Poll: Most wanted feature enhancement for P3D v5

[simbol 5,819]

57 minutes ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Crash modeling? Really?

Well what if somebody need to take a Flying Crash Course? 

[SKEWR 364]

1 hour ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Any option that negatively impacts 3rd party add-on developers is not likely to happen. So I don't expect improvements to be be made to the built-in ATC. And as much as 3D clouds would be great, that also impinges on developers like REX and HiFi.

This type of thing bothers me IRL. The world could be so much further along technologically, but some company or conglomerate would lose money (e.g. we continue to use oil versus alternatives that already exist).

For our little hobby, why should simmers be stunted to the current engine due to 3rd party addons? Why are we still worrying about compatibility when we could have the performance that these new CPUs and graphic cards can produce?

Of course my thoughts on this are total fantasy as here, as in real life, $$$ rules all. We'll continue to have the ESP based engine pieced together like Frankenstein for the foreseeable future. So, if we're stuck with what we have, at least improve it. Which is why I went thread optimization.

[edpatino 1,964]

No surprises here with the poll. So far, the two main items are (as expected) terrain representation and thread managment (ditto, performance) improvements.

I wonder if ATC is on any future plans for LM, since to me is an area intentionally left to third-party developers by LM, but it will not harm to ask for it.

Cheers, Ed

 

[Sam 68]

8 hours ago, simbol said:

I bet the end result will be the ATC, this is the result of years of failure of Vatsim + IVAO + Etc. in providing better environment for online users so people are retrieving back to flying offline since they want to feel the immersion level of ATC traffic, unfortunately the offline ATC is also bad but at least they can ignore it, buy PRO-ATCx, VOXATC, RC4 and others and have a slight improvement.

If only you could control the AI traffic better.. 

S. 

 

Honestly your comment really puzzles me.

being an controller on vatsim I surely cannot seem to recon ‘bad’ atc.

There is people spending their time voluntarily updating and maintaining the sectors up to date, training new guys and organizing major events.

Living close to the local hub, and having an atc scanner I can assure you the controlling you get visiting the FIR, surely is as real as it gets procedurewise... 

We regularly speak and get information from local real world controllers who regularly fly in... 

Surely it’s easy to sit on the outside and bash and entire network (I’m sure you meet bad atc somewhere) but saying vatsim is bad in general is just wrong.

Thinking on all the people who spend so much effort in keeping the wheels running I honestly think you should be ashamed of such comment

We continue to grow on traffic, that is what the stats say. Last event had over 600 movements.

There is always room for improvement, but I invite you all to participate and I promise you new traffic will get patient controlling in my local airspace.

 

Edited September 28, 2018 by Sam

[kevinfirth 1,393]

6 hours ago, scottb613 said:

ATC that provides actual traffic separation - also ATC that is terrain aware - even with addons I don't think either has been accomplished yet...

AFAIK, VoxATC is the only ATC addon that at the moment claims to a) manage AI (and therefore could conceivably manage separations through its own logic) and b) is terrain aware.

---------------------------------------------------------------

31 July 2017 Version 7.4 released

Terrain aware (no more vectors into mountains)

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

2 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

AFAIK, VoxATC is the only ATC addon that at the moment claims to a) manage AI (and therefore could conceivably manage separations through its own logic) and b) is terrain aware.

---------------------------------------------------------------

31 July 2017 Version 7.4 released

Terrain aware (no more vectors into mountains)

I've actually flowcharted how the ATC works in VOXATC and now I know why LM, LR and 3rd party developers have stayed away from improving this feature. 

[kevinfirth 1,393]

2 hours ago, BrianW said:

Exactly this!!  ATC isn’t a navigational aid, its purpose is to keep aircraft from hitting one another. Right now there isn’t any accurate software based ATC because none of them can control AI aircraft.  If LM could introduce the ability to control AI I think it would be a game changer. Maybe as a start they could introduce AI that can perform basic VFR “see and avoid” functions with any player controlled vehicle.  Eventually I’d like to see AI at the point where it can be controlled by a human controller on Pilotedge, Vatsim, etc. alongside real users.

Incorrect, VoxATC generates and controls its own AI traffic.

-------------------------------------------------------------

31 July 2017 Version 7.4 released

Improved traffic generation

[kevinfirth 1,393]

Just now, jabloomf1230 said:

I've actually flowcharted how the ATC works in VOXATC and now I know why LM, LR and 3rd party developers have stayed away from improving this feature. 

Jay, if you've documented this I'd be really interested in reading it if you felt able to share please? Cheers K

[pracines 823]

2 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

And as much as 3D clouds would be great, that also impinges on developers like REX and HiFi.

Impinges? No. All I see it doing is moving them on to bigger and better. Instead of trying to compensate for the lack or realism, like has always been the case, they could be adding to and/or increasing the realism. 👍

[pracines 823]

15 minutes ago, Sam said:

Honestly your comment really puzzles me.

being an controller on vatsim I surely cannot seem to recon ‘bad’ atc.

There is people spending their time voluntarily updating and maintaining the sectors up to date, training new guys and organizing major events.

Living close to the local hub, and having an atc scanner I can assure you the controlling you get visiting the FIR, surely is as real as it gets procedurewise... 

We regularly speak and get information from local real world controllers who regularly fly in... 

Surely it’s easy to sit on the outside and bash and entire network (I’m sure you meet bad atc somewhere) but saying vatsim is bad in general is just wrong.

Thinking on all the people who spend so much effort in keeping the wheels running I honestly think you should be ashamed of such comment

We continue to grow on traffic, that is what the stats say. Last event had over 600 movements.

There is always room for improvement, but I invite you all to participate and I promise you new traffic will get patient controlling in my local airspace.

 

I don't think "bad" meant bad ATC service in the sense of the motive or commitment of each controller - its more like unless there is an "event", there is no way to fully man every controller position in the world (not even a little close). So if I wish to fly from say EHAM to KLAX this moment - there is no way VATSIM or any other online ATC service is going to have separate controllers for every frequency at each airport and in between for the entire flight....not even close. Plus the fact that the airports are much more barren of other traffic compared to AI (offline) situations.

What is called for is an ATC system that we can rely on to be totally manned, all the time, on every frequency, and for that ATC to be able to manage huge amounts of AI (simulating a busy int'l airport) with a system logic that sees ahead to prevent conflicts. Its possible and needed badly.

Unicom and FSS also come to mind because there are times when I do flights between low use fields that are manned certain times of the day....realism.

PCL could also be added to this topic - huge.

[Drumcode 1,893]

8 hours ago, scottb613 said:

Hi Folks,

ATC - ATC - and yet again ATC...

Regards,
Scott

Agreed + AI with a ton of options to control it

[simbol 5,819]

23 minutes ago, pracines said:

I don't think "bad" meant bad ATC service in the sense of the motive or commitment of each controller - its more like unless there is an "event", there is no way to fully man every controller position in the world (not even a little close). So if I wish to fly from say EHAM to KLAX this moment - there is no way VATSIM or any other online ATC service is going to have separate controllers for every frequency at each airport and in between for the entire flight....not even close. Plus the fact that the airports are much more barren of other traffic compared to AI (offline) situations.

What is called for is an ATC system that we can rely on to be totally manned, all the time, on every frequency, and for that ATC to be able to manage huge amounts of AI (simulating a busy int'l airport) with a system logic that sees ahead to prevent conflicts. Its possible and needed badly.

Unicom and FSS also come to mind because there are times when I do flights between low use fields that are manned certain times of the day....realism.

PCL could also be added to this topic - huge.

Yes @Samthat is what I meant to say , people wants more constant activity and traffic around.

Sorry it came across wrong.

S.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

52 minutes ago, pracines said:

Impinges? No. All I see it doing is moving them on to bigger and better. Instead of trying to compensate for the lack or realism, like has always been the case, they could be adding to and/or increasing the realism. 👍

LM would probably do the same thing that they did with fluid motion and 3D trees. They purchased licenses to Sundog's Triton SDK for the water and Speedtrees for vegetation. Sundog also markets a cloud and sky SDK (Silver Lining), so LM could license either that or trueSKY from Simul, which was the SDK used in DTG FSW. In any case, HIFI and REX would have to start over almost from scratch and some of their previous product line like cloud textures would be next to worthless. I suspect that HFI would rather spend its resources coding Active Sky for XP11. REX's testing protocol is so conservative that it might take them years to adjust to such a radical change in P3d.

[pracines 823]

21 minutes ago, jabloomf1230 said:

LM would probably do the same thing that they did with fluid motion and 3D trees. They purchased licenses to Sundog's Triton SDK for the water and Speedtrees for vegetation. Sundog also markets a cloud and sky SDK (Silver Lining), so LM could license either that or trueSKY from Simul, which was the SDK used in DTG FSW. In any case, HIFI and REX would have to start over almost from scratch and some of their previous product line like cloud textures would be next to worthless. I suspect that HFI would rather spend its resources coding Active Sky for XP11. REX's testing protocol is so conservative that it might take them years to adjust to such a radical change in P3d.

I understand and partly agree, but only because I don't wish great obstacles for Hi Fi. The reason I would disagree is because the weather in P3D does need a huge overhaul and, I think with some cooperation (i.e. a well done SDK), LM and Hi Fi can come up with something great, maybe not easy, but moving to bigger and better. (growing pains)

I think, ( or more precisely, I hope ) Hi Fi would rather be working with a better atmospheric base model in P3D with much less limitation.

I'm not as familiar with the XP atmospheric model other than it needs help, more so than P3D, so I cant comment further on Hi Fi AS for XP; looking forward to seeing what it has to offer though. 

[BrianW 124]

2 hours ago, kevinfirth said:

Incorrect, VoxATC generates and controls its own AI traffic.

Interesting I didn’t think it was possible.  So if you’re inflight and there’s a traffic conflict you’ll hear VoxATC give AI instructions and see them comply? Are there and videos you know of that show this AI control in action?