Orbiter-Forum  

Go Back   Orbiter-Forum > Orbiter Addons > Addon Development
Register Blogs Orbinauts List Social Groups FAQ Projects Mark Forums Read

Addon Development Developers post news, updates, & discussions here about your projects in development.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-17-2010, 02:45 PM   #91
xlns
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Neo View Post
 ...Even with current technology, you could detect the shuttle's RCS thrusters from the asteroid belt.
This would be fascinating, if it's true! Can you quote something on the subject? Thx!

---------- Post added at 02:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:43 PM ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by escapetomsfate View Post
 OBSP intends to replicate combat in Orbiter.
...
Thanks a lot,

The OBSP Team - escapetomsfate, RisingFury, T.Neo.
This is excellent idea - I'm sure I'll be enjoying this one. Space warfare and it's weapons are interesting topics to think about:

for an example: I think flak cannons would be quite useful; with timed detonation shells and variable muzzle speed - first choice for melee and spamming weapon - would offer some interesting firing solutions. Or, thermonuclear bombs of low yield; without atmosphere to compress or houses to evaporate, much larger chunk of energy would feed EMP - flash bombs everybody wanna dodge! Or counter with superconducting shield around essential electronic equipment!?

Also, I'm kinda skeptic of laser fire - even in it's ideal conditions. Reason this is so is basically, when I think of space warfare - I think of submarine war. Take, for an example, two opposing ships in Earth's orbit. In the environment of 12000 satellites and debris, to actively scan with radars and use directional weapons that disclose your position and orbit sounds like a unreasonable strategy. Also, power per surface diminishes as 1/r^2 and aiming is quite a problem to crack. Or at least it seems to me so.

I would go with hide-n-seek strategy, relying on spam fire. Passive IR and radar scanning, fire-and-forget missiles deployed out-of-sight, flak fire followed by a change of orbit. Also, lack of drag would offer great stealth possibilities; for an example it may be possible to construct a cloaking umbrella system. Unused, it would reside folded around long rod along the long axis of ship. When you wanna deploy it, pull the rod out, open up umbrella wide to cover larger part of ship and pull the rod back. Umbrella surface would consist of radar radiation absorbing material, with 3 or 4 surfaces (tetrahedron without base or half of octahedral). With possible cooling system throughout the umbrella with LHe or LN2, this system would essentially vanish your radar cross-section, rendering you invisible head-on, for radar, IR scanning and visual. And probably blind

Just a few idea of the top of my head. Keep up the good work, guys. As for now, I am a newb in space flight, week ago, I barely managed to fly DG from Habana to Brighton Beach. Which is not so good, since I planned to land on Iapetus. I'm off to practice some more, but I'll for sure install this one as it comes up

Last edited by xlns; 09-17-2010 at 02:44 PM. Reason: bad post
xlns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2010, 02:51 PM   #92
T.Neo
SA 2010 Soccermaniac
Default

Actually a bomb needs to be in an atmosphere to create an EMP. So a bomb detonated in space won't produce an EMP, but a bomb detonated in an atmosphere will produce an EMP that can travel into space.

Lasers are interesting... they don't drop off in intensity as like non-coherant light does. Lasersdo drop off in intensity though, but not as the square root of the distance (it's the square root of the distance, right?). My main issue with lasers is their power supply and the fact that they tend to generate a lot of waste heat.

You've raised an interesting situation there with all the debris and sats around the Earth- there might be a bit more confusion compared to scanning in open space, but a warship is usually a good deal larger than the average satellite.

Thanks for the input xlns, and to Orbiter-Forum!
T.Neo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2010, 03:02 PM   #93
Wishbone
Clueless developer
 
Wishbone's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Neo View Post
 You've raised an interesting situation there with all the debris and sats around the Earth- there might be a bit more confusion compared to scanning in open space, but a warship is usually a good deal larger than the average satellite.
Hence the preoccupation with microsats (the brilliant pebbles reborn) If one cannot tell a microsat from an orbiting monkey wrench, one cannot target it.
Wishbone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2010, 03:44 PM   #94
xlns
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Neo View Post
 Actually a bomb needs to be in an atmosphere to create an EMP. So a bomb detonated in space won't produce an EMP, but a bomb detonated in an atmosphere will produce an EMP that can travel into space.
Seems I missed the term. After bomb goes off, it's energy, after turning bomb casing into plasma, has to go somewhere - and electromagnetic radiation is the only way out. I read wikipedia article on EMP and it seems it's used to describe massive coherent drive of atmospheric electrons and I used it as describing thick wall of gamma radiation that follows explosion and actually drives EMP . My bad, thanks for pointing that out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Neo View Post
 
Lasers are interesting... they don't drop off in intensity as like non-coherant light does. Lasersdo drop off in intensity though, but not as the square root of the distance (it's the square root of the distance, right?). My main issue with lasers is their power supply and the fact that they tend to generate a lot of waste heat.
I offered a bad worded explanation again.

Well, I was checking out an article someone posted on Moon ranging. There, it says that dispersion of a well collimated laser is about 10 arc seconds. After ~750,000 km travel, it goes from 3,5m to 15km in diameter. From that you can calculate stereo angle of laser dispersion and to get surface, you need to multiply that with distance squared(^2). Therefore, power is dropping with 1 / r^2 (since power per stereo angle is constant) - double the distance, power per unit surface will go down four times. I could be wrong, but even if it is coherent light - geometry is merciless

And you are quite right about heat of power source. Firing 1MW laser would make you quite visible on IR scan!

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Neo View Post
 
You've raised an interesting situation there with all the debris and sats around the Earth- there might be a bit more confusion compared to scanning in open space, but a warship is usually a good deal larger than the average satellite.
True.

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Neo View Post
 
Thanks for the input xlns, and to Orbiter-Forum!
Thanks, glad to be here !
xlns is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 09-20-2010, 01:00 PM   #95
RisingFury
OBSP developer
 
RisingFury's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolarStorm View Post
 Also, RisingFury, is OBSP in the hanger yet or is it still being tested/developed?
Not in the hangar yet. The first version has so much behind the scenes work and so little actual content that putting it on OH would be useless. Next beta should have enough content
RisingFury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2010, 11:49 AM   #96
Wishbone
Clueless developer
 
Wishbone's Avatar
Default

A must have for space combat simulation (SBSS):

http://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthr...ewpost&t=18364
Wishbone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2010, 04:39 PM   #97
Wishbone
Clueless developer
 
Wishbone's Avatar
Default

Would anybody please provide me with the list of features currently implemented in OBSP? Pretty please...
Wishbone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2010, 05:13 PM   #98
RisingFury
OBSP developer
 
RisingFury's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wishbone View Post
 Would anybody please provide me with the list of features currently implemented in OBSP? Pretty please...

It's all on the first page, as well as 3 YouTube vids SHOWING the features.
RisingFury is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 09-27-2010, 08:07 PM   #99
Wishbone
Clueless developer
 
Wishbone's Avatar
Default

Thanks, wish I hadn't been bandwidth- and utube-challenged (am on dialup at home).
Wishbone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2010, 06:47 PM   #100
jedidia
shoemaker without legs
 
jedidia's Avatar
Default

This isn't trying to be a scenario were combat is exciting and fun, you know. This is trying to be as mercylessly realistic as they can get it.
jedidia is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 09-29-2010, 12:21 AM   #101
Brycesv1
Crash Test Expert
 
Brycesv1's Avatar
Default

just thought it might be something to look into though in retrospect it isnt good for a realistic physics simulator
Brycesv1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 06:33 PM   #102
StevoPistolero
Addon Developer

Default

Here is an idea:

Could someone make a quick and dirty statistics based combat MFD? No missiles, no collisions, just hit points. If I could, I would implement Attack Vector: Tactical as an MFD.

So you get in range of an enemy, you fire your missiles. There is no missile icon, no sound, no anything, just a probability of kill. Same with lasers: you fire the lasers, and it does damage based on how far you are.

From there you can build up. You can incorporate target tracking in the HUD, changing the probability of kill. You could create a damage MFD, so instead of a percent damage it shows exact weapons systems (just for information purposes).

This is the opposite strategy of what you are doing. You guys are starting with the hard stuff (bombs, colission), while I am proposing you start at the opposite end, working on the user interface and the combat engine. Then one day you can meet in the middle.

But right now, I don't need an AK-47, or the ability to drop a bomb without any HUD graphics. I need to simulate all the weapon systems of space combat, quick and dirty, with a probability-based system.
StevoPistolero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 07:00 PM   #103
RisingFury
OBSP developer
 
RisingFury's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevoPistolero View Post
 Here is an idea:

Could someone make a quick and dirty statistics based combat MFD? No missiles, no collisions, just hit points. If I could, I would implement Attack Vector: Tactical as an MFD.

So you get in range of an enemy, you fire your missiles. There is no missile icon, no sound, no anything, just a probability of kill. Same with lasers: you fire the lasers, and it does damage based on how far you are.

From there you can build up. You can incorporate target tracking in the HUD, changing the probability of kill. You could create a damage MFD, so instead of a percent damage it shows exact weapons systems (just for information purposes).

This is the opposite strategy of what you are doing. You guys are starting with the hard stuff (bombs, colission), while I am proposing you start at the opposite end, working on the user interface and the combat engine. Then one day you can meet in the middle.

But right now, I don't need an AK-47, or the ability to drop a bomb without any HUD graphics. I need to simulate all the weapon systems of space combat, quick and dirty, with a probability-based system.

You can't build a house by starting with the roof.

Going from statistics based MFD to missiles, lasers and bombs would mean re-writing everything from scratch for every release.

We're not as stuck on *how* to implement everything as we are short on time. Trust me, I would love to make OBSP an 8 hour a day job and bring you wonderful new features every month, but my future is as uncertain as everyone's until I finish school.
RisingFury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 08:03 PM   #104
Urwumpe
Certain Super User
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevoPistolero View Post
 Could someone make a quick and dirty statistics based combat MFD? No missiles, no collisions, just hit points. If I could, I would implement Attack Vector: Tactical as an MFD.
Didn't you want to program it yourself, because it can't be that hard (and it is not to make just a MFD, the rest is the trouble)
Urwumpe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 08:17 PM   #105
StevoPistolero
Addon Developer

Default

If the rest is the trouble, just start with the MFD. Simulate combat without the disappearing meshes, collisions, ballistics. Just random number generators and probability lookups.

It would be easy, and I would do it myself, but I would have to teach myself C++, and I haven't found any good tutorials on how it would integrate with Orbiter.
StevoPistolero is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Orbiter-Forum > Orbiter Addons > Addon Development

Tags
battle, beta, combat, simulation, test


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 01:36 PM.

Quick Links Need Help?


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

Orbiter-Forum is hosted at Orbithangar.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2007 - 2017, Orbiter-Forum.com. All rights reserved.