On Saturday 24 December 2005 22:00, Steve Knoblock wrote: > BTW this is what I think FG is all about. We discuss things here that > no flight sim has ever thought of doing AFAIK, like displaying wing > warping and flex in the visual model tied to the flight model. > Does MSFS even think of doing that?
Sorry, but this is already done in MSFS addon models but it's up to the authors to implement. And neither FG nor MSFS actually warp the airframe based on stress - it's just animations in both cases. > not some arcane garbage shoved in XML files as an > afterthought. All this lowers the barrier to experimentation with the > system. Ummm ... you obviously haven't taken a look at the some of the complex payware addon aircraft for MSFS such as the Level D Boeing 767, PMDG 737 series, PMDG Beech 1900C & 1900D, Flight1's PC-12 or some of the free ones like the Dash 8-300 (can't remember full name), etc. Most of them require a couple of hours of reading manuals just to get airborne. They have everything modeled from hydraulics to air con systems to full EFIS flight decks and fully functional FMC/FMS systems and it's not some "arcane garbage shoved in XML files", the majority of it is written in C. Maybe you should have a look at the MSFS API documentation first before you just assume that it's an arcane XML setup. Yes, we do have some innovative ideas but we're still way behind in features. - We don't have voice ATC at all let alone a realistic text based one that can vector you around the place - We have a half baked AI system (with the PAI addons you can have airlines from around the world flying real schedules in MSFS obeying ATC) - Our scenery and airports look dreadful in comparison (although our terrain mesh is of higher resolution) - We don't have a functional *graphical* GPS units like MSFS has out of the box (GNS430 and GNS530) - We don't have a single working FMS system - We don't have a flight planner - We don't have landing or taxi lights seriously limiting the ability to manouver around an airport at night. - Our 3D object autogen system doesn't even come close to the one in FS2004 - We don't have flight instructor scenarios where you can be taught hands on or hands off how to fly circuits, or VOR holds or shooting ILS approaches in IFR with flight instructor feedback the whole way. - We don't have a graphical system that automatically scales the graphical features to keep the framerates high during flight Oh and our scenery development apps suck in comparison to the ones available for MSFS - there are few people even in the FG circle than know how to use TerrorGear. I could make this list really long but I won't waste any more bytes. The areas that I think we do excel in are : - FDMs both in choice and in terms of fidility - Accurately modeled instrumentation with high refresh rates - Accessibility to code and simulator systems (our property system rocks!) If you can think of more please feel free to add them to the list. :-) Regards Paul ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
