Twin Otter Extended Preview (FSX,P3D)

[DeltaAlpha 0]

Beautiful work. This brings a smile to my face.

[volkerjacob 1]

looks great - i am looking forward . . .

[Holgi 2366]

Some new images, the fact we are now using 2k textures means that for some parts we can do really better textures (not for all as it is above anything intended to get better performance). Look at the roof lining.

Beautiful work Mathijs,

when I see these pictures I can smell the Twin Otter ... great memories that are taking place in my head ...

I am looking forward ...

[craigy 20]

Latest pics look great. I'm not bothered by a GPS. Happy to fly using the VOR and NDB or DR if needed.

[Nick C 110]

Loving the additional details in the textures, the lining adds great depth. Care to let the artist loose on a Douglas VC?

[Prozac 18]

Loving the additional details in the textures, the lining adds great depth. Care to let the artist loose on a Douglas VC?

I've said it before and I'll say it again; This team would be perfect on a DC-3/C-47. Much of the work has already been done on the engines a-la the Catalina and there really isn't a good one on the market. I don't claim to be an FS marketing expert but I hope Aerosoft could find a way to make money on a DC-3.

[altstiff 28]

Feels like I'm back on WinAir

[Finn 873]

Finn, If I remember right, the talk was initially that the 430 would be a better fit in the panel. Obviously, per the new screens, a 530 will fit just fine. Are you still looking at options for the 430, or are we just looking at a 530 at this point? Not trying to ignite any arguments on the forums about which should be supported....I'll be purchasing the product regardless. I might have to save up for the 530 as well though if that's going to be the only one on offer.

My initial plans where for the GNS 430, cause I thought it was the most used from RXP, But I learned that the 530 is as popular.

I don´t think we will do more than one RXP version and that will be for the 530, cause it should fit right into the present one.

Regarding a DC-3, I personally would like to do that, but picking a project needs some proper research about the market.

It´s true that alot of the coding from the Catalina could be re-used to some degree.

Finn

[Matt_Smith 1116]

I'd quite happily give my first born for a DC-3 made like the Catalina

[Eric Bakker 736]

I'd quite happily give my first born for a DC-3 made like the Catalina

So you are pregnant? Congratulations!

[Matt_Smith 1116]

shh don't tell anyone, I could do without the press coverage

[BeaverDriver 37]

Wow, outstanding job guys! That's really going to be a winner!!

I'd vote for a DC3 as well if Aerosoft was doing it. I could really use one of those, especially a cargo version!

@Matt - not to worry - you're secret is safe with us (...and a few million others - www.Matt_Smith_Is_Pregnant.com )

PS - congrats

[Luckyswede 32]

This Twotter looks fantastic! My God, WOW and so on... can't find words. Please release soon!

I will fully support an Aerosoft DC-3 at the same standard as this Twotter. That would be great!

May I suggest a modern cockpit, like this Buffalo Airways one. Up to date with GPS and some modern avionics. A tribute to those DC-3s still flying.

/Torbjörn Kuntze

[Eric Bakker 736]

This Twotter looks fantastic! My God, WOW and so on... can't find words. Please release soon!

I will fully support an Aerosoft DC-3 at the same standard as this Twotter. That would be great!

May I suggest a modern cockpit, like this Buffalo Airways one. Up to date with GPS and some modern avionics. A tribute to those DC-3s still flying.

/Torbjörn Kuntze

I like the new autopilot in this picture, using a rope is brilliant!

I assume the knots are for the speed setting.

Brings back memories of the VOC.

[Nick C 110]

Guys I appreciate that you picked up on my DC3 comments, but perhaps it would be better to continue on the following thread, rather than here where really it should be kept for the mainly for the Twotter.

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/29660-what-if-you-like-to-propose-a-project/

Don't want to annoy the developers by getting off track.

[ryanbatc 4]

The GPS shown on the screenshots is a modified version of the stock FSX GPS500.

We find that adding the Com/Nav radio 1 to the GPS would safe us some space for some other avionics equipment.

I still think that we will do a RXP GNS530 version, but since we haven´t be able to get in contact for support from RXP, I wonlt promise that there will be 3D knobs.

Seems that no one can contact JL anymore argh! Big shame as their stuff is almost required for online flight. 2D spot in the panel would be better than nothing. Thanks for looking into it!

[cvearl 10]

Reality now is high def planes need RXP integration. When Carenado released the C90 without it, people were up in arms and were resorting to trying to jam the 2d version into the VC. That ruins the panel. So much care goes into a 3d masterpiece like this one is shaping up to be. Crying shame to stick a flat RXP unit in there. it will ruin it. It would sit there and remind you that the plane model is no longer perfect and break your suspension of disbelief.

A much better option is leave the 3d bezel in place. Display the rxp screen in behind. Make it popup when clicked. Until bay tower got thier 3d knobs working, that is what i believe they did. Lets leave the 3d bezel in!

If you manage to get the knobs working, the new holy triity in fsx planes will be... The Duke, The King Air B200 and the Aerosoft Twin Otter. in the other Order.Twotter would reign supreme.

[Finn 873]

Reality now is high def planes need RXP integration. When Carenado released the C90 without it, people were up in arms and were resorting to trying to jam the 2d version into the VC. That ruins the panel. So much care goes into a 3d masterpiece like this one is shaping up to be. Crying shame to stick a flat RXP unit in there. it will ruin it. It would sit there and remind you that the plane model is no longer perfect and break your suspension of disbelief.

A much better option is leave the 3d bezel in place. Display the rxp screen in behind. Make it popup when clicked. Until bay tower got thier 3d knobs working, that is what i believe they did. Lets leave the 3d bezel in!

If you manage to get the knobs working, the new holy triity in fsx planes will be... The Duke, The King Air B200 and the Aerosoft Twin Otter. in the other Order.Twotter would reign supreme.

To leave the 3D bezel in for a start is our plan.

But if that won´t work, oit will become a simple 2D insert.

Sorry to say, but without support from RXP we won´t spend an awfull lot of time on getting the 3D knobs to work.

Finn

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51562]

Sorry to say, but without support from RXP we won´t spend an awfull lot of time on getting the 3D knobs to work.

Keep in mind that any product is as good as it's support.

[cenkcnk 14]

Looks fantastic

[cvearl 10]

To leave the 3D bezel in for a start is our plan.

But if that won´t work, oit will become a simple 2D insert.

Sorry to say, but without support from RXP we won´t spend an awfull lot of time on getting the 3D knobs to work.

Finn

I get ya. Not being a developer, I have always wondered. Is it taboo or just hard to reverse engineer what other modellers did? Like look at the XML's and LUA's or whatever the rest of them did and adapt the same technique? I know if it was that simple. Ha. But if it were.... wink. Examples being Carenado C210, C377H, B200, Real Air Duke, Bay Tower RV7a, Your very own gem the DA-20 100 Katana 4X and so on. Just sneak a peak and "borrow" some tech? I promise I won't tell.

I know when Baytower RV7a was 3D bezel (no operative) with RXP glass and a pop up, I was not sure how I would like it. It really was great actually. Most of us that use either EZDOCK or Accufeel for the bumping and jitter effects of flying use a pop up to run the 430/530 as we cant keep out cursor on the knobs on the panel anyway.

Regardless. I dream of this release and any level of RXP integration, 3D or otherwise is a must and deeply appreciated for those of us that fly real navigational practices. This plane is a legend and Aerosoft has a winner on it's hands here. I can hardly wait!!!!

Charles.

[Finn 873]

I get ya. Not being a developer, I have always wondered. Is it taboo or just hard to reverse engineer what other modellers did? Like look at the XML's and LUA's or whatever the rest of them did and adapt the same technique? I know if it was that simple. Ha. But if it were.... wink. Examples being Carenado C210, C377H, B200, Real Air Duke, Bay Tower RV7a, Your very own gem the DA-20 100 Katana 4X and so on. Just sneak a peak and "borrow" some tech? I promise I won't tell.

I know when Baytower RV7a was 3D bezel (no operative) with RXP glass and a pop up, I was not sure how I would like it. It really was great actually. Most of us that use either EZDOCK or Accufeel for the bumping and jitter effects of flying use a pop up to run the 430/530 as we cant keep out cursor on the knobs on the panel anyway.

Regardless. I dream of this release and any level of RXP integration, 3D or otherwise is a must and deeply appreciated for those of us that fly real navigational practices. This plane is a legend and Aerosoft has a winner on it's hands here. I can hardly wait!!!!

Charles.

While some of the developers talks with each other and helpout on certain issues, some also tend to keep certain features for themselves.

the developers I have been in touch with have been very helpfull telling how they got their RXP GPS' to work in their addons.

But that tale is the same - trial & error !!

We know that alot of You like the RXP GPS's, so do I. But we can't / won't do support stuff for developers who doesn´t answer.

So our plan is as follows...

Try to simply put the RXP GNS530 "behind" our own VC GPS model and see if it works.

If not....

Then try to add the display only with inactive knobs and then have to use the 2D pop-up for the knobs and buttons.

I agree that using the small knobs and buttons in in a bouncing VC is not easy anyway.

I just had a talk with our 3D artist, and we agreed that using a simple 2D overlay would be the worst option.

While it works fine on the A2A Civil P-51, cause it is aligned right in front of You, it would look ugly in the Twin Otter, cause You look at it at an angle.

But all this will be some of the very last stuff we will look into.

Finn

[Bert Pieke 26]

To leave the 3D bezel in for a start is our plan.

But if that won´t work, oit will become a simple 2D insert.

Sorry to say, but without support from RXP we won´t spend an awfull lot of time on getting the 3D knobs to work.

Finn

I understand your reluctance to do this without RXP involvement, but the RXP GNS has in fact a well documented

key-driven interface, and Baytower most recently was able to integrate the RXP GNS without Reality XP's participation.

Contact me for details if you like, but certainly for FSUIPC users, this could be a nice (albeit "unsupported") feature.

Key is, that each key push or knob turn generate a separate L-variable change in value. These L-variable changes can

then be detected and fed into the Reality XP unit, via it's (documented) interface.

[bliksimpie 14]

I understand your reluctance to do this without RXP involvement, but the RXP GNS has in fact a well documented

key-driven interface, and Baytower most recently was able to integrate the RXP GNS without Reality XP's participation.

Contact me for details if you like, but certainly for FSUIPC users, this could be a nice (albeit "unsupported") feature.

Key is, that each key push or knob turn generate a separate L-variable change in value. These L-variable changes can

then be detected and fed into the Reality XP unit, via it's (documented) interface.

Well said. Honestly these days it is so easy to just say XYZ do not want to come to the party.. so we will just scrap that, whereas it it so easy to spend just a little time and get the data and deliver like other developers have done succesfully without said developer ever making contact..!!

[smokeyupahead 3]

Yes I agree with you guys and it would be a real turnoff for me to only have a 2d option, it's gotta be 3d!!!

Please reconsider...