Discussion Atmospheric Expansion Pack for Orbiter

[Stripe]

I don't see why anyone should be upset about this. If you don't like it - don't use it. On the other hand, a lot of my Orbiter sessions never leave LEO, rarely past the moon, and I tend to use glider type vessels. This would be a nice option for me, especially since it would be one unified add-on, rather than several add-ons which may not always play nice with each other.

If you want to do this, don't let anyone discourage you. It's your time and effort so you can spend it on whatever pleases you. Those that like the idea will use it. Those that don't like it will gripe and complain, but it's not like you are attempting to force this upon them so who cares?

I seem to remember when Doug first announce the XR-1 there were a few nay-sayers telling him it was a waste of time since we already had the DGIV. Look how well that turned out. Some people are just resistant to new concepts for familiar issues, and will stick to the first solution no matter what.

Oh I fully agree. He is fully entitled to spend his time how he chooses, and that if you don't like a plug in don't use it etc.
My point was that I feel trying to restrict something by cutting a lot of the things out that make orbiter what it is, to try to achieve another goal just sounded fraught with hurdles and unforeseen programming pitfalls, especially when there probably is something already closer to what you're perhaps imagining.
Though having said all that, I've remember a lot of 'add ons' for Quake back in the day, some of those add ons used the Quake engine to produce things that were very different. One I remember, used to Quake engine to produce a platform game.

 

[Zatnikitelman]

This sounds like a great project I look forward to seeing the released result (there's never an "end" is there?). The Atmospheric aspect or Orbiter is one of the few core ares I can readily see could use enhancement.

 

[T.Neo]

This sounds like a great project I look forward to seeing the released result

Don't hold your breath. This project has yet to get past the "hey guys, I have a cool idea" stage.

 

[-Pv-]

Part of the reward of a successful reentry can be and enhanced experience of a believable atmosphere and scenery near the landing which provides more detail than just shoreline and green or blue.

Does the whole world have to be building level detail? For me, an enhancement would be volumetric clouds, real time winds (if desired) and low rez ground detail enough to recognize populated areas, roads, rivers/lakes with high rez dedicated to select landing bases.
Many have been working toward this effect for years. Like some other large-scale projects to come out recently. A dedicated team of tile makers might move toward one part of this goal. It has taken a team several years to create tiles for the middle east in the game Falcon4. They are not done yet and this is using repetition tiles. It can be done. The scope of some of the project portions are huge. Count the cost, go in with eyes open and blast ahead.

 

[2552]

-Solar system with all bodies removed except Earth, Moon and Sun.
-Alternatively, Solar system with all moons other then Earth’s Moon removed, non visible planets (Uranus, Neptune) removed, and visible planets given only low-res textures.

I guess the purpose of removing planets is performance? That shouldn't be necessary in the next version of Orbiter, it has load-on-demand code that only loads the planet textures when you need them. I like the idea of a more realistic atmosphere simulation, but removing planets seems a bit weird for something that's an Expansion pack.

 

[T.Neo]

Update:
Tried two addons today, Weather MFD by Laserpithium and Nebo by Artlav.

Weather MFD was good, especially the rain effects, although nothing could be seen from the outside of the vessel. And the fact that it was present as an MFD in the cockpit was a bit of a letdown in concerns of immersion.

Nebo murdered my framerates, my fault, because my graphics card isn't up to the task. And the clouds looked like dust bunnies*, and were lit up at night.

*I'm feeling a texture update could fix this.

 

[SlyCoopersButt]

Weather MFD was pretty good, But pretty unstable at least for me. And I'd like to have more than just the focus vessel affected by wind. That would make the atmosphere feel alive. Clouds I think could be done flightgear style. Like simple flat layers where you get fog in between for example. Using particles is a rather huge framerate hit for many computers.

Google's server will sometimes(!) block your IP for 1 day when it detects it's not the Google Earth application requesting the data.

Hate to stray from the topic here, But it's worth noting that if you have a dynamic IP you can simply unplug your DSL from the power for a few minutes and then plug it back in and you should get a new address. The legality in tiles you point out is an interesting subject and ought to have a topic of it's own.

 

[doggie015]

​

-Solar system with all bodies removed except Earth, Moon and Sun.

_______________________________________________________________________

So, anyone interested?

this one can be solved simply by creating another solar system for Orbiter. There are many addons that already do this

 

[spaceranger]

I think that this is a fascinating and worthwhile endeavour. I believe you'll run into a number of limitations with the current DX7 code base regarding weather/atmo simulation and hi-res collision-aware topography.

Have you checked into the next Orbiter beta that separates the logic and graphics code, and the OVP project? If I were taking up this glove myself right now, I'd be aiming for the next platform rather than tinkering with the current one. YMMV!

Neat idea though, cheers.:speakcool:

 

[Balladeer]

Update:
Tried two addons today, Weather MFD by Laserpithium and Nebo by Artlav.

Weather MFD was good, especially the rain effects, although nothing could be seen from the outside of the vessel. And the fact that it was present as an MFD in the cockpit was a bit of a letdown in concerns of immersion.

Nebo murdered my framerates, my fault, because my graphics card isn't up to the task. And the clouds looked like dust bunnies*, and were lit up at night.

*I'm feeling a texture update could fix this.

This was the result of a happy accident with regards to nebo's cloud addon. I believe I installed mwog's new exhaust addon which made nebo's clouds fluff out a bit.

 

[wolfast]

if you'd like such a thing?? But Orbiter is not a Great Simulation od in Atmos flight... I have X-plane for that. I have Orbiter for Space flight. Good luck with it... I just dont see the point??

 

[Moonwalker]

But Orbiter is not a Great Simulation od in Atmos flight... I have X-plane for that. I have Orbiter for Space flight´.

Yep. Almost the same here (actually I use Orbiter only for Apollo; Space Shuttle Mission 2007 for STS).

I doubt that atmospheric flight within Orbiter, especially sky and terrain graphics, would ever become what MSFS and X-Plane offer (less than ever FSX). I even doubt that Orbiter 2009 is going to run in Windows 7 (MS FS9 runs perfectly in Windows 7, which beside DX11 makes me thinking about Windows 7...).

 

[Usquanigo]

if you'd like such a thing?? But Orbiter is not a Great Simulation od in Atmos flight... I have X-plane for that. I have Orbiter for Space flight. Good luck with it... I just dont see the point??

Really? Clearly, you aren't alone in that, but... I really can't see why you guys don't see the point.

I don't agree with pulling other planets out at all (rather, I want to ADD kuiper belt objects, asteroid belt objects, minor moons, etc - if they are missing currently).

HOWEVER..... I do like flying amospheric planes, as well as space craft. But here's the thing - the ability to have it all in one, and transition.

Someone mentioned this already, but re-entry and "splashdown" are part of space travel. If you want to fire up your magic DG and fly out to Uranus with your warp drive MFD, great, but that's not a space sim. You might as well use Starry Night for that (planetarium software).

I want to see believable 3D terrain. I want to be able to collide with everything. I want to land at varying altitudes. Weather is always a very tough thing for sims with other focuses, but that would also add to it, as would moving clouds, liquid water, etc.

I want to be able to fly the XL-70 winged launcher in a believable world, and launch a space plane or cargo module from it, into orbit with realistic upper atmosphere and gravitational modeling and use things like the dragonfly to connect modules into a space station or lunar trans-port vessel. And so on.

We know the most about Earth. And if you are using this as a simulation (ie, grounded in reality of timeline and technology, not just math and physics), then you will be spending most of your time around Earth, the Moon, maybe Mars, and some space stations. So why not have the prettiest, most habitable planet that we also happen to know the most about, HIGHLY detailed in every way? How could that possibly NOT add immense value to the sim?

Really, T.Neo's idea is not only a great one, but an obvious one to me.

It's really no different than seeking higher frame rates and higher resolution (and use of FSAA and so on).

It's a shame to see people trashing the idea. It's kinda like dissing the notion of adding Earth shine really.

Hope this get's somewhere T. I'd love to help but I'm not a coder, so all I can do is beta test.

 

[Hielor]

I even doubt that Orbiter 2009 is going to run in Windows 7 (MS FS9 runs perfectly in Windows 7, which beside DX11 makes me thinking about Windows 7...).

Orbiter, both 2006 and 2009, run just fine for me in Windows 7. There's something wrong with your specific setup, if it doesn't run.

---------- Post added at 01:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:19 PM ----------

if you'd like such a thing?? But Orbiter is not a Great Simulation od in Atmos flight... I have X-plane for that. I have Orbiter for Space flight. Good luck with it... I just dont see the point??

As mentioned already, it's about making the whole experience in one package. Neither X-Plane nor its superior, FSX, have an even remotely realistic presence in space.

 

[Jake]

I'm using Windows 7 since the earliest betas, Orbiter runs just fine (well, aside from some horrible crashes, that I experienced on XP anyway...).

Regarding T's idea, I too think it's great. The perfect flight simulator would have FSX-level or better kind of graphics and physics for atmospheric flight, AND Orbiter's space flight mechanics. Which , mind you, aren't perfect, but they are still the best around in sims. The entire thing in one single game.

 

[unnamedkid]

where can i download it?

 

[lennartsmit]

It's just a concept. Nothing has been produced yet, I thought.

 

[UFO64]

I would love to see orbiters in atmo-flight improved. Its kind of sad when the moment you are back inside the atmosphere realism goes out the window. Its like owning a sports car for the high way, but then jumping on a tonka toy truck to get you the last mile home every time!

I question how well we can emulate the real life problems that arise because of these weather effects without orbiters core really supporting it. I haven't dabbed into add on creation much, so I don't know what programmers have access to. The dream situation would be having weather generated by the sim, and a cloud map made to match it on the fly. Forcing an incoming ship to choose their landing site based not only on trajectory, but on local weather would be a neat twist to have to deal with.

I do agree with a lot of the feedback given so far, although I am surprised at how haphazardly it has been dispensed. I would love to see this idea expand onto orbiter. I don't see how removing the rest of the solar system helps things out. Users who want to fly in atmo a lot, are free to do so. From what I understand, the rest of the solar system is based off a very simple to process model at that point. The other planets aren't really a huge resource hog from what i understand.

 

[Shadow Addict]

I think it's a good idea as well. What has always been so great about Orbiter is that you can do a huge variety of wildly different things with it. You can simulate realistic, historical flights; you can build space stations; you can fly sci-fi spaceships; you can slingshot around the solar system; you can do practically whatever you want. Adding realistic atmospheric flight would just be one more thing Orbiter could do.

Removing any of the planets, however, should not be a feature. I strongly support Orbiter at least maintaining all of its original functions.

 

[Flightoffancy]

This sounds alot like genetically engineering a duck to warble like a turkey when we already have turkeys.

I like ducks just the way they are. If I want to fly a Turkey, I play FSX.