Jump to content

A New Simulator (May edition)


Mathijs Kok
 Share

Recommended Posts

Mathijs Kok.

Dear friend... well I will keep as simple as I can, first of all there are two types of flight sim fanatics, hard core computer genius and real pilots....I will make my suggestion from the point of view of the second group (real pilot):

1. Real aircraft (systems, handling and so on)

2. Real landscape or terrain (want to fly in my days off over my house).

3. Real ATC (I know is difficult but maybe it can be done as module per region)

4. Weather, well here I just got one that bugs me, how the wind interact with the aircraft is not realistic at all either in X-plane or FSX.

That’s it.....

Thank you :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry I forget one small detail....

I am tired of the government telling me how my entertainment needs to be, I WANT TO SEE THE AIRCRAFT EXPLODE, CRASH, AND GET DAMAGE..., REMENBER I SAID REAL..... THANK YOU AGAIN!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's been said and will continue to be said; this is exciting and very interesting. I hope that Aerosoft (and others concerned) can make this a viable proposition in all respects and wish them the very best with this potential endeavour.

The concept of a base package upon which users can add is attractive although in some respects is what we have with FSX. Clearly a FS appeals at different levels of immersion for different users so providing a platform package which would give the casual simmer the ability to hack around carelessly with a few aircraft could work. In many respects it would not need to be master of all things - the number of aircraft, the weather, ATC etc could all be basic offerings albeit the proviso is that the standard would need to raise the bar in terms of visual and performance quality from FSX. However, the dynamics would not need to be so detailed, eg a very simplistic weather model. It would then be the user's choice to extend the immersion level with those add-ons they felt appropriate to their specific requirements.

The method of adding on would need to be user friendly and based from within the master package -ie, no need to mess around with files and .cfg's where paints are added.

I suspect this approach would be appropriate in order to appeal to such a huge range of flying desires, from the tubeliner pilot to the chopper flyer to the military buff - and all the sub-sections thereunder! It also opens up an interesting concept for ongoing developer business. Again, in essence, this is what FSX tries to achieve but I cant help but wonder whether MS would have got away with a more simplistic base model having paid attention to the detail within a bit better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<b>Bridged taxiways/runways.&nbsp;&nbsp;</b> <span class="text_body">Leipzig/Halle </span> for FS2004 and FSX is the only scenery I am aware of that has modeled taxiways which pass above roadways. Yet, I once saw a forum post at another site where developers expressed that this is impossible to model. However Aerosoft has done so previously. <br>Other airports that would be enhanced with realistic 3D construction would be KPHX Phoenix, KATL Atlanta, KORD Chicago, KTPA, Tampa, KJFK New York, KIAH Houston, KDFW, Dallas, KMCO, Orlando, and Tokyo Narita and Haneda airports are just a few examples. I would even explore any scenery designer and or SDK that I could use to help design raised runways and or taxiways. <br><br><b>Improved communications and navigation for military. </b>Although there are many military aircraft addons for FS2004 and FSX, there is no genuine simulation of TACAN navigation or UHF radios in the cockpit. Another area of concern is to include ground controlled application (GCA-1) and or navigation<br>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What should be done completely differently than in FSX are Autogen forests or woods. It does not make sense at all to simulate seperate trees instead of green clusters for these areas. From the real air you only see them as an entitity. By the way this should save lots of computing power. Of course seperate trees make sense for airports or on the edge of fields, in cities and so on...but in forests they do not (you cannot land there anyway).

Adding more visual depth to water makes sense as well. Especially on the coastlines transparent water could cover a rising seabed.

What is most important for me is the question whether FSX sceneries will work with this new simulator. I have come a long way from FS4 to FSX and with the latest version I have eventually become tired of waiting for updated sceneries (I am still waiting for a decent version of Dusseldorf). A simulator that needs two or three years to mature (in terms of add-ons) might be prone to fall behind Microsoft's live concept.

I currently use Ultimate Traffic 2 which is an excellent traffic add-on. So please do not re-introduce a fantasy airline AI.

Just my two cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi !

I would like to have :

- a much more better/ realistic (european) vfr scenery with all streets, buildings, rivers, lakes, railroads....

- I suggest to use directly the existing/ further developed scenery products (German Airports ....) - by contracts with the producers

- better (european) ATC

- more helicopters (BO 105, EC 135, Bell UH,...)

- including of a fmc with sid, star, ils, navpoints ....

- including details like fsuipc gives to you

- realistic start up and cutoff system (startup and cut off - incl. exact sound and animation)

In three words : much more realistic !

Regs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a very good thing, as Aerosoft has been in business for a while and many devs have worked on either one of the Microsoft sims and they all at some point ran into the same strong and weak points. I really hope this will lead to a highly optimized, more realistic experience. You've got my money!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonderful Idea ...

Better Meshes with no airport elevation issues

Heli AI traffic

*Better Options * for ATC..Like Lost engine..Guages out..Mayday calls, return to airport, etc

Aircraft systems to me are not important.If this is put into each aircraft config, I would like to be able to switch them off for a more, just load and fly option.(not into learning all the technical aspects of each aircraft) I like to fly, not go back to school....LOL

A Sim that will fly for the masses, on typical machines, out of the box...

Onboard weather radar , and traffic radar too !

A weather engine that actually works real time and looks good ...

Your FSX Cat as default..... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what about being able to see all animations on the planes in multiplayer, I still can't understand why you can see certain things on GameSpy yet wings fold for example you can't see. My my enough things to improve, good luck Aerosoft! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the Idea someone made earlier of renting a scenery. I do not know if this has to be implemented in the Flight Simulator, maybe this would even be possible with todays flightsims.

Most of the Time I fly around germany and the rest of europe. There are some sceneries were I fly to on a regular basis and some that I fly to very rarely or maybe just once. Buying these sceneries does not really pay off, but if I could rent them for a day or two for about 1 or 2 €, that would also increase the number of possible destinations for me, as I would not buy a scenery that I won't use most of the time. Maybe this would also be worthwhile for the designers, if people who would normally not buy their sceneries now could rent them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Almost all my wished are said by other forum members.

That might be missing yet:

-The internal Nav Database of the sim should be able to be updated, perhaps together with Navigraph.

-A better internal flight planner, which uses up-to-date airways,SId and STARs.

-Better load manager for the planes

-Air-Towing and winch start for gliders, also with retractable engine like the Discus

-Better thermals and more realistic turbulences

-Realistic Thunderstorms

-Perhaps the possibility for 3-D-Visibility

-A small and easy scenery designer (like in former FS4), which uses the objects within the sim. So you can place some missing hangars etc. to some minor airports

I wish you all the best with your project!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just stumbled over this topic, great news! I wish you all luck, I´m sure together we can create something very exciting!

I always felt that audio on FSX was a bit weak, especially on airports. Normally planes taking off create such a loud and crumbling noise that I would like to have the new sim in 5.1 channel audio with much subwoofer usage on the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I feel that most of the stuff that makes flight simming more real is the hardware to it like TrackIR and such. And there are a lot of add-ons like the Flight Sim commander who makes it even more real, but where you need to have more than one screen because otherwise flying becomes still very hard.

So in this regard would it be great to have a flight sim that could like the FSX map have chart maps available to pop-up when in the cockpit just as you can maximise the FSX map feature, and the place of your aircraft marked in it. This would be a great help not only for just flight simming, but as well educational. This way you can keep your eyes also focused to where you are flying.

In FSX you are nothing with such maps in the default scenery as you mostly don't really know where you really are vis-à-vis a landmark place. So a sim should already if possible be sold with VFR scenery in place or seperately sold together for different regions and/or better that the FSX VFR scenery add-ons would be made compatible with the new sim whereas the customer can choose between an updated version or not.

Remember that many flight simmers already have invested an enormous amount of money on the FSX sim. Many will thus not take the step once again, and the more so in these economic troubled times!!! I can fairly state that the montly income of most simmers is about 2000 Euro I assume. And with that they need to feed also the family, buy stuff for their kids and wife/husband as well as birthdays and christmas gifts and such, or even a new car.

So I feel that it is best to take that in mind with a new sim in terms of full compatibility of at least the FSX scenery add-ons that are the most expensive ones. I think that it should count also for the aircrafts, but based on what I read from Matthijs do they seem to create more to the art and more real aircrafts visionally outside and inside, especially the cockpit.

Then again based on what I read seem all indications to go to a sim that makes flying the aircraft most important, meaning that you in real life as a pilot can't start hoovering somewhere outside above or around your aircraft. I don't know if many simmers would like that witnessing all the pics that people often do take during their flight. And with regard to the weather do we have superb FSX features like REX for instance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Real scenary like real world and not just random buildings placed anywere, maybe photo realistic texture at least.

A instead of the normal multiplayer for FSX where you have many sessions, just have like two sessions, one for people flying seriously using like ATC and the other one just for fun without ATC. This will let people fly how they wish to. And maybe an aircraft builder or something built in with it and things like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought of some more things. Ground vehicals and actual people walking round on the ground, the ability to have your pilot walk around the aircraft, when you walk around, to have visible passengers walking around the aircraft and sitting down, cabin crew and see passengers boarding, have things like FSPassengers has like putting an inflight movie on or music, and especially videos and stuff from your computer. Have passenger noieses and all that stuff, while being able to be in free mode, multiplayer, etc and as many airports just like flight sim at the moment, and last of all instead of using Fraps or something, you have a built in flight recorder both like the FS one at the moment and one so you can record to WMV, AVI, etc. You can use fraps and stuff but it would be handy if something suddenly happens. And TCAS so you can see air traffic around you. And being able to do emergency landings, say if your front gear doesn't work, you land on your main gear then the nose hits the ground and like sparks then you start to see fire engines approaching, passengers evacuating down the slides. Same with water landings, and you float around and stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet,

But support for SLI graphics.

And support for multi monitor and multi pc users.

Also,

perhaps have a base package, and then some add-ons.

I.E. Have the scenery (photoreal?), weather , landclass, mesh, airports, basic aircraft, autogen etc in the base package.

Then some "add-ons" like atc (so those who fly online won't get that), and AI traffic, atc sound sets for regions, semi-complex planes etc.

ALSO, please don't release a new version every 2 years. Make one version that will last 10-15 years and have an upgrade every 2 years that will cost a portion of the cost of the original product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know if this was mentioned already, but will include here anyway.

  1. x64 support for those who have x64 computers, but FSX installs in Program Files (x86)
  2. Dual-core and quad-core processor supports so less load on CPU 0 and higher framerate and quality
  3. If FSX detects an add-on scenery in Add-on Scenery or a file in the Scenery folder that was not in regular FSX install, then it would be better if stock FSX Scenery was disabled for the portion the add-on scenery covers, reducing load time and increasing framerate
  4. During starting load of FSX, it wouuld be better to show what was being loaded

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A splendid idea!

I would like to see a more open system approach (set aside revenue problems).

• There should be a simulation kernel with few limitations.

• The kernel must have well defined API’s for add-on manufacturers.

• The APIs should be technology independent to facilitate backwards compatibility and fewer problems when technology develops.

• It should be possible for anyone to package the kernel with any number of add-ons to create a complete FS-simulator. If Aerosoft is the kernel owner I would suggest that the creator of complete FS packages pays a fee to Aerosoft. In real life it will only be a few serious packages on the market (compare Linux distributions).

• In some way it has to be compatible with FS9 and FSX. This is a real tuff one. If it is not compatible on end user level it should offer some way to use old efforts on developer level.

• New features is nice but realistically, the first version must concentrate on creation of a maintainable product that can survive on calculated revenues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What any new sim really needs, IMHO, is an upgraded version of FSNavigator. That program was probably the best add-on utility ever created. With such features as "fly to", "moving map" and the abilility to see other aircraft in a multiplayer environment, it ran within the game and was undoubtably the most versatile add-on to grace the sim-world. It was an excellent tool for flight planning and worked perfectly as a real-time radar. Why MS never caught on to the need for such a tool instead of that useless map (which paused the game) is still a mystery to me, like so many other decisions that they made...lol

Anyone who ran FSNavigator in FS9 will no-doubt know exaclty what I'm talking about.

Good luck with this project...it has my support!

BR's,

mal998

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aerosoft is currently seriously investigating the development of a new simulator, directly aimed at replacing FSX.

Dear Mathijs

Good news ! Even FSX had may be some not finsihed parts, overall its a great improvement since FS3 !

The tools available to build models etc. are all over the places, just use them as MS did. Keep same format for aircrafts and sceneries, you may extend it and later on as well.

If sceneries could be more separated into smaller regions or regions can be "overwritten" as sceneries on layers, we do not have Netherlands (by the way very nice) windmills anymore in our alps !

To cockpitbuilder direct easy access to sim variables and data is most important. FSUIPC is a strong tool, what happens once his father stops working ?

So not going thru anything, just direct. Another topic are display-channels / widewiev. As more PC's will calculate their single views, as more/faster fps we will get on our screens.

So easy data sharing over the network will also lift you into professional aerias.

Show instruments which are built with efforts and resources on other screens over the network, today complicate to achieve.

Using FS since years and having developped many tools and packages, we are interested to assist.

With best regards

Peter Kruesi

www.737.ch

www.pcflight.ch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leave out ATC: it is so much regional-dependant, you just cannot get that right. Instead provide a framework where online-networks like VATSIM can easily plug in.

I don't really agree with that. There should be an ATC system somewhere in the sim, and that can handle SID's and STAR's, but it doesn't have to be regional dependant. Just make an ATC thing with the SID's and STAR's, but don't go make a VATSIM connection to the sim. What about 12-13 year old children? Do you think they can handle the live ATC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Mathijs

Here are a couple of benchmarks... If you could get your new simulator to provide

1. Scenery to the quality of the Orbx products and

2. Aircraft to the quality of A2A Accu-Sim or your very own Catalina and

3. Run it on todays mid range computer at a minimum of 40FPS...

I think you will be well on the way to producing a great thing...

I would suggest rather than omitting ATC, you could ensure there is adequate flexibility within the platform for third parties to create a more complex ATC interaction.

Also creating a persistent virtual world would be a great option for me at least.

Cheers and good luck with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it should be focussed on aviation, flying, not on warfare and weapons, which is more gamelike. The sharpness of groundtextures should be improved, no more blurries. A realistic 3d portrayal of the weather, maybe not download worldwide weather based on faulty ATIS etc., but smaller sections in more detail, with finally good overcast looks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi !

I would like to have :

- more helicopters (BO 105, EC 135, Bell UH,...)

Many helcopters will be added eventually later with high quality payware/freeware planes and helis.

It's better that Aerosoft focus on develop a fistful of ultra detailed planes with a very realistic flight model and avionics rather than making 50 planes with average FM such as FSX does. Maybe one bush plane, one airliner, one glider, one ultralight, one jet, one military plane (showing the combat abilities on their new flight smulator).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...