this is what I liked about the whole interview:

 

"And so in the future what we're going to be moving towards is architectural style. Air traffic controller procedures and accents, and aircraft that really reflect each part of the world to really dive into the subsets of culture and aviation so that is not just homogeneous so we have an excellent setup right now. The next thing to do is that more variety, it's the different parts of the world look like those parts of the world."

 

Finally!!!

 

 

Sing it Austin!!  Music to my ears  :yahoo: 

this is what I liked about the whole interview:

 

"And so in the future what we're going to be moving towards is architectural style. Air traffic controller procedures and accents, and aircraft that really reflect each part of the world to really dive into the subsets of culture and aviation so that is not just homogeneous so we have an excellent setup right now. The next thing to do is that more variety, it's the different parts of the world look like those parts of the world."

 

Finally!!!

He's still not addressing the core AI issues. He makes no mention of lifting the 20 AI aircraft limit, aircraft will reflect the region flown, which means still random flights not scheduled flightplans. In other words window dressing. On the ATC side improving the procedures and adding controller accents does sound promising!!

You know what...i can sum it all up in a few words...but why do that when i can rubbish it will a whole paragraph or six!!!

 

X-plane does not fully simulate an entire aircraft...it is not the most realistic flight simulator ever...nor does it accurately model scenery. that is nothing more than a sales pitch to con simple minded and poorly informed customers into thinking it is better than fsx and prepar3d. For example;

 

According to Austin Myers and his bunch of maties (volunteers i might add..it seems there are a lot of them over there who make Austin very rich as a fruit of their labours), Sydney Airport has a Delta Hanger, there is no such place as Botany Bay, and there are areas of water on both sides of Kingsford Smith international airport runways on domestic and international terminal aircraft parking areas!!! What planet are these guys on exactly??? Oh thats right, they are in space now...gee i wonder what Mars looks like in X-plane...Garden of Eden perhaps???

 

for a start, the aircraft dynamics in x-plane rely on the aircraft modeled in Planemaker! Now planemaker completely ignores misc objects when in flight. So, if you create wheel pants, undercarriage pods on the side of a fuselage, flap extensions, in fact any appendage at all...they have absolutely no affect on the flying characteristics of the aircraft. So hey boys, lets hang a 50x50 foot sign out of the back of our aircraft...its perfectly safe as x-plane says its a misc object and as such wont affect the way the plane flies in any way shape or form. If you want to include these bodies in the flight characteristics (e.g drag), guess what, you have to manually enter the data into x-plane just the same as in FSX!!!  I find it incredible that "those in the know" over at x-plane keep saying these things are insignificant.  Dreaming if you ask me!

 

Hey here's a good example of why fundamentally, x-plane needs serious reprogramming and more honest marketing... 

 

remember the C130 that crashed because the drag chute accidently deployed whilst the cargo the aircraft was carrying was still chained down in the cargo bay? ...in the heat of the moment, the airforce pilot yelled reassuringly over the intercom..."its ok boys, i tested this out in X-plane first...the deployed parachute is a misc object and as such, will have no affect on the flight characteristics of our aircraft....so we will all be fine!!!" :lol:  :ph34r:

The core of the multi-million dollar sims is to present an aircraft flight model that reacts exactly as the real thing would in a given scenario. You won't find the screeching tires from hell, the 250kt reverse thrust takeoffs or any other crazy things that you can find in XP, but XP is designed to be used in NORMAL aspects with many aircraft and the multi-million dollar sims focus on one flight model with limited scenery (no gates, barely a tarmac, runway, no cities usually, no AI), but the lighting for fog and cloud effects is usually spot on perfection thanks to the image generators and their graphic effects capabilities.

 

So yes, XP does have better scenery than a multi-million dollar sim, but comparing it to one is like comparing a boat to an aircraft and saying flying will get you around the world faster than a boat. They're designed for different uses and utilities. The scenery is good, but not great. Thankfully, Austin does see that the Paris=Seattle concept is a good dent to take out of the scenery aspect. I just hope that he can regionalize sub-regions like southwest US versus northeast US and such.

 

I can live without regional AI if I can have more aircraft with schedules and parking spots designated for certain aircraft types and sizes.

 

 
Night flying in XP is in a league of it's own! This alone is what made me jump FSX in the first place, but to say XP scenery puts simulators to shame is a bit of an exaggeration.

 

Same here, just the lights and the landing feel so realistic its awesome compared to plain jane fsx.  

 

Austin and X plane people don't make scenery some of us will have to take into our own hands which some of us do not want too.  Do not expect 100% realism with the scenery but slow progress toward regional differences. 

It's nice to hear that regional auto-gen will happen *some day*  my worry is that day may be a very long time from now, as it's taken well over a year for the auto-gen to reach it's current state. And while the models themselves look amazing, it's still very incomplete -- no factories, virtually no sky scrapers in major cities, too much commercial areas, and too many high rise apartments (which is actually more fitting for Asia, but not North America). Plus there is still a lot of green ground in the cities, where there should be parking lots and asphalt.  

 

But it's encouraging to hear that improving the scenery this is a major priority right now. Also it wouldn't hurt if they got a few hands on deck to quicken the pace.

@adamjedgar: ROFLOL!!!!!!   +1  

 

You took the words from my keyboard... although I was not willing to write it :-/, but regrettably I have to admit I agree with most of what you wrote...

Very interesting but Flightgear also is 64bit and even before 10.2.

Very interesting but Flightgear also is 64bit and even before 10.2.

 

Another great remark that keeps coming into my mind each time I read about XP10 having gone 64 bit :-)

It's good to know that you guys that keep complaining about XP have a 64bit alternative. I've tried Flightgear and just don't see any reason to even consider it having it on my drive (no offence to the great dev's involved) but it is still waaaay far behind maybe in 3 years or so. Hmm, I wonder what would XP offer in 3 years!

 

Look, we all know XP has its flaws but this is the only sim that for now, presents a viable future. Be glad that Austin is even considering tackling some of these flaws. I'm sure that eventually he will address most of them if not all. Remember this is a 5 or so team deal.

 

Oh and please don't start saying that he should be hiring more dev's so that LR can get those issues out the door quicker. This is Austin's project and his alone. So, who are we to criticize his business model!

 

Lets just enjoy what we have and be happy with what's coming!

 

Carlos

Makes me smile when I see all the detractors come out of the woodwork...Flightgear hey? lol

Flightgear hey? lol

Yeah, people keep complaining but at the same time do consider going backwards, I just don't see the logic there.

I'm not going backwards, as far as I'm concerned, nor do I say FG is better than XP10. What I do not really like is to read some sentences sometimes Austin writes when addressing his simulator.

 

For me XP10 was an investment, a big one, and I would really like to end up thinking about it how I thought some months ago. It's of course very nice to know about the possible upcoming changes to autogen, etc... but there are other aspects, pertaining a lot more to the category of features a FLIGHT simulation should offer that will not be addressed, or have at least very very low prioroty.

 

Being advertised as ultra-realistic, this issues should, IMO, get their attention.

 

I was placing good hopes on 10.30... 

 

He's still not addressing the core AI issues. He makes no mention of lifting the 20 AI aircraft limit, aircraft will reflect the region flown, which means still random flights not scheduled flightplans. In other words window dressing. On the ATC side improving the procedures and adding controller accents does sound promising!!

 

The AI issues, to my mind, are soon to be completely obsolete with this new package by Classic Jet SImulations:

 

And here I think is a prime example of how development in x-plane will unfold in the future:  Laminar focusses on the core aspects of the X-Plane simulation, while 3rd party developers like Classic Jet Sims fill in the gaps.

 

One of the things though is that Austin can't deliver regional buildings with just the LR team.  I think that maybe some time needs to be spent building the infrastructure needed to support crowd sourced library objects.  All LR then need to do is review submitted library objects for consideration into the X-Plane scenery system.

Laminar focusses on the core aspects of the X-Plane simulation

 

Exactly!  Making room for 3pds to properly inject weather, air traffic, atc, etc... and dedicating to upgrade the problems that only Austin knows how to solve, like the problems with the physics model, engines, etc...

 

I moved away from FSX into XP10 because it irritated me to have the leaning bug, poor turboprop and rotary wing models, the behavior near the edge of the envelope, the absence of good weather effects (overcome by good weather injectors and other products meanwhile available for that platform), and because it is a platform for the future (xp10).

 

I ended up finding the best flight dynamics ever in DCS World, but in fsx gold still a very credible world to fly, even using only default scenery + a good weather injector and the best add-on airplanes, more credible prop aircraft flight dynamics, and other picky details like proper daylight, better fog / haze, etc...

 

I enjoy FG 2.10 because it offers a lot for nothing, and in some aspects has the same promising possible future, only being so rough in some areas because it relies in free cooperation from many talented programmers.

 

Get the hooks for 3pds to start offering good scenery / autogen / atc / ai / weather themes and injection available, and concentrate on the core features...