A new simulator (September/ October issue)

[Arista 64]

Almost impossible with a modern VC where the gauges are build into the model.

Instead of building all the gauges into one single, big, all-encompassing 3D model, why not model each instrument individually, as separate 3D models? The virtual cockpit model would then only have a blank, empty board in front of the seats, and a simple text or XML configuration file would specify which instrument models go where in the virtual cockpit model. That would retain full reusability and reconfigurability of the instruments, and moreover, you could even reuse other cockpit items, like seats, yokes or whatnot. If this approach hampers performance too much, some automated load-time (or even build-time) optimization (i.e. pre-baking the instrument models into the cockpit model) could get around the issue.

Judith

[Finn 873]

Instead of building all the gauges into one single, big, all-encompassing 3D model, why not model each instrument individually, as separate 3D models? The virtual cockpit model would then only have a blank, empty board in front of the seats, and a simple text or XML configuration file would specify which instrument models go where in the virtual cockpit model. That would retain full reusability and reconfigurability of the instruments, and moreover, you could even reuse other cockpit items, like seats, yokes or whatnot. If this approach hampers performance too much, some automated load-time (or even build-time) optimization (i.e. pre-baking the instrument models into the cockpit model) could get around the issue.

Judith

If things just where so simple, but they aren´t.

Making 3D gauges or even add them to the model requires skills beyond what most normal simmers have.

Adding 2D gauges to a sheet in a 3D VC is not much different than how it is done in a 2D panel.

But adding 3D gauges is very much different.

Some gauges though are better kept as 2D, like MFD's, GPS and other glascockpit items.

Having an alternative VC model for a favorite GPS, like it is done in the Realair Duke is an option.

Problem is just that develpers can´t foresee wich GPS alternative might be demanded by the endusers.

It might be a step backwards, but the benefits of real 3D gauges, considering overall framerate improvement, fluidness and graphical quality are too high.

Finn

[frkaipanika 9]

For the Aerosoft flight simulator it starts to look like September 27th will be one of the most important days. I hope to have a meeting the most important people involved and decide more or less to go or not to go. Keep in mind this is a massive project, in time, in money in loss of sleep.

We all hope that meeting is going well! Good luck!

[Rune_ENHD 9]

We all hope that meeting is going well! Good luck!

Yes, we Really do hope the meeting goes well!

We simmers deserve to have new alternative, a next-gen civil flightsim , now that MS is gone.. We are loyal followers in the FS-series..

There are a lot of war-sims but noting that looks like or feels like FS or Flight unlimited 3 I don't care about X-plane -sim

Soo please, pretty please with cherry on top, make a new sim Aerosoft???

[Arista 64]

2D instruments wich has a max update rate of 18 fps,.

Well, but that's just a weird design decision that Microsoft made a long time ago, not some God-given law. Look at X-Plane - they use the same 2D approach, and their gauges are smooth as silk.

Making 3D gauges or even add them to the model requires skills beyond what most normal simmers have.

Making 2D gauges is not that easy, either. You need some very specific skills, too, like programming (be it XML or C). But I didn't really talk about creating gauges, I was more talking about arranging them on the panel. While creating instruments can be arbitrarily complex and difficult, in my opinion, using those instruments to create or modify a panel should be as easy as possible. Because that's what Joe Average Simmer wants to do. Just like in the real world: pilots don't create instruments, that's much to complicated. But pilots are known to modify their panels, often beyond recognition, by adding new, ready-made gauges and re-arranging existing ones.

Adding 2D gauges to a sheet in a 3D VC is not much different than how it is done in a 2D panel.

But adding 3D gauges is very much different.

But it doesn't have to be, and it shouldn't. That's exactly my point. If 3D gauges were separate from the virtual cockpit model, just like 2D gauges and 2D panels are separate entities, adding and arranging 3D gauges on a 3D panel could be just as easy as it is now in the 2D world - just edit a simple text file. I mean, scenery objects and the terrain aren't baked into the same 3D model, either. Again, look at X-Plane - they allow you to use exactly that approach (although it's not the standard way).

Some gauges though are better kept as 2D, like MFD's, GPS and other glascockpit items.

Good point. And there should be an easy way to create simple - well, let's call it screen pages - in 2D, using some mark-up approach similar to FSX's XML gauges (but without the RPN scripting language, please). I don't even want to think about creating a PFD as a 3D model. Of course, you also need some way to draw gauges programmatically (moving maps, for example). Both approaches could draw to a texture, which can then be used in the 3D model of the actual gauge.

Judith

[avrolino 0]

Instead of building all the gauges into one single, big, all-encompassing 3D model, why not model each instrument individually, as separate 3D models? The virtual cockpit model would then only have a blank, empty board in front of the seats, and a simple text or XML configuration file would specify which instrument models go where in the virtual cockpit model. That would retain full reusability and reconfigurability of the instruments, and moreover, you could even reuse other cockpit items, like seats, yokes or whatnot. If this approach hampers performance too much, some automated load-time (or even build-time) optimization (i.e. pre-baking the instrument models into the cockpit model) could get around the issue.

Judith

Thats is precisely the approach that i would recomment to Aerosoft. They may however reply that this approach has some drowbacks , but i think this is the case if you structure the sim like in MFS. We are examining and discussing ways in this forum to create a simulator that will be better than MFS . If there is a way to be done better in this aspect let it be explored.

[Mthomas 0]

Hello everyone, I'm new to the aerosoft boards, this topic was a good reason to join

I haven't read through the hundrets of posts and therefore don't know if it has been discussed before but have you thought about working together with Maddox Games. Oleg Maddox stated that his new flight sim engine is aimed not only at military aviation but at aviation as a whole. He also stated that they are missing the manpower and expertise to implement the civilian aspect themselves. Maddox Games have proven with IL2 what they can do in respect to physics modeling and I'm sure the new engine will set the bar for FMs again. 

I wish you the best of luck with your (incredibly complex) undertaking in any case!

[Sven_SP 5]

Hi!

I know not everyone liked them but I really loved the mission system and I'd like it to be present in your sim.

I'd also like to be able to use at least some of the addons I bought for FS (most of them were yours). Perhaps you could implement some kind of "Compatibility Mode" so we wouldn't lose all the money we invested. I wouldn't like to lose my beloved Twin Otter or my 747-400X.

As already mentioned, I'd also like to have some kind of tool to (as easily as possible) develop scenery or planes.

Degradation of aircraft, systems or scenery would also be interesting.

Some kind of built-in economic system (some sort of Company Career). I don't have the time to belong to a Virtual Airline... I'm sure that many people would like this idea.

Well. I hope you find this interesting.

Thanks for reading me.

[weafaeryhsdfgzdfghdfhg 3]

Hi,

As well as a Mission system (they're cheesy, unrealistic- but so much fun!), I'd like to see lessons being integrated. Kind of like what we have in current Flight Sims, but better, without that infuriating voice hacking your aeronautical bones when you go one degree of course tracking an inbound VOR. Base it on real world check rides. In addition, there could be Training scenarios like missions but more realistic than current FSX, so without those massive Green gates, and more forgiving than the IFR checkride, perhaps basic maneuvers to get new simmers into the swing of things. A really good book is this:

Microsoft Flight Simulator X for Pilots: For real world Training

I'm not sure if you've come across it, but it's really good for introducing one to Flight Simulator or refining one's skills, so I reckon it would be really good if you could have some sort of collaboration with the authors or something and have them trial test any lessons/training in the Flight Simulator.

These are just ideas to help with the inevitable truth that there needs to be some sort of training structure in the Simulator.

I look forward to updates on the project!!!

Regards,

Natty

[Hiflyer 129]

Not sure if this has already been said or not, but to me, one of the biggest downfalls of FSX, graphically is the road system and especially the way roads just cut through everything: edges of airfields, parking lots etc in such a distracting way. This is not helped by the FSX grid system that apparently requires everything to have a certain north/south east/west orientation (like New york) even if it does not fit reality.

Hopefully, any new Sim would allow much more freedom in that regard, and if possible would introduce truly elevated roadways, rather than the flat lines that we have now. That would also help in places like New York that have elevated rail-lines!

It would probably also be cool to have a sort of internally expandable (rather than closed) library system of objects that could grow over time: bridges, buildings boats and etc that could be integrated into specific scenery's and perhaps be called upon by other scenery's: Maybe even be "favorited" as the default by individual users.

Which brings up my next issue. Scale! It should probably be established right away the scale of all objects in the new Sim universe so that we don't have a situation like now, with certain objects being completely out of scale with others throughout the Sim. (Blah)

Tertiary to that would be a specific Hillside class of buildings, designed for steep terrain so that they don't leave parts hanging unsupported in mid-air as can happen now.

Obviously people would want the ability of slanted runways and no plateaus!(probably already been said a zillion times)

An add on library that really works! So that additional scenery's can be added in such a way (maybe by company) that if deleted they have no way to corrupt the Sim, since they are just being called as needed, and are not replacing original Sim files.......

Volumetric clouds! Long ago, I played a game called Jet fighter V that had probably the best simulation of clouds I have ever seen, rarely matched by anything in all the years since. I think they were volumetric, but am not certain. I wonder how they did it?

Just a few random thoughts.

Edit: Actually, my craziest thought would be Aerosoft going wild and creating something called "Simworld"

Depending on your inclination, you could fly a Plane, drive a Bus or Train or maybe even a boat, all as expansion modules of the same Sim. As each module was updated, it would affect the scenery of all other active modules.......

Yes, I know. Crazy.

[Earthscapeone 2]

Not sure if this has already been said or not, but to me, one of the biggest downfalls of FSX, graphically is the road system and especially the way roads just cut through everything: edges of airfields, parking lots etc in such a distracting way. This is not helped by the FSX grid system that apparently requires everything to have a certain north/south east/west orientation (like New york) even if it does not fit reality.

Hopefully, any new Sim would allow much more freedom in that regard, and if possible would introduce truly elevated roadways, rather than the flat lines that we have now. That would also help in places like New York that have elevated rail-lines!

It would probably also be cool to have a sort of internally expandable (rather than closed) library system of objects that could grow over time: bridges, buildings boats and etc that could be integrated into specific scenery's and perhaps be called upon by other scenery's: Maybe even be "favorited" as the default by individual users.

Which brings up my next issue. Scale! It should probably be established right away the scale of all objects in the new Sim universe so that we don't have a situation like now, with certain objects being completely out of scale with others throughout the Sim. (Blah)

Tertiary to that would be a specific Hillside class of buildings, designed for steep terrain so that they don't leave parts hanging unsupported in mid-air as can happen now.

Obviously people would want the ability of slanted runways and no plateaus!(probably already been said a zillion times)

An add on library that really works! So that additional scenery's can be added in such a way (maybe by company) that if deleted they have no way to corrupt the Sim, since they are just being called as needed, and are not replacing original Sim files.......

Volumetric clouds! Long ago, I played a game called Jet fighter V that had probably the best simulation of clouds I have ever seen, rarely matched by anything in all the years since. I think they were volumetric, but am not certain. I wonder how they did it?

Just a few random thoughts.

Edit: Actually, my craziest thought would be Aerosoft going wild and creating something called "Simworld"

Depending on your inclination, you could fly a Plane, drive a Bus or Train or maybe even a boat, all as expansion modules of the same Sim. As each module was updated, it would affect the scenery of all other active modules.......

Yes, I know. Crazy.

I made a few similar suggestions some time ago, so I really agree with your "Simworld" idea. And about those roads and houses, how about making roads only so they are at the right elevation and the right directions, but also so they actually look like real roads, not a million cow paths? Beyond not wanting to again find houses completely levitating in Hawaii, so many buildings in FSX look so cartoonish, and it would be great if they looked more realistic, and also had a little more solidity so we can't just roll through them like ghosts (well, maybe that last crash was a little more serious than I thought!).

[Lighthorse 1]

Hi Mathijs,

My two cents!

I like FSX but Fly Condor instead.

You guys designed a nice Discus but still it is flown in FSX.

so for new sim how about allowing a serverlist hosting for competitions

Sample ( http://www.condorsoaring.com/serverlist.php ),

How about more real weather with proper Ridge and thermal lift.

Please have designers fly Condor to or have real Sailplane pilots with both Ridge

and Thermal Experience Help.

I enjoy flying FSX for allot of reasons but if you can include the proper weather

and the competitive side you will get a lot more sailplane pilots. There are over

5,000 just in Condor Club.

So I ask for better weather, More sailplanes and an IP serverlist forwarding option.

K

[maxter 4]

I am warming to the idea of a large persistent world in which to fly in. I see the opportunity for add-on's like FS_Economy and Air-Hauler and FS Passengers to be fully a part of the sim and structures to be implemented that would let us all operate in a very integrated manner. In this world, the system would recognise new 3D models for buildings etc and they would be available for all to use/buy/download depending on their class and buildings would be installed in their own real estate of this virtual earth. Virtually trading or exchanging objects/realestate/buildings etc would add another dimension to the experience. For those who are not interested, don't really need to take part in that side of the sim and there could be a sandbox mode for single player/free for all simming.

I think that policing those who would spoil other peoples fun would not be too hard with a form of virtual FAA made up of community members and that we could also incorporate a virtual ATC like a vatsim etc. All of these would be available out of the box as it were, designed from the outset to coexist with each other.

The other thing that has been made patently obvious is the adoption of an on-line update system like that of Rise of Flight. It works really well (for me anyway) and would ensure consistency. Then hopefully the sim could evolve on a more regular basis than the MSFS business model.

[TDLOWS 0]

Hello!

i am a long time with micrsofts fsims and always wondered why the weather system is still that bad. its based on met reports of wx stations and wx ballon data for winds and temperature in

higher alt. but when 1 station fails, you only get iso standard on that part of the world and the cloud types displayed, as well as the thickness of layers, are most of the time inaccurate.

(REX does it a bit better, but is still not correct).

so why not using satellite pictures (infrared and vis pix) to determine the cloud coverage of the world? they are updated every 30 mins (same as metars) and at least

in the vis pictures you can get the approximate height of the clouds (though there has to be some kind of software programmed to get this data somehow).so literally spoken if

you can put the combined satellite pix over the flightsim world, and make it 3D, there would be every detail of cloud coverage with all types and real structures of the actual clouds!!

[Evincare 0]

Hi everyone,

first of all, i haven't read through all of the posts (because there are one or two replies ^^).

But personally i find it hard to find interesting airports in fsx.

The way to choose my airport should also include a globe with regions / countries / *fill in* and their airports. i'm from Austria so i know the major airports around (and some minor too, ofcourse) but sometimes i just want to hop into a small aircraft and go for a region where its nice to fly. And therefore a map with airports would help me a lot to choose an airport.

Nobody knows every beautiful place to fly in the world and that could be a great improvement.

Thats all folks,

cheers,

Alex

P.S: Looking forward to every progress on AFS2012 i'm going to read (as long as there are no Fireball XL5's and so in it @ Shaun)

[wedge 5]

Here are a little things I had forgotten in the long post I had made

1/ There should be a lot more to be made about flight models, it shoud definitely be able to use the wind and the physical effects of it on the plane, than using some kind of mathematical formulas, which as far as I know is the case right know. That would require of course very accurate models of the airplane as without that it would not be workign correctly.

2/ One very important point is the scale, I think that is one of the pretty wrong things of FS by having those trees that are really huge or other vehicules which size seems pretty far from the real scale, it is a little like the planes are bigger than the representation around them, and give some times false impressions

3/ The weather would be an obvious aspect to polish and even more of course when looking at this post #1, one of the wrong thing of FS is the way the winds can change very very quickly with a huge impact on the speed, making it possible for your plane to suddenly become overspeed or stalling, while in cruize.

4/ The user interface, on this part I'll give kudos to Microsoft, I think their user interface pretty nice and simple, making it easy for the user to use, and with open format for flightplans and things like that. I also liek X-Plane but I really think they lack of this great interface that would make it much more user friendly.

5/ Well that's more a consideration, but I guess that being able to maybe hire a few people from the ACE team, or from the various talented add ons developpers could be a real help to this project, making it come together, much better. And while I'm reapeating that point giving tools to play with to both developers and public maybe to start getting feedback on all the tools that will be needed, and for that point I suggest considering from the beginning supporting 3D modeler such as Blender for example that is free, and not only 3DSmax or professionnal and expensive solution.

Aurelien

[Jason9001 10]

I hope this new simulator will have real crashes, so if you make mistakes or do something wrong the plane lose ex. engines, wings or other parts or broke in parts or something to bring more realism to the game it will be super and more harder.

[Cathy Howat 0]

I would love to see a really GOOD AI traffic and ATC system, with a choice of keyboard input or voice for the ATC (I am an insomnica, and simming at night I use the keyboard, VOXATC at other times). I would also love some "regional" voice both male and female for ATC and pilots and an "edit Voicepack" type utillity as wellas a "point and shoot" AI traffic manager so ypou can add individual flights. Example. I grew up in Picron NZ. If you have REAL NZ MARLBOROUGH, you have the small airport but no traffic. The local Airline (Soundsair) flies Caravans between Picton and Wellington. As well ther is GA traffic. I would like to be able to just slect onan aircraft, click and drag my route, input the airilen name, naumnber, and have the Ai tool do all the rest, is this level of program possible?

[flyingsub 7]

Another interesting development:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17854-live-video-makes-google-earth-cities-bustle.html

[Tim_A 1]

Club/VA Parked Traffic, AKA "Where did you leave my plane?"

Primarily for MP flying clubs and VAs, but it could work in single player too. It would be nice if there was a system to remember where you parked the plane last time. Say for example, I flew the SF260 into Shoreham. Next time I start at Shoreham in a Cessna, but if I look around... there's the 260 parked on the apron. Similarly my chums fly in on an MP session, and next time their planes are parked up too. You would only need a small file to say an AI thingamyjig needs to be parked at such & such airport. Traffic could be done by registration, and planes subscribed/unsubscribed. A simple report could be used to track subscribed planes. There would need to be a server mechanism of some sort to cater for planes moved offline or on Vatsim etc (AS wouldn't need to provide a server -- it could all be hosted by the individual VAs, with suitable hooks in the sim)

[TheCosmicFrog 3]

One thing I would love for ASFS2012 to have is the Blade Element Theory flight dynamics of X-Plane. Is there any chance of this happening?

[frkaipanika 9]

There should be also physics inside of the cockpit (airplane) ... if you have some loose stripes or belts they should be moved under the influence of G-force

[Jan-Paul Schuchna 24]

Hi,

another nice feature would be the access to the menus without pausing the sim. As far as I know FLY was capable of doing that. Also apply changes of parameters directly without reloading scenery etc.

Jan-Paul

[weafaeryhsdfgzdfghdfhg 3]

Would it be possible to reduce load times when you start the sim? Whenever I invite friends over to see FSX, they tend to get bored fairly quickly watching a boring splashscreen to nothing. I would mind it less if there was at least a status bar telling one how long before flight sim finishes loading. It would just be a nice perk!

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Would it be possible to reduce load times when you start the sim? Whenever I invite friends over to see FSX, they tend to get bored fairly quickly watching a boring splashscreen to nothing. I would mind it less if there was at least a status bar telling one how long before flight sim finishes loading. It would just be a nice perk!

If you find a way to load a gig of data from disk, manipulate it in memory etc, we could. But there is not a lot of progress to be expected here in the next 24 months. With the exception of solid state hard disks of course. They offer great promise in loading things faster. I do share your feeling the user should be kept informed.