Hi fellow simmers and ACES team!I'm interested to know if the physics model and flight models of the aircraft in FSX will be enhanced/improved to the ones in FS9. If you can't answer this just say so and I'll understand!Also, moreso than screenshots I'd like to see videos of FSX. I'm not asking to rush any as I'm wise enough to know that you won't, but even an indication as to when to expect some (not solid dates, but ballparks) would be great!I'm really looking forward to the release of what I'm sure will be an MS masterpiece!James

>> I'm interested to know if the physics model and flight models of the aircraft in FSX will be enhanced/improved to the ones in FS9.yes.

WOW..this is a biggie that everyone was complaining about and now that it is confirmed that its improved, so few responses..yo yum! We are only good at complaining I guess..lol

That's one of the reasons I thought of posting the question. I think it's laughable that people have been winging about eye candy at the expense of better flight models, yet haven't even bothered asking.James

>That's one of the reasons I thought of posting the question.>I think it's laughable that people have been winging about eye>candy at the expense of better flight models, yet haven't even>bothered asking.>>Jameswell, I've become used to that. Was the exact same thing with FS2004 and FS2002 as well.In either case kids saw the preview screenshots and concluded that the only changes were to the eyecandy (and that those changes would be minimal)...Many wouldn't listen to arguments that you can't tell FDE changes (and weather engine changes in large part) (for example) from a screenshot...

Well, not too suprising, since we "enhance & improve" the FMs with every release. The reason there are so few responses is probably because no one's suprised by that.

I've noticed that every version has better physics and flight models etc, but I swear that that reality escapes some people.I remember not long ago reading a thread where someone actually argued that FS98 had better flight models than FS2002!!!Anyway, now no-one can complain that the flight models have been sacrificed for eye-candy.James

>Well, not too suprising, since we "enhance & improve" the FMs>with every release. The reason there are so few responses is>probably because no one's suprised by that.It is very good to hear that flight model enhancements are confirmed. Any chance that we will get physics processor support? You could probably do a lot of interesting things if the flight model was partly or entirely moved to dedicated hardware.

I remember FS98's flight dynamics. They were OK, but crosswinds were unrealistic. Position a 747 on the the apron in FS98 and add a 20kt crosswind ... the 747 starts to weathercock and slide across the tarmac :-lol

>Anyway, now no-one can complain that the flight models have been sacrificed for eye-candy.

if flight models had been sacrificed for eyecandy (as some people claim) they'd been getting less and less realistic in time as the sim started to look better and better.This is obviously not the case, as the flight modelling has gotten better and better along with the visuals.

I remember reading somewhere that there would be no physics processor support for FSX. I'm pretty sure it was from one of the ACES team but I don't exactly remember.James

Seems to me a little early to be supporting such a new technology.It's one thing to say you (AGEIA) can do something. Totally different actually proving it'll work. And I imagine you're talking years of work integrating it into the FS engine. Not to mention that, what percentage of the population will actually go out and buy this chip? So FS will still have to do its own calcs. Supposedly, they also can do software only, but, geez, I'm not holding my breath waiting for support on this one.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com/FC_StartJava.html] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)

I wouldn't think that it would take that much work if the flight model is properly abstracted the way that other things such as graphics are. I've heard that graphics cards are planning to build the physics chip on board. If the chip provides the kind of FPS and fluidity improvement that it should by removing all of those real-time, repetitive calculations from the cpu then I think a good portion of the hard core simmers would adopt it. I suppose the multithreading and dual core support that they've hinted at will make a difference also. Maybe we can get a 64 bit version too.

>I wouldn't think that it would take that much work...You aren't a professional programmer, right? ;)