Kerbal Space Program versus Microsoft Flight Simulator

[MetricRocketeer]

Hi TRF colleagues,

Does anyone have insight into the relative merits of KSP versus MFS? I have used KSP, and found it to be amazingly scientific and educational. I only recently heard about MFS and I don't know anything about that program.

Do any of you nice people have thoughts about this?

Thank you.

Stanley

 

[Antares JS]

Hi TRF colleagues,

Does anyone have insight into the relative merits of KSP versus MFS? I have used KSP, and found it to be amazingly scientific and educational. I only recently heard about MFS and I don't know anything about that program.

Do any of you nice people have thoughts about this?

Thank you.

Stanley

Microsoft Flight Simulator doesn't do space, but is far more realistic for aircraft. Versions of MFS have been around for decades though and I am shocked you never heard of it... I've been playing it off and on since middle school.

 

[MetricRocketeer]

Hi @Antares JS and everyone else,

A moment after I sent out my post, I realized that I made an error in saying Microsoft Flight Simulator — with which I am quite familiar actually. I meant to write Microsoft Space Simulator.

So, I will restate my question correctly. I am asking about KSP versus MSS.

Thank you.

Stanley

 

[Antares JS]

Hi @Antares JS and everyone else,

A moment after I sent out my post, I realized that I made an error in saying Microsoft Flight Simulator — with which I am quite familiar actually. I meant to write Microsoft Space Simulator.

So, I will restate my question correctly. I am asking about KSP versus MSS.

Thank you.

Stanley

I had never heard of MSS and after a little bit of googling, I see why... Unless there is a really new version that google hasn't heard of, it looks like MSS is from 1994. So right off the bat you may or may not have issues getting it to run at all on newer hardware and OS's depending on how lucky you are... (at least, this is my experience trying to run really old games.)

It also appears that, like MFS, you don't build wacky craft like you do in KSP, it comes with a number of stock craft and maybe homemade add-ons exist.

 

[MetricRocketeer]

Hi @Antares JS,

Thank you for looking up Microsoft Space Simulator.

Well, I guess that, if the program is that old, how good could it be.

Apparently Kerbal Space Program is the state of the art when it comes to space simulation programs.

Stanley

 

[Antares JS]

Hi @Antares JS,

Thank you for looking up Microsoft Space Simulator.

Well, I guess that, if the program is that old, how good could it be.

Apparently Kerbal Space Program is the state of the art when it comes to space simulation programs.

Stanley

About that, Kerbal Space Program 2 is coming in February. It's going to start similar to the original KSP but will supposedly be updated over time to include colonization mechanics, interstellar flight, and multiplayer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerbal_Space_Program_2

 

[Scrapmaster87]

If you want a more modern and realistic spaceflight simulator, check out Orbiter: http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/index.html

Bonus: it's free!

I hope you like steep learning curves!

 

[waltr]

Wow, thanks for the Orbiter link.
I am a big fan of KSP since it uses real physics but not so much on the fictional world it uses.

 

[MetricRocketeer]

If you want a more modern and realistic spaceflight simulator, check out Orbiter: http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/index.html

Bonus: it's free!

I hope you like steep learning curves!

Hi @Scrapmaster87 and anyone else,

Then I ask this question to everyone. What are the relative merits of KSP versus Orbiter?

Thank you.

Stanley

 

[Antares JS]

Hi @Scrapmaster87 and anyone else,

Then I ask this question to everyone. What are the relative merits of KSP versus Orbiter?

Thank you.

Stanley

Kerbal Space Program is more accessible. While the physics are still mostly realistic, it does leave out some nitpicky special cases like Lagrange Points and is more game-like overall. There are also easy-to-use navigational aids in the base game that make getting where you want a lot easier and more intuitive in Kerbal.

Orbiter is ultra-realistic, and you can actually do orbits around Lagrange Points and similar special orbits, but the user interface is not as intuitive and the learning curve is much steeper. I remember having to add mods just to be able to navigate to the moon and back, but that was an older edition of Orbiter and things may have changed.

Edit: I did forget to mention and it is kind of important... Orbiter is free. IIRC, it was made by an Oxford physics professor with the intention of giving it away. Kerbal Space Program is not free and has two expansions to buy if you want all the content.

 

[Scrapmaster87]

Hi @Scrapmaster87 and anyone else,

Then I ask this question to everyone. What are the relative merits of KSP versus Orbiter?

Thank you.

Stanley

KSP will do a great job at teaching basic orbital mechanics and launch profiles.

Orbiter will show you how difficult orbital mechanics are in the real world. There is an extremely steep learning curve to using the built in navigation displays. I've done Lunar flights, but I think I missed Mars by an AU or two.

I taught myself orbital mechanics with Orbiter (long before KSP) and it was quite the eye-opening experience. KSP let's you be sloppy in your transfers and gives you the tools to easily fix things. With Orbiter, you may want to calculate your burns and transfer windows yourself outside of the simulator.

 

[ahmedcharles]

KSP has mods that do n-body simulations and improved aerodynamics. Look into RealismOverhaul (RO) and RealisticProgression1 (RP-1).

 

[n3tjm]

As an early supporter of KSP, I got the expansions for free