On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Vivian Meazz awrote: > Thanks for addressing the points that were hammered out over on the IRC > channel. I think the modified system could work. Just a few points remain: > > There is no penalty for including systems, such as an AP, where none existed > on the original.
There's not an explicit penalty. but I think Hal has addressed this in the notes for the System criteria: "Ignore systems not present on the aircraft IRL. If the real aircraft doesn't have a system (e.g. autopilot), the FG model shouldn't have either and if all systems in the real aircraft are modeled then it scores a 5 even if it is a very simple aircraft. " I'm not sure how much of a problem this is. If someone chooses not to disable the generic autopilot for a vintage aircraft, it will have no effect on pilots who choose to fly realistically (they simply won't use it). If the system is exposed in the cockpit, then it is covered by the rating for accuracy of cockpit - a KAP140 in the Sopwith Camel would obviously not be worth a 4 or 5 cockpit rating. I don't think it's unreasonable for vintage aircraft to have access to a radio, for example. A modern pilot flying a vintage aircraft would carry a hand-held. > The use of shaders etc. may or may not enhance the realism of the model and > in some cases could be used inappropriately. This is a subjective > assessment, and perhaps could be removed from the points system. > > Livery support is not necessarily an enhancement - it is not appropriate for > all models. We're talking here about the difference between a 4 or 5 External Model rating, where we're trying to differentiate between a good external model and one that is as realistic as possible. I think we should differentiate between them if possible, but I'm struggling to think up some objective criteria. Photo-realistic? model resolution of 5cm? Perhaps we end up providing subjective criteria, or some additional guidance in this case? > I'm not clear if you are awarding points for underwing stores and the like. Hadn't thought about that at all. I've added it to the criteria for a "4" rating. > We have additional features such as co-pilot/RIO over MP, Wingmen, Formation > Control, Tutorials, Aircraft Specific Help, Contrails, Vapour Trails, and > there are probably some I missed. Contrails & Vapour trails should probably be covered by the external model, I think. I could add them (along with tyre smoke) as criteria for a Model 5 rating? I don't have a good answer for the other items. Some are nice-to-haves that enrich the simulation experience but don't impact simulation of flight itself, but others (such as a co-pilot) are more important for multi-crew aircraft. > And finally - the points system could award a high status to a poor model - > there are no points awarded for the accuracy or the fidelity of the 3d > model. E.G there is at least one model with afterburners modelled where none > existed. I've updated the external model to include the world "Accurate" for ratings 3-5. Of course, we're trusting that aircraft developers are going to apply the rating criteria accurately to the best of their ability. > Oh and, finally finally - the model with the highest score might be so good > that the framerate means that it can only be used on high-end systems or > away from detailed airports. This limitation should be noted somewhere. I don't have a good answer to that. Does that become criteria for a "5" in External Model? I think this ends up back as something subjective. > Let's hope that this tool can help to bring some order out of the current > chaos. We can but try. Certainly this seems to have a bit more momentum behind it than previous attempts, based on the feedback here and on IRC. If enough people rate their aircraft and we can use it to provide a better download page for the upcoming release, it will succeed. -Stuart ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ vRanger cuts backup time in half-while increasing security. With the market-leading solution for virtual backup and recovery, you get blazing-fast, flexible, and affordable data protection. Download your free trial now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/quest-d2dcopy1 _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
