That's why I have to laugh when I read posts that say "X-Plane is good at calculating ball park figures".

 

We were being nice.......

I had a look at the CRJ flight model. This is in no way a criticism to JRollon (whom I consider a friend) or any other developer.

The CRJ's inertia (RoG) is set to default X Plane values.

It's likely the other aircraft you speak of also have the RoG set at default values.

This plays a HUGE part in how the aircraft handles in the way you describe.

The RoG is a delicate area to be fooling around in and, if you don't know much about it, is best left alone.

As an example, fly Morten's Piper Archer around a little bit. That aircraft does have manually entered RoG values and it flies beautifully!

I'm in no way criticizing your thoughts, but when it comes to this area that you are pointing out, there really is nothing to "fix". This is evidence of X-Planes versatility and flexibility in making extreme changes to certain areas of the flight model. That's why I have to laugh when I read posts that say "X-Plane is good at calculating ball park figures".

The RoG alone can have countless (several thousand) adjustments in it's various combinations made to it. Add to this the low speed and high speed "Phase-Out" figures that can be entered and any stability figures that the developer wants to enter for control surface damping constraints and/or autopilot constraints, and you're looking at one helluva tool to adjust just the inertia of the aircraft and control surfaces.

Austin has always said, the tools are there and the wiki is there. The rest is up to the developer.

And I can honestly tell you, the wiki covers absolutely everything.

 

I haven't tried Morten Piper Archer since it's a XP9 or 8 model, so I'm looking forward for him releasing his updated version for X10, I will consider that the benchmark for X-Plane Current FM, if he can't do it, nobody else can! If he succeeds, then no developer will have the right to use any excuses as to why their addons isn't flying correctly.

 

I haven't tried any of your addons GoranM, I think you should focus on developing a freeware model using all your experience with X-Plane. No need to make a wonderful 3d model, maybe even use some freeware one, it;s just to showcase the world what X-Plane can do regarding the FM, maybe this way people like me and others who complain to the FM would accept the fact it's possible from our experience, and not by reading it from a forum. I really think you would greatly enhance X-Plane popularity by doing this, I won't spend my money if I haven't seen any other addon succeed in areas I think is crucial, until I try one.

I haven't tried Morten Piper Archer since it's a XP9 or 8 model, so I'm looking forward for him releasing his updated version for X10, I will consider that the benchmark for X-Plane Current FM, if he can't do it, nobody else can!

 

But it's already been done. I've done it. I've reduced (and in some cases, eliminated) P-Factor in various flight models (for my own use and through experimentation) and I've added inertia so aircraft feel much less twitchy. I've also helped a handful of other people stabilize other flight models.

 

If he succeeds, then no developer will have the right to use any excuses as to why their addons isn't flying correctly.

 

That's a bit of a broad/generalized statement. Going by that statement, every FSX developer should be at PMDG's level for airliners and A2A's level for warbird and engine simulation. If PMDG and A2A can do it, then all FSX developers should be able to do it?

 

I haven't tried any of your addons GoranM, I think you should focus on developing a freeware model using all your experience with X-Plane. No need to make a wonderful 3d model, maybe even use some freeware one, it;s just to showcase the world what X-Plane can do regarding the FM, maybe this way people like me and others who complain to the FM would accept the fact it's possible from our experience, and not by reading it from a forum. I really think you would greatly enhance X-Plane popularity by doing this, I won't spend my money if I haven't seen any other addon succeed in areas I think is crucial, until I try one.

 

I seriously doubt I can increase X Planes popularity by making a freeware add on. I'm not that influential.

I would love to make a freeware add on for the sole reason of giving back to the community somehow, but for now, pretty much all my free time is taken up with my current project.

I would suggest that you maybe search out some independent reviews on some X Plane add ons. PC Pilot have reviews in every issue of their magazine. One of my add ons was reviewed by them, and believe me, they are very objective.

FSMagazin is another one. Maybe even have a look at the FSMagazin 2012 awards list. There are some X Plane add ons in the nominations. The CRJ is actually up against the PMDG 737.

 

We were being nice.......

 

So was I...

^_^

I know what you meant, Larry. I just laugh at the "ball park" and "back of the napkin" references in general.

 

That's a bit of a broad/generalized statement. Going by that statement, every FSX developer should be at PMDG's level for airliners and A2A's level for warbird and engine simulation. If PMDG and A2A can do it, then all FSX developers should be able to do it?

 

I meant blaming X-Plane limitations for the lack of a better simulation.

 

I can imagine you're working full time with your project, as you should, maybe one day when you have some spare time think about this freeware plane. Just as you recommend Morten's three years old addon for people who complain about X-Plane's FM, you would be able to tell them to try your own, built within XP10 specifications. I didn't buy any of your addon since I you haven't done anything that I would like to have in my Hangar, I'm mostly interest in Pipers, Cessna, etc. I would love that beautiful DC-3 in my X-Plane, but it would get unused pretty quickly

I believe, without having any access to internal LR team information, so, just based on the way tings are progressing, that we will see further attention dedicated to areas like those who can really make X-Plane10 more than just one more flight simulation platform.

 

A platform for flight simulation is always a very complex project to design and support. We can expect extraordinary and very detailed performance from dedicated flightsims like DCS BlackShark or their new p-51, or even, in the market for pilots investing in their IFR rating, ELITE. OTOH platforms like MSFS and X-Plane, being general and allowing for a vast range of aircarft to be simulated will allways lack detail here and there.

 

My honest opinion is that MSFS, and particularly their latest serious simulation platform - FSX - was the best generic simulation platform ever developed for the PC. This judgement is based on every aspect it brings with it, from a very plausible world representation, to it's flight dynamics engine, but above all, the tools available for 3pd to continue developing over it, and producing, still now that 6 years have past since the project was abandoned by MS, some excellent add-ons being released.

 

X-Plane is a more challenging project, not only because it extends considerably the range of aircraft types, systems, engines, etc that can potentially be modeled, brings lot's of features that we can only achieve with MSFS by acquiring various expensive add-ons, but, above all, is the work of a very small team of talented programmers and a master engine pushing/pulling the team - Austin. Compared to any of the teams that were ever in charge of the MSFS line of simulators, it is the ant and the elephant.... The ant, is an intensive and dedicated worker, and with lot's of effort was capable of moving his huge (insane... to use Austins typical UI words...) project to what it is today.

 

There are things that X-Plane allows to simulate that we can't achieve with MSFS, unless we use just ESP for the graphics, and feed the sim with our own external flight and weather dynamics platforms, like some professional simulation producers have done. Rotary wing is a good example.

 

What I think is that sometimes the track followed by X-Plane is complex to follow for 3pds, and they have to get a profit in time from their work... Also, and although I am not absolutely sure about this sentence, I believe that some areas of X-Plane10 that could receive support from 3pds are still closed - weather being one of them. I don't think that something like AS2012 or REX or other similar products can already be adpated to X-Plane because they lack the proper interface, but I might be wrong (I do not know enough about datarefs in X-Plane and plugin programming...).

 

It would be great to have the platform more opened to this type of poroducts. For instance, I am looking forward for that particular one that may bring plausible and not heavy on fps AI to X-Plane10. A good weather injector would be another great type of add-on.

 

If the proper tools were made available for such projects I believe that X-Plane10 and future versions would rapidly get to the level FSX has achieved.

 

And... we have to bare in mind, there is life in X-Plane10's core, while FSX's core is dead as far as further development goes... Yes there is Prepar3d 2.0 in the horizon, but, that should only be a reason for LR to decide investing even more on their team, making if big enough to be able to turn this simulator into what we, even sometimes so demanding and boring customers really wnat it to be!

 

I believe in X-Plane, and particularly now in X-Plane10, and want it to get as good as possible not only for me but for all of those potential users that, should they find their demanded features implemented, or at least offered by 3pds, will embrace the sim as they did in the past with MSFS.

If Prepar3d was ever able to be published for entertainment usage, which will never happen, I would put all my money that it's the follow up for the throne which is currently occupied by FSX. The FS Platform, as jcomm said so well, is the best generic one made to date, it's been 6 years and the best is yet to come. P3D with an updated engine allowing DX11 and proper usage of multicore would last another 10 years, but thats not going to happen. X-Plane can succeed, but there are serious issues which needs to be worked on, because this community got used to something working for the past 10 years, and they're not going to give it all up in 2012. Austin really needs to listen to them. Proper AI Traffic and Seasonal Textures is something people don't accept not having in their simulators nowadays.

 

Beside FM changes, which we all think can improve in some areas, I think the Weather system should be more accessible, so that a weather engine is able to inject data, like in FSX, that's also a must, this with a working weather radar that X-Plane already simulates, people are gonna get crazy.

+ Alec

 

I also miss environment reflection on Aircrafts alike FSX, better ATC and AI with improved moving map.

I also miss environment reflection on Aircrafts alike FSX

Technically, OpenGL cannot render reflections. But, Gizmo can...

^_^

 

Gizmo uses OpenGL. I've reflections even running FSX on Wine/Ubuntu. Also Flightgear has it on some planes...

Stop spamming about an outdated plugin that's not even running on all os and crashes all the time. :wacko:

ahso

Where is this hostility coming from??

You mentioned that X Plane cannot render reflections and I simply corrected you by showing a video.

Gizmo uses shaders, which, when used and programmed correctly, can render reflections. You don't have to take my word for it. The video speaks for itself. (Incredible reflections!)

As far as "outdated plugin", well, you obviously haven't been keeping up to date. Gizmo 12 is in development. It has been for at least a year and includes a new, vastly improved sound engine...among other core features.

By the way, Gizmo doesn't compile on Linux...yet.

^_^

Again, stop spamming about proprietary stuff that doesn't even support all OS.

Goran go ahead and tell us everything abut Gizmo if you want to. Just because some TROLL doesn't like it, doesn't mean the rest of us don't want to know all we can about a particular app. Apparently he doesn't even know what spamming is, as you are not trying to sell us anything. I for one use gizmo and am glad for it. :smiley:

Thanks Donald

I wasn't really concerned about ahso's thoughts, as he is an ill-informed, anti Gizmo extremist...for whatever reason.

Rest assured, I'll continue to post Gizmo news should it arises.

All the best!

Goran

Here's my want: Radar Contact for X-Plane.