Talk:Orbiter (sim)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of Low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:

This page has been redirected to Orbiter (sim) as it directly implies that Orbiter is a game - which in fact is not true (as stated by the author)

Contents

[edit] Revert to fix c&p move

I'm going to revert this temporarily to fix the c&p move. --Aqua 05:21, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

  • Move complete. --Aqua 19:16, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

I think these are the ones responsible. They've got a contest on to see who can spam the most. http://www.freeibforums.com/forums/index.php?mforum=Wraithklan&showtopic=143

-Berle (not registered)

I believe this page should stay locked until requested to be unlocked by Martin. The vandles that struck are serial web site defacers, and they will come back in the future to make more attempts.

-BigJimW

I beg to differ. This would mean that probably no one would work on it anymore. Would we be satisfied with it? I do not think so. In my opinion it should be locked for some time. Then we should restart developing it again.

0.39 19:31, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

There has been abuse of the talk page today. The offending person has been blocked.

-MatW, 23rd September 2005 (UTC)

If this sort of vandalism continues, we may want to consider notifying Comcast that one of their subscribers was engaging in behavior contrary to his/her terms of use. -Loren 23:16, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] External links

Should the External Links be split into a large collection of links to addon sites + a small collection of other links (official web site, forum, irc, orbiterwiki)? Does anyone like the idea? --Romanski 10:27, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

  • I like the idea of subheadings; the external links section is too big right now. -- Ruaraidh-dobson 11:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sound

Please let people know this beautiful sim needs the seprate sound plugin to have any audio at all. It is kind of a hidden fact on the wiki and the main orbiter page.

Done. :) The Singing Badger 16:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Just to remark... its also existing in the OrbiterWiki FAQ since a long time.[1] --62.176.239.161 12:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to move to Orbiter (sim)

Orbier has been moved to Orbiter (Computer Game). I don't recall any discussion regarding this, I would have though it to be a simulation rather than a game. Espcially considering the quote at the top of the page

This page has been redirected to Orbiter (sim) as it directly implies that Orbiter is a game -
which in fact is not true (as stated by the author)

What do other people think> --Rehnn83 13:35, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

It definitely feels more like a sim than a game to me. --pile0nadestalk | contribs 04:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
It is not a game, it's an open-ended simulator. The Singing Badger 11:40, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Judging by the comments on here I've decided to move the article back to Orbiter (sim) --Rehnn83 16:47, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notes

This article is maintained by the Orbiter community besides millions of users who are using Wikipedia. --Bigtop 00:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow, based on a whole one comment. Why not call it a 'computer program' or something instead? As there are a strong group for both sim and game. I'd go with the latter.

[edit] New patch released

A new patch has been released - try to improve the page! Bigtop 23:50, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] OrbiterWiki & linkspam

I removed OrbiterWiki as per WP:EL's links to avoid: Links to open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors as, whilst I'm a great believer in it, it doesn't have a substantial number of editors.

It's been re-inserted, so someone else obviously like it too, but if it does get removed again, this is why.

Since there are no other entries in the external links section bar the homepage, I think it's probably reasonable.

There are too many links in the addons section, though, so I'm going to prune those to sites that offer a notable and original set of downloads.

Cheers. --BadWolf42 17:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


I agree the number of external links should be cutdown. Of the Links currently present - these are my thoughts.
External Links
Orbiter official website
OrbiterWiki
The Official website IMHO is a must, as for the orbiter wiki - I'm undecided - there are pros and cons. I think it's best left to a community decision.
Addon collections
Orbit Hangar Mods - an Orbiter addon repository
Orbiter Sound Addon
Avsim - large Orbiter addon libraries
Moonport Orbiter site
Many open source addons from the CCCP Team
Meadville Space Center
Astronomy Portal to the Heavens, Deep Sky and Universe
Orbiter Community Links
Project Apollo for Orbiter
Russian page and forum about Orbiter
Virtual United States Space Program (VUSSP) - A virtual space agency that uses Orbiter
Package Orbiter + full addons
Fly Away - Orbiter and simulation news
Go Play In Space, introductory tutorial manual for Orbiter
Virtual Spaceflight - Links, Tutorials, Add-ons & Reviews
CVE-lite progammer's API extension.
There is a case for having no download sites at all. (As they contribute nothing to the article itself). However some could be justified. IMHO - general download sites e.g. Avsim, Orbit Hangar etc... add nothing and they can easily be found from the main Orbiter site or Orbiter Comunity Links. Specific download, such as Project Apollo have merit. One idea which has occured to me is to include them as references rather than external links.(in the section for Orbiter Addons) (They would need to be referenced properly rather than as they are now. Rehnn83, (talk) -- 19:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I can see the point about not linking to external wiki sites, but the Orbiter wiki is possibly the best place to get an idea of what addons are available for Orbiter short of searching through all the different download sites, forums and sourceforge pages. So I'd say it's probably worth including: it has been around for some time and does seem to be policed against spammers and vandals. Mark Grant 22:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Afraid I couldn't disagree more with Rehnn's summary. Orbithangar and AVSim are probably the most useful links since they offer a mulititude of downloads from a dedicated centralised source.
Orbiter Links Compendium, or similar, need not apply.
--BadWolf42 04:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I would say, remove all external links to add-on repositories, especially general like AvSim, and erase all community specific links (virtual space agencies). To be fair, the OrbiterWiki link would also need to be removed according to the rules, though as we have reached stability by brute force and some sort of official relevance to the topic of the article, but lack active editors, which also threatens our official status for Orbiter. Maybe OrbiterWiki can return as external link later, when we reached more activity again. The question for each link should be "What relevance has this link to Orbiter. Is each two-person space agency important to know?"
I have no problem with these agency links in OrbiterWiki, the same applies to add-on links (add-ons can have their own articles in OrbiterWiki, the same also applies to add-on repositories). Virtual Space agencies could even have their own articles in OrbiterWiki, so its sure a better place for them. But for this article, it would only be nice to mention that they exist and that there are many of them. Also that there is a VERY active community behind Orbiter.
Urwumpe

[edit] Dr. Schweiger Section Move

I moved the page of Dr. Schweiger and merged it with the orbiter section. It combines the creator and his creation, which is really all he is known for. There really isn't anything else on him, so I don't know why people were so insistant on giving him his own page with 2 sentences; its out of place and awkward. After putting it in this section, I really think it fits better and gives it more quality as an encyclopedia.

--User:Deltaforce5000 02:23, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Pictures

The ones in the article are old and therefor don't show the current state. Especially the first few. At least they use outdated textures. There should be new ones with the best current graphics. Also, MIR has bad textures anyway, so ISS should be used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.142.242.149 (talk) 17:03, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Full game title

I noticed that lots of websites list the game's title as "Orbiter Space Flight Simulator" (link). Is this the game's full title? SharkD (talk) 21:46, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

The site calls the program "Orbiter", with "Space Flight Simulator" being more of a description of what it is. Think outside the box 13:08, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Orbiter-ariane5.jpg

Image:Orbiter-ariane5.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:X29overEdwards in Orbiter.jpg

Image:X29overEdwards in Orbiter.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:28, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Shuttle lift-off in Orbiter.jpg

Image:Shuttle lift-off in Orbiter.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 08:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:X29overEdwards in Orbiter.jpg

Image:X29overEdwards in Orbiter.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Shuttle lift-off in Orbiter.jpg

Image:Shuttle lift-off in Orbiter.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Serenity add on

In the Firefly "Jumbo" Transport 2008 Edition add on, how do I get Serenity's main propulsion ("firefly drive") to work? I can only get the jets going, far too slow for interplanetary travel, useless you increase the time skip Think outside the box 13:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Mercury1-large.jpg

Image:Mercury1-large.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Its done. Think outside the box 14:57, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Delta Glider MKIV

I thought that the Delta Glider mark iv was an add-on, becuase i downloaded it, adn it allowed me to go ummu eva or something, and evry control is usable, it comes that yellow black colour, nbut can be changed in the scenaroi editor, but i thought that just a standard DG came with it. --Jameogle (talk) 00:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, The Delta Glider IV is the downloadable one by Dan Steph's website, but Orbiter comes with a stock Delta Glider that is the basic one. I'm not quite sure but it's possible that the "stock" glider might be the 4th version, or Mk.4 but I'm not sure. If not, we should remove the "Mk.4" part to avoid confusion. I'm looking around, but so far haven't seen anything referring to the stock one as the Mk.4 Cody-7 (talk) 23:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

The current version of the STOCK DG, by Dr. Schwieger, is the MK 4. The DeltaGliderIV is an addon created by Dan Steph. --Alx xlA (talk) 02:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up for us, Alx xlA. Cody-7 (talk) 02:18, 14 June 2008 (UTC)