and so much more it strikes me that building a brand new platform as described above would be considerably quicker to pull off than when FS was first developed w/ all its subsequent major releases.

 

I highly encourage you to surf thru the P3D Learning Center (aka SDK) ... don't have to read it all, nor understand it all, but it will give you a very good idea of the "scope" we are dealing with in terms of this flight simulator.

 

Such reading will help you realize just how far away Outerra really is from P3D, just how difficult it would be to build a new platform from scratch WITH an SDK.  If a new platform is ever built (Dovetail maybe?) it would be feature limited and much will be missing from what we have today in P3D (or FSX) ... it may not OOM, but it may not do all the things you want it to do.

 

I was thinking about this very topic the other day as I ...

1.  Fired up my 3rd PC to start ASN for my weather generation

2.  Then added ProATCX for ATC handling on my 2nd PC

3.  Add a dash of FS Commander or PFPX for additional flight planning/tracking

4.  Setup Orbx Central to get my regions sorted

5.  Run NaviGraph and/or NavDataPro to make sure all my tools/aircraft are updated with latest navigation data

6.  Make sure my departure/arrival airports are all set, confirm gate numbers match real world departs for my aircraft of choice (Q400)

7.  Activate GSX for some ground service 

8.  AI traffic match real world schedules and aircraft types (well pretty close not perfect)

9.  Start programming the FMS in the Q400 after going thru an extensive checklist

10.  Setting up VNAV entry altitudes

11.  determine fuel loads/weight, flap position, rotate speeds, etc. etc

12.  mid flight ice detection

13.  respond to ATC directions and changes based on weather

14.  landing and direction to gate, unload and repeat

 

Frankly it amazes me it all works given about ten 3rd party products involved ... 

 

So now someone wants to be able to do all this from scratch?  Good luck and see you in 10 years!  

 

Cheers, Rob.

I think LM realized the the enormity of creating there own world wide training sim,how many yrs did it take MS to arrive at the final flightsim version FSX, LM by using ESP and allowing thousands of free beta tester,s to join in took a massive short cut to arrive at their destination,look at the following comment

  . “ESP models the "entire world" and will allow Lockheed Martin’s developers to easily add their own content, objects, scenery, simulation functionality and scenarios to create custom training solutions."

 

nothing about marketing in my book,just a clever  time and money saving commercial decision, this to my simple mind answers a lot of questions regarding P3d,s reason for being here

peter

I highly encourage you to surf thru the P3D Learning Center (aka SDK) ... don't have to read it all, nor understand it all, but it will give you a very good idea of the "scope" we are dealing with in terms of this flight simulator.

 

+1

I think LM realized the the enormity of creating there own world wide training sim,how many yrs did it take MS to arrive at the final flightsim version FSX, LM by using ESP and allowing thousands of free beta tester,s to join in took a massive short cut to arrive at their destination,look at the following comment

 

The final version that MS worked for a couple of years on was Flight. It actually was a much improved flight sim from the MSFS days, but people immediately started complaining and whining about how it was too different from FS9 and FS10, and it didn't have all the add ons, and aircraft, and bells and whistles, and AI, and on and on and on. Anyway what finally  happened was MS said " screw it" and pulled the plug. End of story.    I just hope that LM doesn't read so many negative comments on  these forums, and come to the same conclusion. 

I'm going to go out on a limb and make some short term predictions here. Version 3 of P3d will be released a short time after the official release of Windows 10. It will be 32 bit and use DX12. It will not break very many add-ons although most will need minor updates, just like the version 2.5 hotfixes do.

As an FSX Beta Tester and one who recalls the user public flightsim forum fights w/MS over the FSX RTM it appears that some learn slowly.

IMHO, it appears that the "community" is still trying to "leverage" their purchasing power in an activist way against a behemoth.

LM is no small player. B)

As an FSX Beta Tester and one who recalls the user public flightsim forum fights w/MS over the FSX RTM it appears that some learn slowly.

IMHO, it appears that the "community" is still trying to "leverage" their purchasing power in an activist way against a behemoth.

LM is no small player. B)

a BIG +1 -

 

There are some members of this "community" who have the mistaken belief that because they spent their $$ on the product, that LM's corporate world revolves around "them". If our entire community went away, it would be a negligible blip in the LM radar.

 

We are very lucky right now, voicing helpful opinions are a good thing but the " I paid my $xx and I DEMAND......" has got to go.

 

Vic

.

 

As an FSX Beta Tester and one who recalls the user public flightsim forum fights w/MS over the FSX RTM it appears that some learn slowly.

IMHO, it appears that the "community" is still trying to "leverage" their purchasing power in an activist way against a behemoth.

LM is no small player

 

Exactly. Prepar3D's development will be determined by the requirements of Lockheed Martin's commercial customers. Those enthusiasts in these forums will get simply what they are given - like it it or not

 

So now someone wants to be able to do all this from scratch?  Good luck and see you in 10 years!  

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

Nice one Rob

Frankly it amazes me it all works given about ten 3rd party products involved ... 

 

Outerra as you know is a 3D engine w/ a few products so of course has no depth by comparison.  The vast majority of depth in P3D is from content developers, not the core engine, which has been reworked now to do some nice things for sure, but is now hopelessly limited by 32-bit, unless there are new tricks to get around that issue.  I wonder how the engine in P3D compares to newer engines like Outerra in terms of accessing hardware better, efficiency, utilizing the most modern graphics APIs and so forth.

 

Yes, the patchwork that is P3D does do a lot of stuff very well we would all agree and I am thankful to have it to use.  What continues to bother me is the incredible amount of processing power my now 4+ y/o machine has sitting idle on the sidelines, synchronization issues notwithstanding.

Outerra as you know is a 3D engine w/ a few products so of course has no depth by comparison.  The vast majority of depth in P3D is from content developers, not the core engine, which has been reworked now to do some nice things for sure, but is now hopelessly limited by 32-bit, unless there are new tricks to get around that issue.  I wonder how the engine in P3D compares to newer engines like Outerra in terms of accessing hardware better, efficiency, utilizing the most modern graphics APIs and so forth.

 

Yes, the patchwork that is P3D does do a lot of stuff very well we would all agree and I am thankful to have it to use.  What continues to bother me is the incredible amount of processing power my now 4+ y/o machine has sitting idle on the sidelines, synchronization issues notwithstanding.

 

I for one am really enjoying this "hopelessly limited"  sim tonight in a flight into KIAH.. 

Yes, it's hopelessly limited when you bring in aircraft like PMDG T7, and everyone is fully aware of this.  And yes you can enjoy what you can w/in this hopeless limit, I never contested that.  Unless there are untapped tricks to get around this, the hopeless limit remains until the address space issue is ultimately solved.  A new engine might get around this by streaming scenery, perhaps.

64 or bust

 

I guess P3D will shrivel up and go away unless it grows up

64 or bust

 

I guess P3D will shrivel up and go away unless it grows up

 

I wonder if Lockheed Martin could simply make their own version of "ENBBoost" which offloads texture memory onto a separate program's memory VAS. I recall this working very well in TESV: Skyrim. And then no 64-bit needed.

Hopelessly limited? Anyone remember as far back as the DX/Open GL wars? That was MS heavy hand if I recall... :blink:

I wonder if Lockheed Martin could simply make their own version of "ENBBoost" which offloads texture memory onto a separate program's memory VAS. I recall this working very well in TESV: Skyrim. And then no 64-bit needed.

 

32-bit DAW's do that too  (that's music creation software, lots of large 1G audio files to run simultaneously)  they sort of have a proxy

 

my DAW is 64 bit so I never have to worry. With P3D its a full time job

 

They should call these 32bit sims  "VAS human management simulators"