Anyone notice all the little GAs in amongst the big boys? Cool!

Yeah it's a little guy still on the runway that causes the commercial jet to skid across the tarmac at the end,

Anyone notice all the little GAs in amongst the big boys? Cool!

That reminds me of Flight Unlimited II... When you tried to taxi after a big airliner and got too close, your little aircraft was blown up and away by its jet engines spooling up... :)

I am not sure the airplane are really loosing altitude. I believe they are entering the traffic pattern and stay at constant altitude thereafter. Because they are flying away from the camera, the azimuth angle at which we see them is decreasing.Before trashing, think twice about it.ThanksMinos

Tom you're better off not drawing any conclusions yet. As programmers, sometimes we may make a plane do something specific during testing to make sure we have control of it. That may mean making it climb, then dive, then turn so we have visual feedback of our code during testing......and when we know we have control of it, then we'll control it exactly where we want it to go as a last step.The point of the video is to demonstrate that x-plane has AI ATC and that is is making very good progress. The planes taxi well, they stage well, they do many things well and perhaps that last little bit of tweaking to make them really behave real is the last thing to be done. Now if you don't think videos of such progress should be shown before it's time or you don't want to feel like you have been misled, then by all means feel free to wait for x-plane to be released before watching any more videos or viewing any screenshots. These are for those who are interested in seeing the progress and understand that they're 'works in progress' we share with the community. -TomK

Of course graphically it doesn't, but it does in Database form. When an AI aircraft goes out of range in FS, you don't suddenly get a new one spawned to take it's place. That is what is stated in the developer blog how X-Plane is modeled. In FS, you only get the planes that should be there, from the beginning of the flight to end of it.

As far as I can see, X-Plane should work in same way as FSX. Currently I'm using TrafficX with FSX. I also follow the AI traffic movement with FSCommander.If I'm correct, TrafficX flight plans seem to be direct routes from A to B (only using airways by accident). AI traffic appears and disappears when they reach a certain radius from your aircraft. This seems to be very similar to XP10.With FSX and TrafficX, there might be more than 20 planes around you but they very light models of airplanes. Also the take-offs and landings are far from perfect and mostly defy the rules of physics.As a software developer (not a games developer), what kind of sounds odd to me is that every AI plane gets it's own "thread/core". With zero knowledge of XP10, I would have thought that it would be easier/less error prone to give one core for AI traffic, one for flight model, scenery handling and so on. Good concurrent programming skills required :)Haven't flown XP9 for a while, but I have to say that XP10 looks very promising. Keep up the good work and hope that the integration phase goes smoothly!

Yes but he goes on to say"If they happen to get outside of that certain radius, where you can’t see/hear them, they’re deleted by the system and respawned somewhere useful to you. Which means it's still simulated to keep traffic in your area."This is simply not realistic!!

I think by "respawned", he simply means that a new plane will realistically enter your airspace rather than suddenly appearing from out of nowhere.

I've watched the video again. Quite a few planes do not lose altitude, as they must be light. The ones that lose alt are banking quite tightly, as you know this can reduce lift. Then they convert altitude into speed and off they go.Anyone notice all the little GAs in amongst the big boys? Cool!

I did notice the GA-very nice. One thing I'd like to see is at an airport with parallel runways like this-the GA usually use one runway and the commercial the other-for obvious reasons....

Also the take-offs and landings are far from perfect and mostly defy the rules of physics.

I did notice the GA-very nice. One thing I'd like to see is at an airport with parallel runways like this-the GA usually use one runway and the commercial the other-for obvious reasons....

A lot of times in FSX I will switch views to watch the AI aircraft at different points in their flight plans. In some instances I do see the craziest of crazies defying rules of physics or even realistic flight parameters for commercial flights. I don't know if this has anything to do with AI traffic trying to make unrealistic arrival times to the destination. In some instances I'll spot aircraft in steep nose dives and in full landing configuration. Others are in similar distress with deployed spoilers and thrust reversers opened trying to get somewhere. The other day I came across a Lufthansa A340-600 climbing through FL 400 with gear down and flaps down.In the time-lapsed video, my eyes were either tricking me or some of the planes were landing with cross-wind controls!It also looks like ATC makes more decisions for taxiway and runway management than previous versions of FS. I am patiently awaiting.

KC-10 seems to have a mind of it's own. I've seen it doing somersaults in the sea, landing on top of 747, doing 360s on the taxi way and now departing using "the whole width of the runway" :)

If you read Austin's interview in The latest Computer Pilot magazine (Free BTW look at the link on AVSIM's front page!) you'll see, that beyond the usual hype we normally see, there is some interesting information regarding X-Plane-10. One in particular is performance with the AI aircraft. It seems your going to have to have a top end system to run with all 20 AI aircraft. I have a E6850 dual core, so I guess that leaves me out!Austin Meyer: Even if you only have one CPU and a little bit ofRAM, you will still be able to run version 10 just fi ne. In fact, youmay see it even run faster and with less RAM than Version 9! BUT,you will have only one airplane, and the cities will be simply grassfi elds, and the air traffi c controller will have very few people totalk to. BUT, if you get the 4 gig of RAM to load up the renderingoptions, the 8 CPU cores to run 20 AI planes with full fl ight-modelsat once with minimal frame-rate hit, then you will start to see thewhole world enrich and come alive. But there is no way that ishappening with 2 GIG of RAM and one CPU. This type of world isall about parallel-processing: A lot of stuff happening at once. Nosurprise it will eat up all the CPUs and RAM (up to 4 Gig) that youcan give it.

If it's going to be that RAM intensive then I'm surprised they didn't make the jump to 64-bits so they're not restricted by the 4GB limit.Well, I have a 6-core CPU and at least 4GB RAM, so I should be able to do pretty well with XP10.

If you read Austin's interview in The latest Computer Pilot magazine (Free BTW look at the link on AVSIM's front page!) you'll see, that beyond the usual hype we normally see, there is some interesting information regarding X-Plane-10. One in particular is performance with the AI aircraft. It seems your going to have to have a top end system to run with all 20 AI aircraft. I have a E6850 dual core, so I guess that leaves me out!

I really don't hope the sim adds in that lame "fog" when it detects a fps drop... bah... I'll take my eye candy over haze anyday.

That fog can be turned off.

If you read Austin's interview in The latest Computer Pilot magazine (Free BTW look at the link on AVSIM's front page!) you'll see, that beyond the usual hype we normally see, there is some interesting information regarding X-Plane-10. One in particular is performance with the AI aircraft. It seems your going to have to have a top end system to run with all 20 AI aircraft. I have a E6850 dual core, so I guess that leaves me out!

Tom, again, I am not trying to patronise anyone here, but I have frequented another forum of another developer and noticed countless people posting, almost bragging, they will be spending, often times in excess of $2000 to run the latest payware add on. ONE add on. Here we have a flight sim that is doing things that have never been done before and you expect it to run smoothly on what can be considered a low level system. Dual cores came out, I think, about 5 or 6 years ago. You could get a new M/B, CPU and RAM for the price of 2 flying lessons. On top of that, you're writing it off before it's even out and fully tested on a variety of systems. There will be a demo. Try it first...then make the decision.

Tom, again, I am not trying to patronise anyone here, but I have frequented another forum of another developer and noticed countless people posting, almost bragging, they will be spending, often times in excess of $2000 to run the latest payware add on. ONE add on. Here we have a flight sim that is doing things that have never been done before and you expect it to run smoothly on what can be considered a low level system. Dual cores came out, I think, about 5 or 6 years ago. You could get a new M/B, CPU and RAM for the price of 2 flying lessons. On top of that, you're writing it off before it's even out and fully tested on a variety of systems. There will be a demo. Try it first...then make the decision.

I'm not reacting to rumors and innuendo here, I'm reacting to statements made by the lead developer, which clearly indicate you won't be able to run X-Plane-10 with any kind of detail and max(20) AI, unless you have a top end computer. There was a time, I would jump right out and buy a more powerful computer, to run the next greatest sim out there, but sadly with the economy being what it is, those days are gone (at least for now)! With a default type aircraft and high detailed scenery, and even with 100% WOAI, or UT2 traffic, FSX uses 600-1GB memory, Only when you add complex addons does resources become an issue, culminating with the PMDG 737NGX, which takes it to the limit (Which BTW even with my E6850, I can run smoothly in most areas, even with 100% AI, but only after jumping through some configuration hoops!) . So If as Austin states XP10 out of the box uses up all 4GB and CPU to run with 20AI, and detailed scenery, how is it going to support the 3rd party aircraft with complex systems, which eats up even more memory, that simmers are going to want, just like in FS? Also when he says 4GB memory, he really means up to 3GB, depending on the size of of your video memory., which makes up the remainder of the Virtual Address Space. Hopefully at some point, he'll convert XP10 to 64bit to eliminate this limitation.