took me hours to learn to fly the Delta Glider and finally dock successfully. This was followed by trips to the Moon, Mars and beyond.

I will never forget my first successful trip to Mars. As I approached using time compression I was able to watch the moons orbit it at high speed. It was amazing to see. However, I was even more amazed to realize I had learned to use the MFD's and was able to navigate there, orbit and land.

I developed a greater appreciation for the people who do this in real life. I also developed appreciation for the author of Orbiter and all those wonderful people here who developed add-ons and helped me learn fly in space. Most importantly I learned it is not as easy to fly in space as people sometimes think it is.

To me the real point of Orbiter is giving someone the chance to learn something about what it is like to fly in space - a chance to learn something new.
dkluempers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 07:23 PM   #23
wehaveaproblem
One step closer
 
wehaveaproblem's Avatar

Default

no no, I don't have the knowledge or the inclination to argue the point lol.
wehaveaproblem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 07:26 PM   #24
ar81
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkluempers View Post
 To me the real point of Orbiter is giving someone the chance to learn something about what it is like to fly in space - a chance to learn something new.
It is about 4 years since I first played Orbiter and I am still learning, and I think I have not reached half of what could be learned from it.
ar81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 07:52 PM   #25
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hielor View Post
 Orbiter is really not the best platform for wargames, for various reasons. Moreover, none of the weapons addons I've seen thus far have been very realistic at all, even compared to dedicated combat flight sims of thirteen years ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-10_Cuba!
One key problem is, that it is not easy to implement collision detection in a whole solar system.

Also the A-10 in LO:MAC is much better and extremely realistic... the only flight-sim in which the warthog stomp really works, most others use jet-liner or fighter aerodynamics on the A-10.

Bad is just that there is no flight simulator which does the Harrier with the "accuracy" of the old Harrier Jump Jet... The thrust vector maneuver in dog fighting does not work in more recent ones I played.
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 08:19 PM   #26
Hielor
Defender of Truth

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urwumpe View Post
 One key problem is, that it is not easy to implement collision detection in a whole solar system.
Indeed. I imagine that this problem could be made easier through extensive culling of irrelevant collision meshes, but it's still way harder than the typical combat flight sim which just has a few hundred square km of area in any given level.

Quote:
Also the A-10 in LO:MAC is much better and extremely realistic... the only flight-sim in which the warthog stomp really works, most others use jet-liner or fighter aerodynamics on the A-10.
Well yes, but LO:MAC is a much newer game (Nov. 1996 for A-10 Cuba!, Nov. 2003 for LO:MAC), so I would expect it to be better and more realistic.

My point was that thirteen years ago combat filght sims had already surpassed where Orbiter is now in terms of combat realism capability.
Hielor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 08:38 PM   #27
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hielor View Post
 My point was that thirteen years ago combat filght sims had already surpassed where Orbiter is now in terms of combat realism capability.
No wonder, if you can work in a simpler 3D space for collision detection or sensor models.

Even wrapping an octtree over the solar system would not be as effective as doing so in a "flat" battlefield. The reason why simpler games had been able to do so earlier, is just that they operated in a much simpler world.
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 09:19 PM   #28
agentgonzo
Grounded since '09
 
agentgonzo's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urwumpe View Post
 One key problem is, that it is not easy to implement collision detection in a whole solar system.
It shouldn't be too tricky. The solarsystem dynamics change very infrequently with time, and you only *really* need to do collision detection between the vessels and other objects. That means a relatively small source grouping and a static target tree for collision dection. The target tree needs to be reorganised very infrequently, and even then, only in small groups. The tree also only needs to be restructured (from a Vessel's POV) relatively infrequently when the closest two objects change which one is closest to the target vessel too.

It's not easy, but it's also not insurmountable.
agentgonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 09:48 PM   #29
tgep
Tutorial Publisher
 
tgep's Avatar
Default

A bit off topic but ......
Whether or not our RTF weapons in Orbiter are legal or not is sort of a moot point. The MK-82 is an old school gravity bomb slowed down by airbrakes that pop open after release.

Pictures and basic technicle data are readily availible on the net. If we can see a picture of it, chances are we can build it. The whole point of our weapons systems is to make them opperate as accurately as possible within the Orbiter framework to expand the capabilities of a combat craft in Orbiter.
tgep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 10:23 PM   #30
Pilot7893
Epik spaec mishun!
 
Pilot7893's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urwumpe View Post
 Bad is just that there is no flight simulator which does the Harrier with the "accuracy" of the old Harrier Jump Jet... The thrust vector maneuver in dog fighting does not work in more recent ones I played.
Only one I've seen with a Harrier is Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X. I was expecting the Harrier to include some no-stall mechanism (or at least reduced stall). Nope. Just the same as the other jets, only less maneuverable.
Pilot7893 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Orbiter-Forum > Orbiter Space Flight Simulator > Orbiter Web Forum


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:29 AM.

Quick Links Need Help?


About Us | Rules & Guidelines | TOS Policy | Privacy Policy

Orbiter-Forum is hosted at Orbithangar.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2017, Orbiter-Forum.com. All rights reserved.