Microsoft Flight - The Living World....

[albx 17]

Just wait and see, it will be as real as it can get, you all will be surprised, now get a load of this.....(from one of my sources) ...3rd party developers are seeking public comment on issues affecting airline passengers — peanuts... “We haven’t said we won’t do anything,” said 3RD party developer spokesperson "blank blank" to MS. “We haven’t ruled anything in or out. So we still do want to hear public comments about peanuts. We plan to read and review them all.” 3RD party developers issued a notice to MS saying it is simply gauging public opinion on ways to handle in-flight peanuts.

Alain, start to run away, you'll get this

[Christopher Low 5,406]

The best thing third party developers could do would be to sell their products for peanuts. Then we would all be happy.

[Kosta 122]

Next thing people are going to request is to see not only people boarding but also taking their seats... Come on!! We want a flight simulator not an airport simulator!

[alainneedle1 97]

Next thing people are going to request is to see not only people boarding but also taking their seats... Come on!! We want a flight simulator not an airport simulator!

If you think that's bad....here, from my source again... A $1.25 fee to check a first bag. (MS is calling this "baggages flow") The organized protest from 3RD party developers over hidden MS fees is the latest salvo in the battle over enhanced protections for air simmers — a battle that will loom increasingly large as the deadline for comments on the latest proposals from MS approaches. “Airline passengers have rights and should be able to expect fair treatment when they fly,” said 3RD party developers spokesman "blank blank". “We want to raise the bar for simmers when it comes to treating passengers fairly.”

[poplar 39]

Next thing people are going to request is to see not only people boarding but also taking their seats... Come on!! We want a flight simulator not an airport simulator!

Yeah - this is why my original post mentions that...... "I don't wish this thread to explode into a debate about Flight turning into a world simulator" I'm interested in where Microsoft will draw the line on including 'living world' additions as they did in FSX on the basis they've made the airports in Flight look absolutely amazing. The detail in the roof alone is excellent.

[Johan_Dees 84]

It does look dark and grey.. heck, FSX is way too dark, so not suprised on this shot.

[albx 17]

Next thing people are going to request is to see not only people boarding but also taking their seats... Come on!! We want a flight simulator not an airport simulator!

You board passengers, and you transport them, what is wrong with having them included in the sim? It's part of a simulation, what is it without humans? and airport ground crew? are airports empty like you see in FSX and older versions?

[dmaher 0]

You board passengers, and you transport them, what is wrong with having them included in the sim? It's part of a simulation, what is it without humans? and airport ground crew? are airports empty like you see in FSX and older versions?

It's a great idea for an add-on, but I'd like to see Flight draw the line when it comes to this kind of detail.It'll just and time and expense and take away from the fundamentals.IMO we really want MS to focus on the core, because that's an area P3D's can't modify.However I'll agree to a point, in that MS should make every effort to remove any barriers to this kind of add-on.That's very hard for MS to do without actually implementing the effect...maybe a very basic example is enough.This is the kind of thing folks can expand on using the SDK.BTW it appeared charater animation support was in RailSim...so there's been ground work.

[turner112 52]

I hope I can wait for the "Occupied" sign to flip and the occupant to shimmy back to her seat so I can "walk" into the tiny restroom. On some aircraft, maybe I can just park it there in the aft lavs, read a magazine (streamed, of course, from a real magazine), look out the little round window, and hear the loud, satisfying WHOOOOSHHH as my simulated loaf is whisked away.

[Chock 17,769]

Actually, I would like to see MS implement the ability to wander about and around the aircraft, which would presumably then make the sim more amenable to having such things as passengers boarding etc, and I don't think that would be a wasted effort. It's already in the beta version of Take on Helicopters for example, where you can do a walk around inspection of the major parts, and there are one or two recent payware FSX aircraft which have a bit of a stab at that capability as well of course. In the real world you don't just magically appear in the cockpit, even with big airliners you do a walk around check before you board, because it's a fundamentally important part of the pre-flight process. Take a look at this (grim) video of what happened when some pilots did not do the pre-flight checks properly and left a gust lock on their aircraft; the prototype B-17 Flying Fortress was lost in just the same way prior to WW2 when being demonstrated by Boeing to the US Army:

Al

[turner112 52]

+1 for preflight walkarounds. I love the idea of that new Diamond add-on actually using up fluids and needing maintenance... would be amazing if that same "wear engine" could be applied to various aircraft.

[Kosta 122]

You board passengers, and you transport them, what is wrong with having them included in the sim? It's part of a simulation, what is it without humans? and airport ground crew? are airports empty like you see in FSX and older versions?

I rest my case.

[BIGSKY 317]

Date: 27 AUG 1992Time: 10:20Type: de Havilland Canada DHC-4T CaribouOperator: NewCal AviationRegistration: N400NCMsn / C/n: 240Year built: 1965Crew: 3 fatalities / 3 on boardPassengers: 0 fatalities / 0 on boardTotal: 3 fatalities / 3 on boardAirplane damage: Written offLocation: Gimli, MB (Canada)Phase: Initial climb (ICL)Nature: TestDeparture airport: Gimli Airport, MB (YGM)Destination airport: Gimli Airport, MB (YGM)Narrative:This happened just north of Winnipeg, and the aircraft was the first version with PT-6-67 Turboprops. ('Modernized' Caribou.) The Canadian DOT concluded that the control locks were still locked when the aircraft took off. You who have flown the Caribou wonder how that could have happened when it is physically impossible to advance the throttles (past 1800 RPM) with the gust-lock in -- but this aircraft had been modified (still Restricted Category) and the throttle quadrant was not properly rigged to accommodate the throttle levers for the turbine engines.The aircraft took off for a test flight for a turbine-engine conversion programme. It climbed steeply, rolled to the right and crashed in a nose-down, rightwing-low attitude.

[january 19]

.------------ In the real world you don't just magically appear in the cockpit, even with big airliners you do a walk around check before you board, because it's a fundamentally important part of the pre-flight process. Take a look at this (grim) video of what happened when some pilots did not do the pre-flight checks properly and left a gust lock on their aircraft; the prototype B-17 Flying Fortress was lost in just the same way prior to WW2 when being demonstrated by Boeing to the US Army:

Al

Al - As far as I know, the most sophisticated, real world simulators- Level D type- do NOT provide for walkarounds- nor passengers boarding etc. In effect you do "magically appear" in the cockpit and that is what the simulator is all about- ie flying the bird from a mockup of a real flightdeck!For my money, what I want is a poorman's approximation of a Level D. No more/no less.In any event, i believe the first officer usually does the walk around- captains have more interesting things to do!AR

[Chock 17,769]

That is because such fixed and full-motion simulators are for use in professional flight training. We are talking about an entertainment product, and so there is no reason to limit such an entertainment product to what those professional devices have to be limited to, since the people who have or use full on simulators generally also have a real aircraft they can walk around as well. Level D Sims often don't have AI aircraft, fancy weather simulation, photorealistic sceneries, and a lot of other stuff that we do in entertainment sims; would you do without those as well? You are correct that the FO does tend to do the walkaround in real life (especially when it is raining), but in FS we are both the FO and the Captain, and on light aircraft there is no FO, and plenty of simmers do not fly the heavy metal at all, so they too have to be catered for. Airlines do in fact have simulators for boarding passengers and practicing evacs etc; they are usually a cabin section mock up at the crew training facility, although occasionally they will be a real aircraft, since crew have to learn how to work the doors, airstairs, slides, smoke hoods etc. Al