"Never stop learning, that's what I say!" ROFL I was rolling on the floor when you said that, Scott! As a bush pilot with ohhh...what do I have now? 12,750 hours? Somewhere around there; I stopped counting a few years ago....but ahem. I thought when I first started playing Orbiter about a decade ago I'd breeze through it. I'm a pilot after all. ONE launch with the magnificent AMSO addon relieved me of that notion. Orbiter is HARD! That statement: "Never stop learning" is the solace and excuse we supposed professionals use when utterly and completely screwing the pooch in a simulated flight. At least in Orbiter we can just say "Yup, learning experience" when our sim abruptly ends in an explosion. When it is graded and examined in real life, we have a few more questions to answer...very pointed questions. I love all your work, Scott; especially your humour and cheerful whimsy. Keep up the good work! (Big thumbs up)
Funny thing is, I created a base on Titan: Paradox-Refuel Titan, available on Orbit Hangar. And it looks like some other people have made bases more recently than 11 years ago. :V Scott could've had a place to actually land, complete with a runway!
Back around 1988 I started watching Shuttle missions on NASA-TV on cable. One of the big Mission Control screens often displayed a program that looked a lot like Orbiter 2016. It was called DEMOS (Dynamic Earth Model and Orbiter Simulator?). A real time simulator that used Shuttle telemetry, it rolled when the real thing did. At first only the Shuttle had much detail, but with each mission the program got more realistic and complex. The Earth got more and more detailed and they even added the Moon and bright stars as well as launch and landing. It's a shame NASA didn't adapt it for gaming.
I notice NASA has lately been using a CG package for TV broadcasts of missions, Juno being a good example, to visualize the state of spacecraft that aren't in visual range of any camera. I wonder if that software is the same as what you are talking about, or comes from the same code base? It would be interesting to know!
pseudocoder78 By the time the ISS was being built the NASA simulators were showing three views and moment vector lines on it and the shuttle. It was more like a specialized real time data display than a simulator. There are so many commercial graphical mission planners for the satellite industry I'd be surprised if NASA didn't use one of them instead of writing new graphics code for every mission like they did in the old days.
So much of my life has gone into touring the solar system with this game...in fact, I don't like to call it a game...it's more of a recreation. Many are the days when I would sit down early in the afternoon and stand up and be shocked to discover that it's about 2 o'clock in the morning!
-and programming, When I took my first CNC class the note pads with the programs looked shockingly similar to the orbiter files! I had no idea all those years I was messing around with programming! Not making my own from scratch but just silly things like making the LSS Photon addon go faster! I toured the whole solar system, set up bases on moons with that thing. The nickname for the Triton outpost was just "Snowball" LOL
6:57 "Ok, that was a landing. That was not quite as smooth as I would like, but uh. good ne- Oh..." Not too different from Kerbal Space Program, after all, hehe.
I have only just recently discoverd Scott Manley, and i think he's a cool guy. I just starte drecently watching his KSP Interstella Series. Its really cool.
+RedRock3t82 Yeah, You are right but I Love Orbiter, I Know that is a Simulator, I Love Games But sometimes i Like Play Things Like Simulator Because You Need to use your brain 100% xD And When you Do that Goals You Feel Like a Real Astronaut, Or a Pilot in Atmosphere Flight
Actually the names is different depending of the constructor, Lockheed and Boeing calls it Betty, the UK IIRC was "Dave" or something for the EF2000. And the UAE also have a male voice too because even virtual female voices aren't allowed to "give instructions" to the pilots lol.
There's also "Barking Bob" or "Hank the Yank" (in UK airlines that fly Boeing) for the male voices and Sonya (because she get[s on ya] nerves) for the female voice. But as to the male/female debate: There are actually psychological studies that indicate that a female voice works better for user interface (e.g. elevators, sat navs, etc.), because both men and women react more positive and unquestioning towards a female voice. The theory is that men feel instinctive competition with a male voice, while women tend to sympathize with a female voice. [It should be said, that these studies have been performed by western universities and with people of western culture. So it might be a fun experiment to do this with other cultures to see how much of this is culture and how much is primal instinct, i.e. DNA.]
Ok. That's it. I have to own this simulator. No questions about it. My survival depends on obtaining this sim. Thanks for sharing Scott. This really looks like a fantastic sim.
I'm so glad you replied to this thread. I forgot about this until I saw the Google notification. LOL. So much for my previous attitude of my survival dependent on getting this sim. LOL.
LOL. well, that's what I get for scrolling down at the comments without looking at posted dates. But yes, it is indeed a fantastic sim once you wrap your head around the interface.
Played Orbiter since the early 2000s (2002 or 2003, not sure now). My favourite pastime was to de-orbit the Delta Glider mark 2 while keeping the external skin temperature under 300 degrees. Made me wonder if lifting body physics would solve the heat shield problem. If we could actual re-enter Earth's atmosphere but keep the craft's skin to just a few hundred degrees we could save a lot of weight by not having to pack a shield.
When I found this a hundred years ago, I was absolutely dumbfounded at the sim. It taught me a lot about rocketry. Then Kerbal came out. I had all the 2001 a space oddysey mods.
They'd never tell the shuttle to hold, it's a glider and hence has priority over everything else in the sky, the only thing that'd have priority over them is a balloon, but they'd have plans which keep balloons clear at that time.
That's interesting. ...I wonder if the heat draft from a balloon would be enough to keep a glider lifted above it? lol I guess traffic control can't always coordinate a balloon if it doesn't have a radio... and only height control... so I guess their priority for landing makes sense. :P
Balloons have more than height control, it's just they are very slow to manoeuvre so everyone else has to move out of their way, and priority landing isn't strictly true actually, because yes, in theory they do, but in reality they would be kept well away from active airports and busy airspace. And no, a glider could not stay aloft on a balloons heat alone, it simply doesn't have the surface area that it could generate that kind of force, it needs airflow over the wings to generate lift, also the escaping gas from a balloon is actually pretty cool and escapes out of the bottom I do believe, the idea being all the hot air is trapped in the balloon causing it to rise, once it cools and becomes ineffective it sinks out of the bottom.
Streaky100001 oh, lol. You described it so well, it sounds so logical. I fell a bit silly for not thinking about it... Sorry I asked a silly question. :P Thank you for the reply though, it was very informative. :D You seem to really know about aircraft... (or maybe just basic physics even? haha) :P do you fly/balloon? (I'm now intrigued about it) :) Cheers!
It's not a silly question at all, the only silly question is the one you don't ask :DAnd yes and no, I have flown but I'm not a pilot, I was in the air cadets here in the UK and they do what are known as air experience flights, basically you get 30 odd minutes flight time in an RAF trainer (basic prop trainer, not lucky enough to get a go in a jet) per flight. We also had lessons about rules of the air and airmanship and such. On top of that I am now an apprentice aircraft technician, so I've picked up knowledge there as well. I've never ballooned, and I'm not sure I'd fancy it personally, but I know the basic theory of it. I'm hoping to go for my private pilots licence when I have the money. And Yes, I also have quite an interest in physics, that was the other thing I considered pursuing as a career :D
Streaky100001 :D wow, I can only imagine what flying a plane is like, (my KSP experience) :P I really hope you get your private pilot's licence and the chance to fly man! Being able to fly sounds exciting, I hope I could get the chance also.. I'm studying as a mechanical engineer so it might be a flapping, home-made flying machine for me though, lol. :P Hopefully I can pick it up as a hobby maybe. ^_^
The craziest is that mod for orbiter that adds the AGC is the best simulator for Apollo ever, other than the ones NASA used in the 60s. A mod for a flight sim is more accurate technically and historically than any dedicated flight simulator for Apollo.
You haven't lived until you've learned to use the AGC in anger, as if your life depended upon it. Very handy to have some of those nouns and verbs memorized.
Orbiter's DirectX 7 stock client works perfectly on Windows 10, but you probably didn't know that there is a maximum for the screen resolution in the stock client. If you have a modern monitor with a large resolution larger than 2054px wide, than you need to limit the resolution in the Video tab before launching Orbiter. This maximum of 2054 px width is a limitation DirectX7 itself. Using a larger width leads to an error like "Initialising 3D environment using a hardware device failed. Try again with a software device."
INCBraindead I blew up countless times just after engaging the scram jet. Tricky business engaging it at the right speed and disengaging it when it got too high or risk overheating... or overheating the craft's skin and burning up in the atmosphere.
The tossing into deep space at random while landed has always been there. I remember messing around with Orbiter back in the very early days... before KSP was even a distant dream.
I love orbiter and its challenges and played it for quite a few years. what i love more though is the ability to create. KSP with some realism mods does it for me.
Here's an interesting series of spacecraft to fly: Altea Aerospace's XR fleet, as the optimal way to get them to orbit is by using the main rocket engines to take off like an aeroplane (when on Earth) and accelerate the craft to Mach 3 in a climb, when the scramjets start being operational, then cut down on the climb rate and transition over to scramjet power (first, open the scramjet intakes, known as SCRAM doors in their instrument panels, then apply full throttle on the scramjets) for the acceleration and ascent until Mach 17-20 is reached, then cut off the scramjets, close the scramjet intakes, and use the main rocket engines to continue the ascent (with extra climb rate to cross the Karman line, aka the edge of space) and perform the orbital insertion burn.
I remember trying to play around with this back in the early 2000's. Thought it was pretty cool but too complicated. Of course, I didn't have a HOTAS back then. Graphics are much better now so I might just have to take another look at it.
When landing, your Nav1 says 134.200MHZ. That is a Com frequency and not a Localizer frequency. Localizer frequencys have an odd number after the decimal point, and go from 108MHZ to I think 112MHZ.
There actually is a book called Titan by Stephen Baxter where a re-purposed space shuttle is landed on Titan as part of a one way mission. This reminded me of that. I am so hyped to play Orbiter 2016, I have been waiting for Orbiter to update for years!
I got into the Space scene with Orbiter 2010. Using velcro rockets, I strapped an Energia Booster and 2 SRBs to the XR-5 and went to mars, with a whole new Mining base in the Cargo hold (UCGO). Those were the days....
Cool to see Martin is still at it. Hope that the Delta glider have survived over all these years. I used to love playing an older game called "Shuttle" on the Amiga, it came with a thick manual and a large poster showing all of the buttons on the dashboard(s). There were also a looong checklist that went on until you were in orbit, making you remember stuff like OPS 101 PRO, ITEM 27 EXEC and extending the KU band antenna. Prefer KSP nowadays. P.S: Try the Jumpdrive mod. Earth -> Jupiter in seconds.
I love this game as much as I hated it. I actually downloaded and played this a long time ago in search for any kind of game that simulated modern space flight. I seriously had a notebook paper with a hundred definitions hand written like (for example) "Apoapsis". My lack of PC gaming experience and my complete lack of any knowledge of how space flight actually worked at that time it was very hard to learn and play. It was the game that eventually led me find other sims I still play like KSP, Falcon BMS, and DCS World.
I've been watching your channel for a while now, and watching you play Orbiter, there is a game I'm very surprised you have never played. That game is Microsoft Flight Simulator X. Highly recommended for you Scott, it can go for as little as $5.00 when it is on sale on Steam!
Would be really great to have Oribtor, Kerbal Space program and Space Engine all put into one cool program. If they all got together they could make an excellent game, flight and space simulator.
Speaking of text and manuals for the Space Shuttle... a few years ago, I found and picked up a copy of 'The Space Shuttle Operator's Manual' (Copyrighted 1982) at a thrift store. Surprisingly, for a 30 year old book, its in really good condition. (Or maybe its a reprint?) A little research says the book was meant as very in-depth introduction of the Shuttle for the general public, or possibly someone going into 'space camp' back in the day?
Lol , Im still running orbiter 2010 on laptop with joystick nothing's greater than when the music first kicks in once you leave the atmosphere , it takes alot of reading to run this sim successfully , but well worth the time ,
I really love kerbal for sure but I really wish there would be a game less cartoony of the same vein as kerbal. I truly love what you can do with kerbal
I've read somewhere (i think that was nasa site) about ISS orientation, where it was said that station can and does reorient for incoming craft or per experiments requirements. So we can pretend that was the case in this demo
IIRC, one of the things they also added to Orbiter 2016 (at least in the beta), was randomized wind simulation, to make things a little more interesting. ;)
I've always wondered: Why does the shuttle make a roll right after launch? What's the reason for not just putting it turned the right way around on the pad?
TL;DR The important thing is, initial climb is belly up arch and the inclination of the orbit is not always the same. So unless the orbiter wants to fly directly east, it has to rotate before arching. Note: It only fits on the launch pad in one orientation --------------------- During initial climb, the shuttle flies up on an arch in order to get into orbit and since orbit is rather very fast and not very high, the orbiter has (or had) to start the arch pretty much immediately after leaving the launch pad. During this arch trajectory ascend, the shuttle had to be belly up. The inclination of the desired orbit is different each time, sometimes it wants to fly around equator (directly east), other times it wants to fly at an angle to the equator, more north or more south, depending on the mission. Since the orbiter has to be bolted to the launch pad in a particular orientation and the launch pad can't be rotated without rebuilding it, the shuttle has to be rotated to correct position mid-air, after it leaves launchpad, its cargo doors have to be facing the direction of the orbit, so that when it starts the arch, it's gonna be belly up. I don't know all the reasons why it has to be belly up, but it probably mostly has to do with g-forces. The arch ascend produces some significant G-forces, so they align the space shuttle so that those G-forces are pushing astronauts down into their seats, instead of up. It's much easier for humans to deal with positive G forces, rather than negative or sideways ones. Think about it as an airplane. When airplane wants to turn, it will first rotate, then the pilot will pull the stick, so the g-forces are pushing down. That's the most comfortable way to turn aircraft. It's same with the shuttle, don't get confused that it's flying up, instead of sideways like a plane, it still just wants to do a turn. So the shuttle computer just rotates it and then pulls the virtual stick. There might be other reasons why it's flying belly up that might have something to do with things like how the fuel splashes around in tanks, how gyros might complain about negative gees, or maybe astronauts just want to have better view of earth before leaving. But I don't know anything about those.
There are 2 reasons for belly up ascent: 1st: To utilize massive lift forces from wings to help with gravity turn (arching). 2nd: Gravity turn is pretty G intensive and both shuttle and crew tolerate positive Gs better.
Okay, thanks. I knew the gravity turn was performed belly up, I just didn't know why they didn't orient the shuttle more toward the direction it needed to be initially. Guess it makes sense they couldn't just stick it on there any which way. Guess KSP has spoiled me for ease of use. Too bad they couldn't revert to VAB for the failures. I guess reality is set on hard difficulty. ;)
The crane which carried the Shuttle from the VAB onto the launchpad was designed to put the shuttle only in one position. It was easier to perform a roll than completely redesign the launchpad.
Would you ever consider doing a NASSP series (the sim with the flight computer) or use one of the more detailed fictional spacecraft to show a trip to an outer planet?
If you want a more faithful simulator for the Space Shuttle, then you should take a look at Space Shuttle Mission Simulator. Maybe next year the new installment will eventually come out, after that the previous version had been updated for the last time back in 2010
In Space Shuttle Simulator only use the Space Shuttle, is complete, but in Orbiter 2010 you can download The Space Shuttle Fleet, And The Space Shuttle Ultra that can give more things like the Space Shuttle Simulator, and In orbiter ( all versions ) You can use more fictional and historical spacecraft( you can download a lot of great fictional and realistic historical spacecraft on orbit hangar or other websites ), and go to the, Iss, Mir ( and other space stations addons ), go to, moon ( and the historical bases in the moon, and fictional bases, and fictional space stations in moon ) and go to sun, mercury, venus, mars, jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune ( and if you have more special addons, you can go to Pluton and other solar systems like Kepler ;) i hope that this help you to understand more this simulator
I know what kind of game Orbiter is, I was talking about the space shuttle only, nothing else. And in that game you fly real missions, really happened, like deploying satellites, like Hubble, or docking and building the space station. Again, I know what Orbiter is about and what you can do with it, but for the actual Space Shuttle I think there's nothing better than that. And besides, if you read my comment above, you will see that I said "If you want a more faithful simulator for the Space Shuttle...", not " if you want a better sim for space exploration..."
1:32 -- "Space Geeks" -- Hey Scott! *Great pick for content*, an excellent simulator. RE: The manuals from real NASA missions, there was a full Apollo mod for a previous Orbiter version which would be at least as good as an old-style NASA mock-up that allowed astronauts to play with the flight computer for specific things, as in on final approach for Moon landing. Orbiter is better than that in many ways, because of the 3D element. It was fun to play it with head tracking, while scooting about over the lunar surface. Orbiter's other great feature is the non-realistic ships that are included, let alone the mods which get released. Frankly, the Delta Glider with a Scramjet engine - SSTO - followed by a leisurely 48-hour lunar transit, and I can be sitting in my private moonshed on the west side of Picard crater. The Shuttle-A (not the Space Shuttle) is a great challenge too, especially for leaving Earth, but really shines in Lunar gee, because it has secondary engines mounted port and starboard, and which can pitch forward, down, or back, three of the four directions for meaningful course correction!
2:23 -- Not meaning to cut you off, but hey Scott, I hope you don't forget to talk about the *pre-existing* atmospheric engine, which worked first, before he ever worried about terrain effects. There were open source alternative rendering engines being developed in parallel to this terrain effect, prior to this release, to help that happen I suspect. The atmospherics in this game have always been great. Leaving Earth's atmosphere is easily noted by the outside air pressure gauges; similarly, max Q and Mach 1 are easily spotted if the ship has instrumentation. The other thing is that, *unlike Kerbal Space Program*, this one calculates Lagrange points; so if you're really space geeky, putting something into a stable, very-long-term orbit is possible. It's not a multiplayer experience, though; it's not a "continuing universe" game experience either, to be honest. It is very much a "by the numbers mission" simulator where things could be made as realistic as "SYSTEM FAILURE!" Next Phase: *Bring Back the Dyna-Soar!*
3:55 -- "Never stop learning!..." - then you point out this is incorrectly being modelled? That's *technically* true since there's no explicit control being effected upon the ISS to (A) Station-keep, and (B) Orient. Both these functions require humans, IRL. Otherwise, the ISS is calculated by known position, as extrapolated by nothing other than it's mass and *how much the Sun perturbs it*. Do solar sails work in KSP, Scott? Also, I think (but I don't know for sure, Scott) the new changes to the flight computer for Atlantis are system-wide, as well, in the sense that there's a scripting language which would allow for any user to code their own ISS flight computer, *if they're geek enough.* P.S. If I were a malicious sort, I could see a way of making a bonus look like a drawback.
7:03 -- "Oh." -- Yeah, Scott, the HUD is limited and simplistic, but it *DID* have a landing gear indicator, which is three little blocks which will display on the middle of the screen. ; ) [edit: I checked myself here -- the Space Shuttle, maybe not! The DG - pretty sure. Shuttle-A...? For Sure.] So, If I go back in the video.... I can also read the vertical velocity, not only the forward velocity, so even if you had the landing gear indicator showing (I can't see it) you may have been fast enough to collapse them. Not that I'm saying they didn't fail. If you're not trying for outrage - what are you trying to do? And if it isn't the first, you wonder why you were ever hacked? P.S. If you had been using a hand-written checklist on your lap, that had a clear time to drop gear command on it, that you then echoed as you hit the key to drop gear... *then* I might have believed you.
9:51 - "I Can't See My Descent Speed!" -- You have an open MFD on the righthand display. That Has Your Descent Speed, forward and down. You can use your *Instruments* to fly. Also think that Orbiter has options for changing the size of things like the MFDs, but YMMV, for sure.
4:12 not true, the ISS rotates and adjusts for incoming and outgoing crafts. crafts dont come from below during orbit but from the sides. Now depending on which dock they are supposed to grapple on to.
Scott there is a re-entry simulation with the orbiter shuttle in x-plane10/9. x-plane 10 has pretty much the best aerophysichs available commercially so maybe you could try that.
Wonder how many pages is in IRL "space shuttle" manual? In Finland came F/A-18C´s "owners handbook", when it was bought in 95. It is more like library, with those moving thriller movie bookshelfs.
when I installed the Orbiter 2016 msi and I opened the orbiter2016.exe file, the screen turned black and then after a couple of seconds it all came back. Should I be worried since this happened?
Addon MFDs will really save your day FYI. Also try mod planes, they have some nice cool features but you need to pay attention to the crew's safety (since they're not Kerbals)
Installed orbiter fine, but when I launch it the game is stuck at the loading screen. (I waited about 30 minutes for it to load.) Anyone have any advice?
Hey Scott, as you said that the space station always has the US module oriented prograde I was asking myself: Do they always have to apply thrust to keep the orientation right? This seems like a waste of fuel to me.
Haven't played Orbiter since Orbiter 2010, it's so much better now, however i'm curious how he got the water to have the ripple effect, I got 2016 and did all the graphics upgrades, it looks basically the same as in the video but the water doesn't look as good.
Hey Scott, if you're willing to play Orbiter, you should definitely watch David Courtney's channel. It's a preety interesting tutorial series that actually made me go somewhere in Orbiter.
well i wouldn't mind if its patchwork as long as its not too difficult to install and run. I tried it once, it was not so stable :/ KSP with all the realism mods is very unstable too. so I don't know any cool realistic space simulator. I started programming my own, but I only had a (in some ways better) editor I got a job and stopped doing that
Isaac L-L Perigee is the term for the closest point of an orbit around Earth. For the sun it's call "perihelion". Each body has its own term. Jupiter is probably "perijovian".
Used to fly in a flight sim community where we had air traffic controllers, had to use preflight checklists to start the okane, our own call signs, logos, and everything else you can imagine. Fun times. But not THAT fun. Now I play KSP.
If I remember correctly, the game is also noteworthy in that it has a much higher physical time acceleration to KSP. So you can physical-time-warp up to... how high can it go?
+Scott Manley, have you played Freespace 1 and 2? They are great games that I grew up with. and I 've tried some recent mods which make them look like games from ~ 2007-10 ... if you haven't played them I think you would like them, and now with these mods they look fantastic (2560x1440 and recent)
Orbiter has terrain now? Well that's a relief.
Pun intended, I hope, because it's a good one.
That joke really makes the grade.
I see what you did there.
I'm inclined to agree. :P
meethane
"A Less Kerbal Space Sim" then lands a spaceshuttle on Titan
4 year lol
@@nasawormlogo9521 4 month lol
@@hareeballsac9777 4 hour lol
@@nasawormlogo9521 1 month lol
@@dylstructor9867 1 year lol
"Never stop learning, that's what I say!" ROFL I was rolling on the floor when you said that, Scott! As a bush pilot with ohhh...what do I have now? 12,750 hours? Somewhere around there; I stopped counting a few years ago....but ahem. I thought when I first started playing Orbiter about a decade ago I'd breeze through it. I'm a pilot after all. ONE launch with the magnificent AMSO addon relieved me of that notion. Orbiter is HARD! That statement: "Never stop learning" is the solace and excuse we supposed professionals use when utterly and completely screwing the pooch in a simulated flight. At least in Orbiter we can just say "Yup, learning experience" when our sim abruptly ends in an explosion. When it is graded and examined in real life, we have a few more questions to answer...very pointed questions. I love all your work, Scott; especially your humour and cheerful whimsy. Keep up the good work! (Big thumbs up)
"You're clear to land"
"Thank you, Titan Traffic Control!"
Best Quote Ever
Funny thing is, I created a base on Titan: Paradox-Refuel Titan, available on Orbit Hangar. And it looks like some other people have made bases more recently than 11 years ago. :V
Scott could've had a place to actually land, complete with a runway!
Back around 1988 I started watching Shuttle missions on NASA-TV on cable. One of the big Mission Control screens often displayed a program that looked a lot like Orbiter 2016. It was called DEMOS (Dynamic Earth Model and Orbiter Simulator?). A real time simulator that used Shuttle telemetry, it rolled when the real thing did. At first only the Shuttle had much detail, but with each mission the program got more realistic and complex. The Earth got more and more detailed and they even added the Moon and bright stars as well as launch and landing. It's a shame NASA didn't adapt it for gaming.
I notice NASA has lately been using a CG package for TV broadcasts of missions, Juno being a good example, to visualize the state of spacecraft that aren't in visual range of any camera. I wonder if that software is the same as what you are talking about, or comes from the same code base? It would be interesting to know!
pseudocoder78 By the time the ISS was being built the NASA simulators were showing three views and moment vector lines on it and the shuttle. It was more like a specialized real time data display than a simulator. There are so many commercial graphical mission planners for the satellite industry I'd be surprised if NASA didn't use one of them instead of writing new graphics code for every mission like they did in the old days.
Incredible! Used to play Orbiter long before KSP was a dream. I had no idea there was an update. thank you thank you THANK YOU
Played Orbiter since 2010. I love it. Learned a lot about orbital mechanics with it.
then you should check out Rogue System :)
So much of my life has gone into touring the solar system with this game...in fact, I don't like to call it a game...it's more of a recreation. Many are the days when I would sit down early in the afternoon and stand up and be shocked to discover that it's about 2 o'clock in the morning!
@Bad Cattitude Exactly. Better than wasting life away, eh?
-and programming, When I took my first CNC class the note pads with the programs looked shockingly similar to the orbiter files! I had no idea all those years I was messing around with programming! Not making my own from scratch but just silly things like making the LSS Photon addon go faster! I toured the whole solar system, set up bases on moons with that thing. The nickname for the Triton outpost was just "Snowball" LOL
The Kraken is even in Orbiter!
he throws you several lightyears away from earth when you're about to land.
That f**king Kraken!
yes and timewarping help so stop the sickness
The other day, I landed the dragon capsule in the ocean and somehow ended up on 27km/s flyby of io
4:00 Scott, the ISS changes the orientation for docking and undocking. they do that to push the Space Shuttle on an other Orbit. So they don`t crash.
6:57
"Ok, that was a landing. That was not quite as smooth as I would like, but uh. good ne- Oh..."
Not too different from Kerbal Space Program, after all, hehe.
At least the ship doesn’t spontaneously explode on landing xD
I have only just recently discoverd Scott Manley, and i think he's a cool guy. I just starte drecently watching his KSP Interstella Series. Its really cool.
Welcome to the gang buddy!
o/
Welcome to an awesome channel =D
You should also checkout the Kerbal reusable series. Thats one of his best IMHO.
chickenman297
I will do that, cheers mate!
I think Scott is a pretty cool guy. Eh lands space shuttles and doesn't afraid of anything.
He never afraids of anything!
This just made me want to play more KSP.
Hahaha Why?
He even managed to land in a very Kerbal manner on pure instinct.
It just isn't as charming as those silly Kerbalnauts.
+RedRock3t82 Yeah, You are right but I Love Orbiter, I Know that is a Simulator, I Love Games But sometimes i Like Play Things Like Simulator Because You Need to use your brain 100% xD And When you Do that Goals You Feel Like a Real Astronaut, Or a Pilot in Atmosphere Flight
+Jose Alvarez Why did you capitalize the comment like a title?
It's been years since I've used Orbiter (I would do 2010) so glad that u did it, it's right up your alley :)
16:16 Apparently the industry name for the electronic voice that talks to you during flight is "Bitching Betty". Just thought I'd toss that out there.
Actually the names is different depending of the constructor, Lockheed and Boeing calls it Betty, the UK IIRC was "Dave" or something for the EF2000.
And the UAE also have a male voice too because even virtual female voices aren't allowed to "give instructions" to the pilots lol.
@@SnaxDesAvions Nagging Nora is another name for it.
If the message involves helium pressure being lower than expected, or say "terrain!" I don't care what name or gender is telling me.
There's also "Barking Bob" or "Hank the Yank" (in UK airlines that fly Boeing) for the male voices and Sonya (because she get[s on ya] nerves) for the female voice.
But as to the male/female debate: There are actually psychological studies that indicate that a female voice works better for user interface (e.g. elevators, sat navs, etc.), because both men and women react more positive and unquestioning towards a female voice. The theory is that men feel instinctive competition with a male voice, while women tend to sympathize with a female voice.
[It should be said, that these studies have been performed by western universities and with people of western culture. So it might be a fun experiment to do this with other cultures to see how much of this is culture and how much is primal instinct, i.e. DNA.]
@@QemeH very interesting
I've been waiting to see you play this game. I enjoy your Kerbal adventures.
I thought almost everybody forget this beautiful space sim. Appearance of Sun and Neptune from Triton in this sim were almost becoming history.
It's a good time to get back to Orbiter. It's a good time to be a fan of space games actually
Ok. That's it. I have to own this simulator. No questions about it. My survival depends on obtaining this sim.
Thanks for sharing Scott. This really looks like a fantastic sim.
it's free, so it's not going to cost anything at least!
I'm so glad you replied to this thread. I forgot about this until I saw the Google notification. LOL. So much for my previous attitude of my survival dependent on getting this sim. LOL.
LOL.
well, that's what I get for scrolling down at the comments without looking at posted dates. But yes, it is indeed a fantastic sim once you wrap your head around the interface.
OMG ORBITER! awesome, this got me into space sims :)
Thanks Scott, this is right up my alley....why am I only seeing this now???
Played Orbiter since the early 2000s (2002 or 2003, not sure now). My favourite pastime was to de-orbit the Delta Glider mark 2 while keeping the external skin temperature under 300 degrees. Made me wonder if lifting body physics would solve the heat shield problem. If we could actual re-enter Earth's atmosphere but keep the craft's skin to just a few hundred degrees we could save a lot of weight by not having to pack a shield.
9:55 Scott, there's a vertical speed indicator next to the artificial horizon on the right. The rightmost blue tape that says "VS" and "m/s".
+Seekay and at the exact moment of touchdown it was unreadable because of the background image.
I remember sneaking a copy of Orbiter into my classroom back in 2003-2004... I only realized they continued development a few years ago.
When I found this a hundred years ago, I was absolutely dumbfounded at the sim. It taught me a lot about rocketry. Then Kerbal came out. I had all the 2001 a space oddysey mods.
They'd never tell the shuttle to hold, it's a glider and hence has priority over everything else in the sky, the only thing that'd have priority over them is a balloon, but they'd have plans which keep balloons clear at that time.
That's interesting. ...I wonder if the heat draft from a balloon would be enough to keep a glider lifted above it? lol
I guess traffic control can't always coordinate a balloon if it doesn't have a radio... and only height control... so I guess their priority for landing makes sense. :P
Balloons have more than height control, it's just they are very slow to manoeuvre so everyone else has to move out of their way, and priority landing isn't strictly true actually, because yes, in theory they do, but in reality they would be kept well away from active airports and busy airspace.
And no, a glider could not stay aloft on a balloons heat alone, it simply doesn't have the surface area that it could generate that kind of force, it needs airflow over the wings to generate lift, also the escaping gas from a balloon is actually pretty cool and escapes out of the bottom I do believe, the idea being all the hot air is trapped in the balloon causing it to rise, once it cools and becomes ineffective it sinks out of the bottom.
Streaky100001 oh, lol. You described it so well, it sounds so logical. I fell a bit silly for not thinking about it...
Sorry I asked a silly question. :P Thank you for the reply though, it was very informative. :D
You seem to really know about aircraft... (or maybe just basic physics even? haha) :P do you fly/balloon?
(I'm now intrigued about it) :) Cheers!
It's not a silly question at all, the only silly question is the one you don't ask :DAnd yes and no, I have flown but I'm not a pilot, I was in the air cadets here in the UK and they do what are known as air experience flights, basically you get 30 odd minutes flight time in an RAF trainer (basic prop trainer, not lucky enough to get a go in a jet) per flight. We also had lessons about rules of the air and airmanship and such. On top of that I am now an apprentice aircraft technician, so I've picked up knowledge there as well. I've never ballooned, and I'm not sure I'd fancy it personally, but I know the basic theory of it. I'm hoping to go for my private pilots licence when I have the money. And Yes, I also have quite an interest in physics, that was the other thing I considered pursuing as a career :D
Streaky100001 :D wow, I can only imagine what flying a plane is like, (my KSP experience) :P
I really hope you get your private pilot's licence and the chance to fly man! Being able to fly sounds exciting, I hope I could get the chance also..
I'm studying as a mechanical engineer so it might be a flapping, home-made flying machine for me though, lol. :P
Hopefully I can pick it up as a hobby maybe. ^_^
The craziest is that mod for orbiter that adds the AGC is the best simulator for Apollo ever, other than the ones NASA used in the 60s. A mod for a flight sim is more accurate technically and historically than any dedicated flight simulator for Apollo.
Oh i love this "oh ?!" at 7:00
At one point you said "Orbiter 2006", actually pretty coherent with the whole DX7 engine. :)
Pretty sure there was an Orbiter 2006. I remember playing some kind of Orbiter back then.
+turarwanaa Orbiter was first released in 2000, since then we've had Orbiter 2006, 2010 and now 2016
2006 was the first if I'm not wrong, then orbiter 2010 and finally 2016
Nah it was originally released in 2000 as 'Orbiter'
You haven't lived until you've learned to use the AGC in anger, as if your life depended upon it.
Very handy to have some of those nouns and verbs memorized.
Orbiter's DirectX 7 stock client works perfectly on Windows 10, but you probably didn't know that there is a maximum for the screen resolution in the stock client.
If you have a modern monitor with a large resolution larger than 2054px wide, than you need to limit the resolution in the Video tab before launching Orbiter.
This maximum of 2054 px width is a limitation DirectX7 itself.
Using a larger width leads to an error like "Initialising 3D environment using a hardware device failed. Try again with a software device."
One of the best space TH-camr
Scott Manley: I'd recomend playing a bit with slightly futuristic but rich in features XR-2 Ravenstar vessel (already recompiled for Orbiter 2016)
INCBraindead I blew up countless times just after engaging the scram jet. Tricky business engaging it at the right speed and disengaging it when it got too high or risk overheating... or overheating the craft's skin and burning up in the atmosphere.
The tossing into deep space at random while landed has always been there. I remember messing around with Orbiter back in the very early days... before KSP was even a distant dream.
Crazy how one guy did this!
I love orbiter and its challenges and played it for quite a few years. what i love more though is the ability to create. KSP with some realism mods does it for me.
AWESOME! Been waiting for this badboy for a while.
this is old enough to bring good memories
Here's an interesting series of spacecraft to fly: Altea Aerospace's XR fleet, as the optimal way to get them to orbit is by using the main rocket engines to take off like an aeroplane (when on Earth) and accelerate the craft to Mach 3 in a climb, when the scramjets start being operational, then cut down on the climb rate and transition over to scramjet power (first, open the scramjet intakes, known as SCRAM doors in their instrument panels, then apply full throttle on the scramjets) for the acceleration and ascent until Mach 17-20 is reached, then cut off the scramjets, close the scramjet intakes, and use the main rocket engines to continue the ascent (with extra climb rate to cross the Karman line, aka the edge of space) and perform the orbital insertion burn.
I remember trying to play around with this back in the early 2000's. Thought it was pretty cool but too complicated. Of course, I didn't have a HOTAS back then. Graphics are much better now so I might just have to take another look at it.
When landing, your Nav1 says 134.200MHZ. That is a Com frequency and not a Localizer frequency. Localizer frequencys have an odd number after the decimal point, and go from 108MHZ to I think 112MHZ.
There actually is a book called Titan by Stephen Baxter where a re-purposed space shuttle is landed on Titan as part of a one way mission. This reminded me of that.
I am so hyped to play Orbiter 2016, I have been waiting for Orbiter to update for years!
Cool!
And hello.
You're gone from the forums.
legoclone09
I'm still there, just not very active. I'm mostly lurking and participating in the role-playing thread.
mikeman7918 Ah, OK.
Wait. Isn't roleplaying not allowed?
legoclone09 It is allowed in the "Quizzes, Roleplaying, ect." sub forum.
mikeman7918 Wait. I'm confused. Can you link the subforum?
I loved this! I admit:
_I modded the heck out of this game. It was a wild ride learning how to cruise between planets and aim the craft just right._
I was playing this years before Kerbal. And I like it more.
Same here.
I got into the Space scene with Orbiter 2010. Using velcro rockets, I strapped an Energia Booster and 2 SRBs to the XR-5 and went to mars, with a whole new Mining base in the Cargo hold (UCGO). Those were the days....
Cool to see Martin is still at it. Hope that the Delta glider have survived over all these years.
I used to love playing an older game called "Shuttle" on the Amiga, it came with a thick manual and a large poster showing all of the buttons on the dashboard(s). There were also a looong checklist that went on until you were in orbit, making you remember stuff like OPS 101 PRO, ITEM 27 EXEC and extending the KU band antenna. Prefer KSP nowadays.
P.S: Try the Jumpdrive mod. Earth -> Jupiter in seconds.
I love this game as much as I hated it.
I actually downloaded and played this a long time ago in search for any kind of game that simulated modern space flight.
I seriously had a notebook paper with a hundred definitions hand written like (for example) "Apoapsis".
My lack of PC gaming experience and my complete lack of any knowledge of how space flight actually worked at that time it was very hard to learn and play.
It was the game that eventually led me find other sims I still play like KSP, Falcon BMS, and DCS World.
“You are clear for landing” “Well that’s good I don’t really have a choice”
I've been watching your channel for a while now, and watching you play Orbiter, there is a game I'm very surprised you have never played. That game is Microsoft Flight Simulator X. Highly recommended for you Scott, it can go for as little as $5.00 when it is on sale on Steam!
he does mostly space things, and FSX is a flight sim that most everyone knows about.
You know that the space shuttle orbiter has been fully recreated in X-Plane 10 with all the realistic controls ?
woahhhhh I've been waiting for an orbiter update for so long :D
Would be really great to have Oribtor, Kerbal Space program and Space Engine all put into one cool program. If they all got together they could make an excellent game, flight and space simulator.
Nice pfp, brother
Speaking of text and manuals for the Space Shuttle... a few years ago, I found and picked up a copy of 'The Space Shuttle Operator's Manual' (Copyrighted 1982) at a thrift store. Surprisingly, for a 30 year old book, its in really good condition. (Or maybe its a reprint?) A little research says the book was meant as very in-depth introduction of the Shuttle for the general public, or possibly someone going into 'space camp' back in the day?
I fix industrial machinery ranging from $70,000 to $1.5m and, trust me, no one EVER reads the manual.
Lol , Im still running orbiter 2010 on laptop with joystick nothing's greater than when the music first kicks in once you leave the atmosphere , it takes alot of reading to run this sim successfully , but well worth the time ,
I really love kerbal for sure but I really wish there would be a game less cartoony of the same vein as kerbal.
I truly love what you can do with kerbal
I've read somewhere (i think that was nasa site) about ISS orientation, where it was said that station can and does reorient for incoming craft or per experiments requirements.
So we can pretend that was the case in this demo
IIRC, one of the things they also added to Orbiter 2016 (at least in the beta), was randomized wind simulation, to make things a little more interesting. ;)
I've always wondered: Why does the shuttle make a roll right after launch? What's the reason for not just putting it turned the right way around on the pad?
TL;DR
The important thing is, initial climb is belly up arch and the inclination of the orbit is not always the same. So unless the orbiter wants to fly directly east, it has to rotate before arching.
Note: It only fits on the launch pad in one orientation
---------------------
During initial climb, the shuttle flies up on an arch in order to get into orbit and since orbit is rather very fast and not very high, the orbiter has (or had) to start the arch pretty much immediately after leaving the launch pad. During this arch trajectory ascend, the shuttle had to be belly up.
The inclination of the desired orbit is different each time, sometimes it wants to fly around equator (directly east), other times it wants to fly at an angle to the equator, more north or more south, depending on the mission. Since the orbiter has to be bolted to the launch pad in a particular orientation and the launch pad can't be rotated without rebuilding it, the shuttle has to be rotated to correct position mid-air, after it leaves launchpad, its cargo doors have to be facing the direction of the orbit, so that when it starts the arch, it's gonna be belly up.
I don't know all the reasons why it has to be belly up, but it probably mostly has to do with g-forces. The arch ascend produces some significant G-forces, so they align the space shuttle so that those G-forces are pushing astronauts down into their seats, instead of up. It's much easier for humans to deal with positive G forces, rather than negative or sideways ones. Think about it as an airplane. When airplane wants to turn, it will first rotate, then the pilot will pull the stick, so the g-forces are pushing down. That's the most comfortable way to turn aircraft. It's same with the shuttle, don't get confused that it's flying up, instead of sideways like a plane, it still just wants to do a turn. So the shuttle computer just rotates it and then pulls the virtual stick.
There might be other reasons why it's flying belly up that might have something to do with things like how the fuel splashes around in tanks, how gyros might complain about negative gees, or maybe astronauts just want to have better view of earth before leaving. But I don't know anything about those.
There are 2 reasons for belly up ascent:
1st: To utilize massive lift forces from wings to help with gravity turn (arching).
2nd: Gravity turn is pretty G intensive and both shuttle and crew tolerate positive Gs better.
Okay, thanks. I knew the gravity turn was performed belly up, I just didn't know why they didn't orient the shuttle more toward the direction it needed to be initially. Guess it makes sense they couldn't just stick it on there any which way. Guess KSP has spoiled me for ease of use.
Too bad they couldn't revert to VAB for the failures. I guess reality is set on hard difficulty. ;)
The crane which carried the Shuttle from the VAB onto the launchpad was designed to put the shuttle only in one position. It was easier to perform a roll than completely redesign the launchpad.
"Titanian atmosphere" - Would it not rather be the "Titanic Atmosphere"?
Who knows what the opinion of Titan's atmosphere is on this. For all we know Titan's atmosphere prefers to be referred to as 'Susan'.
Titanium?
That's kinda right since the Titanian atmosphere would be the atmosphere of Titania
Would you ever consider doing a NASSP series (the sim with the flight computer) or use one of the more detailed fictional spacecraft to show a trip to an outer planet?
If you want a more faithful simulator for the Space Shuttle, then you should take a look at Space Shuttle Mission Simulator. Maybe next year the new installment will eventually come out, after that the previous version had been updated for the last time back in 2010
In Space Shuttle Simulator only use the Space Shuttle, is complete, but in Orbiter 2010 you can download The Space Shuttle Fleet, And The Space Shuttle Ultra that can give more things like the Space Shuttle Simulator, and In orbiter ( all versions ) You can use more fictional and historical spacecraft( you can download a lot of great fictional and realistic historical spacecraft on orbit hangar or other websites ), and go to the, Iss, Mir ( and other space stations addons ), go to, moon ( and the historical bases in the moon, and fictional bases, and fictional space stations in moon ) and go to sun, mercury, venus, mars, jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune ( and if you have more special addons, you can go to Pluton and other solar systems like Kepler ;) i hope that this help you to understand more this simulator
I know what kind of game Orbiter is, I was talking about the space shuttle only, nothing else. And in that game you fly real missions, really happened, like deploying satellites, like Hubble, or docking and building the space station. Again, I know what Orbiter is about and what you can do with it, but for the actual Space Shuttle I think there's nothing better than that. And besides, if you read my comment above, you will see that I said "If you want a more faithful simulator for the Space Shuttle...", not " if you want a better sim for space exploration..."
1:32 -- "Space Geeks" -- Hey Scott! *Great pick for content*, an excellent simulator.
RE: The manuals from real NASA missions, there was a full Apollo mod for a previous Orbiter version which would be at least as good as an old-style NASA mock-up that allowed astronauts to play with the flight computer for specific things, as in on final approach for Moon landing. Orbiter is better than that in many ways, because of the 3D element. It was fun to play it with head tracking, while scooting about over the lunar surface.
Orbiter's other great feature is the non-realistic ships that are included, let alone the mods which get released. Frankly, the Delta Glider with a Scramjet engine - SSTO - followed by a leisurely 48-hour lunar transit, and I can be sitting in my private moonshed on the west side of Picard crater. The Shuttle-A (not the Space Shuttle) is a great challenge too, especially for leaving Earth, but really shines in Lunar gee, because it has secondary engines mounted port and starboard, and which can pitch forward, down, or back, three of the four directions for meaningful course correction!
2:23 -- Not meaning to cut you off, but hey Scott, I hope you don't forget to talk about the *pre-existing* atmospheric engine, which worked first, before he ever worried about terrain effects. There were open source alternative rendering engines being developed in parallel to this terrain effect, prior to this release, to help that happen I suspect.
The atmospherics in this game have always been great. Leaving Earth's atmosphere is easily noted by the outside air pressure gauges; similarly, max Q and Mach 1 are easily spotted if the ship has instrumentation.
The other thing is that, *unlike Kerbal Space Program*, this one calculates Lagrange points; so if you're really space geeky, putting something into a stable, very-long-term orbit is possible. It's not a multiplayer experience, though; it's not a "continuing universe" game experience either, to be honest. It is very much a "by the numbers mission" simulator where things could be made as realistic as "SYSTEM FAILURE!"
Next Phase: *Bring Back the Dyna-Soar!*
3:55 -- "Never stop learning!..." - then you point out this is incorrectly being modelled? That's *technically* true since there's no explicit control being effected upon the ISS to (A) Station-keep, and (B) Orient. Both these functions require humans, IRL. Otherwise, the ISS is calculated by known position, as extrapolated by nothing other than it's mass and *how much the Sun perturbs it*.
Do solar sails work in KSP, Scott?
Also, I think (but I don't know for sure, Scott) the new changes to the flight computer for Atlantis are system-wide, as well, in the sense that there's a scripting language which would allow for any user to code their own ISS flight computer, *if they're geek enough.*
P.S. If I were a malicious sort, I could see a way of making a bonus look like a drawback.
7:03 -- "Oh." -- Yeah, Scott, the HUD is limited and simplistic, but it *DID* have a landing gear indicator, which is three little blocks which will display on the middle of the screen. ; ) [edit: I checked myself here -- the Space Shuttle, maybe not! The DG - pretty sure. Shuttle-A...? For Sure.]
So, If I go back in the video.... I can also read the vertical velocity, not only the forward velocity, so even if you had the landing gear indicator showing (I can't see it) you may have been fast enough to collapse them. Not that I'm saying they didn't fail.
If you're not trying for outrage - what are you trying to do? And if it isn't the first, you wonder why you were ever hacked?
P.S. If you had been using a hand-written checklist on your lap, that had a clear time to drop gear command on it, that you then echoed as you hit the key to drop gear... *then* I might have believed you.
9:51 - "I Can't See My Descent Speed!" -- You have an open MFD on the righthand display. That Has Your Descent Speed, forward and down. You can use your *Instruments* to fly.
Also think that Orbiter has options for changing the size of things like the MFDs, but YMMV, for sure.
10:28 -- Argh! Well done!! Scott, I'm shutting up now, I swear. :D
You are Like the best Scott!
The velocity vector versus your attitude laterally is called sideslip I think
It's difficult to fly the real stuff, but that's why he created the Delta-glider, which is easy to control
Orbiter is sooo much fun! Especially with the Delta Glider IV (V? VI? I forgot which)
I love the XR-2 Ravenstar from the Altea Aerospace Team.
And of course the Arrow Freighter.
Are you gonna make a series on this, Scott.
The Orbiter 2016 Is Here,
I play orbiter on my yt channel if ypu want to see tutorials
@@IvanDordevicDonjiKraj93Sarbane Why, *Speaking Cybertronian About Tutorials Of Orbiter 2016*
4:12 not true, the ISS rotates and adjusts for incoming and outgoing crafts. crafts dont come from below during orbit but from the sides. Now depending on which dock they are supposed to grapple on to.
Scott, do you know the Buran Screensaver?
Scott there is a re-entry simulation with the orbiter shuttle in x-plane10/9. x-plane 10 has pretty much the best aerophysichs available commercially so maybe you could try that.
Holy f... Didn't knew they finally updated Orbiter, 'gonna fly the shit out of this.
when a dude that has been playing orbiter for a year. SCREAMING AT THE SCREEN
Wonder how many pages is in IRL "space shuttle" manual? In Finland came F/A-18C´s "owners handbook", when it was bought in 95. It is more like library, with those moving thriller movie bookshelfs.
I remember orbiter. I used to play it back in '09.
when I installed the Orbiter 2016 msi and I opened the orbiter2016.exe file, the screen turned black and then after a couple of seconds it all came back. Should I be worried since this happened?
Best to go and download the DX9 plugin and use that instead.
d3d9client.codeplex.com/
Addon MFDs will really save your day FYI. Also try mod planes, they have some nice cool features but you need to pay attention to the crew's safety (since they're not Kerbals)
What are MFD's? I'm familiar with MOD's but MFD's are new to me.
Space nerds. We love our authenticity.
Installed orbiter fine, but when I launch it the game is stuck at the loading screen. (I waited about 30 minutes for it to load.) Anyone have any advice?
It has a hard time working with modern graphics cards - get this mod d3d9client.codeplex.com/
Scott Manley Hey Scott, any way to contact you privately here on TH-cam? I'm retired NASA and wanted to give you two pointers on your landings.
That air traffic on Titan is serious. Gotta be sure you're clear to land, man!
For docking the ISS actually turns itself like in the game. For Soyus at least it's like that, and probably for Shuttles too. Don't know exactly why..
Soyuz*
Hey Scott, as you said that the space station always has the US module oriented prograde I was asking myself: Do they always have to apply thrust to keep the orientation right? This seems like a waste of fuel to me.
They use control moment gyros for attitude control.
Thanks for your answer! That makes sense!
Haven't played Orbiter since Orbiter 2010, it's so much better now, however i'm curious how he got the water to have the ripple effect, I got 2016 and did all the graphics upgrades, it looks basically the same as in the video but the water doesn't look as good.
Hey Scott, if you're willing to play Orbiter, you should definitely watch David Courtney's channel. It's a preety interesting tutorial series that actually made me go somewhere in Orbiter.
Without Davids Tutorials i would have been completely lost.
lol, the mods are awesome, they even provide audio and graphics :-P
HAHAHA pretty much, you should think of Orbiter as a community project, one enters with the base engine and people develop around it
+Danilo “Dantiger” Oliveira So free Kerbal Space Program?
+legoclone09 . Kerbal Space Program allow you to design & play with your own spacecraft, in Orbiter 2016 you can't do this.
xponen Yeah, I was comparing it to how Scott said Orbiter was like a platform, Kerbal is quite like a platfork for mods.
well i wouldn't mind if its patchwork as long as its not too difficult to install and run. I tried it once, it was not so stable :/
KSP with all the realism mods is very unstable too. so I don't know any cool realistic space simulator. I started programming my own, but I only had a (in some ways better) editor I got a job and stopped doing that
Affix the Total Velocity Vector/Flight Path Marker on end of the runway where you intend to land.
Scott, you were looking for the word "perigee". I know I spelled that wrong but I am too lazy to google it
Isaac L-L Perigee is the term for the closest point of an orbit around Earth. For the sun it's call "perihelion". Each body has its own term. Jupiter is probably "perijovian".
@@CarFreeSegnitz It's apoapsis but the opposite?
@@CarFreeSegnitz It's apoapsis but the opposite?
They've landed a modified Shuttle and two Apollos on Titan in Stephen Baxter's novel "Titan".
I wonder if the shuttle orbiter would have been able to maintain powered flight on Titan using its OMS engines?
7:06 before landing checklist complete, baby :D
Used to fly in a flight sim community where we had air traffic controllers, had to use preflight checklists to start the okane, our own call signs, logos, and everything else you can imagine. Fun times. But not THAT fun. Now I play KSP.
they need to create a high def version of orbiter.
I managed to land on Mun at a velocity of 600 m/s. One of 3 brave Kerbals survived. God I suck at such games, but I love them anyways.
i really love the water landing..
If I remember correctly, the game is also noteworthy in that it has a much higher physical time acceleration to KSP. So you can physical-time-warp up to... how high can it go?
Awesome, looks like KSP ! which is better ?
Scott, you should check out SSU, it already has a branch for Orbiter 2016
Lands shuttle on Titan. Reminds me of Steven Baxter’s book of the same name.
+Scott Manley, have you played Freespace 1 and 2? They are great games that I grew up with. and I 've tried some recent mods which make them look like games from ~ 2007-10 ... if you haven't played them I think you would like them, and now with these mods they look fantastic (2560x1440 and recent)
I assume the whole presentation of Titan in this game has improved by now?
Hailprobe
Hail Probe!
:hailprobe:
:hailprobe:
:hailprobe:
:hailprobe: