[mikhael]

All the stuff in the subject line, and for free. Its called "Orbiter".

http://www.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/~martins/orbit/orbit.html

[Ulundel]

This is sweet. I've been searching for something like this. Thanks dude.

[diamondgeezer]

Er... http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,10274.0.html

[mikhael]

I must have missed that post when the subject came up.

[Stryke 9]

Odd. Did you miss all 50?

Already heard of it. Sent it to my computer-illiterate grandma for Christmas. Something tells me she hasn't used it, since she couldn't figure our how to unzip it while here and hasn't called me a billion times for techsup since she went home.

[diamondgeezer]

Your grandma play a lot of space sims, does she?

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Stryke 9
Odd. Did you miss all 50?

Missed the entire thread.

[kode]

I don't know, but aren't shuttles supposed to break if you crash them into the ground?

[Stryke 9]

I meant all 50 threads. This gets posted pretty regularly here.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Stryke 9
I meant all 50 threads. This gets posted pretty regularly here.

I guess I missed them all. This is the first time I had seen it, and that over at the LWG boards.

[Flaser]

Another post from Necro-thread Productions™:

This project is still very much alive.
This is their current page is still this:
http://www.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/~martins/orbit/orbit.html

Some pics:




With my last attempt (101 Spaceflight) to shed light on true spaceflight banished (but not forgotten) I think this is the closest thing I can recommend for a virtual hands-on experience.

BTW this page:
http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/basics/

Covers the cold hard facts some of us are so fond of.

[Setekh]

Wow, this is old... but cool. I didn't realise they were still developing that thing.

[Nuke]

i dont know, there was frontier, which has simi-realistic physics and realistic solar systems, re-entry and such. it didnt really have realistic rotational physics or a proper aerodynamics but gave you an idea about how interplanetary spaceflight would work.

[kasperl]

And here I am, first going 'yay, Mik's back' , and then 'uh, Stryke too?'. Then I started reading dates, and got disappointed.

[mikhael]

Holy crap. I don't even remember this thread. I started reading it and was like, "dude, old news!" and thengot to the bottom and wondered why Kasperl mentioned my name. Imagine my surprise when I scrolled back to the top to see who started it.

[aldo_14]

Hi mik.  Long time no see.

[Unknown Target]

How realistic is it's endo-atmospheric flight?

[FireCrack]

This program is awesome!!!

[Nuke]

its nice, could use some sound effects and a built in control mapper as well as support for more axes. with all those rcs thrusters and gimbal controls it should support more axes. you really cant complain about something thats free. i tried a lunar landing but i kinda underestimated the amount of time it would take to slow down for a soft landing. colision code kinda sucks too. they need a reset button or something. theres quite a bit of learning curve, the mfds kinda have of functions in them. none the less it proves the point about how difficult realistic space flight is.

[kasperl]

Originally posted by mikhael
Holy crap. I don't even remember this thread. I started reading it and was like, "dude, old news!" and thengot to the bottom and wondered why Kasperl mentioned my name. Imagine my surprise when I scrolled back to the top to see who started it.

Hey, nice to know you're still reading the forums a bit.