Beyond FSX.

[Guest Andre_Hedegaard]

As computing and IT increases in power and dynamics over the years to come, how will this affect the FS series?Times change and what people wanted in a product in 1988 isn't viable today because of the massive amount of change in the computer/entertainment industries.Changes to the FS-concept:I predict that products such as the FS series will undergo more customizability.The product will become 'Live' in the sense that you install the basic components and other elements you wish, such as aircraft from the www and then as you fly, the scenery is updated via www-linkage thanks to fiber-optics in the future.That way, as soon as the FS-Team change something in the scenery, there is no need to provide updates, as everything will change automatically.Included in this regard is that users would only have to pay for what they use and the FS-team would update according to the amount of funding received.For example: 1 million users fly in USA, great, but only 10 users fly in some obscure island in the South Pacific, then the funding would go to 99% updating USA and 1% updating the island.This would alleviate pressure on the FS team to "provide the world" in the same rich detail.There would be package discounts of course, so that someone wanting to 'buy the world' is not going to have to sell his house first.No more DVD's (or Blu-ray discs by this time) would be needed, saving package & distribution costs.Another advantage is that pirating FS would be harder since there is no way to install FS other than through Microsoft servers and pre-paying for the product.With the current trend of Microsoft opening itself up to more user feedback either through forums or emails, FS can target its audiences with increased accuracy.Through the user-customizability options, individual users can choose 'how' they want FS, such as more arcade orientated for beginners, or hardcore detailed simulation for the more serious minded users.This would make it easier on the FS-Team, as there wouldn't be one single version of FS to launch, but a living network of multiple versions that would appeal to a wider range of users.(A sort of an advanced version of "FS2000 Normal/Pro")New users are part of the process to ensure the survival of FS in the years to come, as they are hopefully going to remain in the FS world and support the product.I suspect that many long time users are a little afraid of this concept because of the fear that some elements within the FS system will be removed, for eg. "We're going to reduce the number of displays in the cockpit because new users find it hard to cope with mixing air/fuel ratios, keeping your eyes on the EGT, thinking that cowl flaps are windscreen wipers and wonder why they don't work etc" However I doubt that features that are already pre-existing will be removed.Changes to the FS-engine:Even now, there is talk of a physics world that would come alive, objects that interact with each other. (Eg. you hit the CAT-III sign and off it goes, flying onto the runway creating a mark and the passing 747 sucks it into its engine causing blowout)"Download real weather" would become "Download real environment" so that the real world will be simulated. The 747 parked at the gate would be as in real time, really parked there and loading passengers.A sort of snapshot of the airports at the current time and then the FS-engine takes over to animate the life around the airport.Snaphots could be downloaded at intervals instead of constantly, reducing workload on the www connection.Wind, rain and ice, tear down the runway and airports as in the real world, service trucks appear, personal go about their chores.Aircraft fatigue, failures and even paint would wear down according to usage."Flight Simulator" would become "Flight Environment" in that sub-applications would sprout, such as ATC simulations within the FS system.Airport management and other users from online would land, pay airport tax, refuel etc, creating a really engrossed product that would be fun, addictive and a learning experience."Oh but that won't work if everyone wants to just fly"Well, the world is multiplying in users and how they interact with computing, what once was a 'geek' machine is now being used by a great number of people, from youngsters to pensioners.On a grander scale:The FS engine would evolve into finely detailed branches that benefit airport personal for training purposes. This would require a fee to be paid to MS for this use and as such would ensure that funding towards FS wouldn't only come from flight simulation enthusiasts.With multiple versions of FS available, aircraft manufacturing companies would buy versions that would show their aircraft in real time on the screens of the passengers seats from spot-plane view, so that the passenger feels more secure about what is currently happening, instead of seeing out through the window only. The passenger would see whats directly beneath him as well or other views that aren't possible with some Airbuses inbuilt forward looking cameras.The FS engine would become very powerful, that it would receive FAA approval to be used as a flight training simulation for major aircraft manufacturers. Private pilots could *perhaps* log flying time to maintain their pilots licenses as each flight would be logged online and fees would be received by FAA.The FS engine could at this time become an "aircraft testing application", testing not only aerodynamics of aircraft, but also wear/fatigue and weakspots within an aircraft system.On an even grander scale:The FS engine, alive with real world physics and dynamics would via sattelite and other world device connectivity measure continental drifts, earthquakes, meterological assesments.NASA would perhaps at this time take an interest in this area of the FS engine, so that distant planet environments could be simulated on earth, to get a better understanding of some of the climatic world conditions we currently face.The FS engine would go sub surface too, providing simulation of the world beneath us, gaining usage for marine biologists with eco systems and their impact they have on the world, or our impact on theirs.The worlds eco systems and its environment would be simulated, such as gases and pollution tracking.Vegetation would live and die according to criteria from the real world, superimposed into the FS system.New man-made constructions could be simulated to receive a better understanding of the impact on these eco systems.All of these possibilites wouldn't be an impossible hurdle to overcome with new technology being made available in the years to come (more than 15-20 years I presume) and with enough interest and enough funding.The wonderful experience about all this, is that we, the casual user, would be there from the beginning of such a remarkable abstract journey.Thanks for reading :)

[Guest wingnut2]

> The FS engine would go sub surface too, providing simulation of the world beneath us, gaining usage for marine biologists with eco systems and their impact they have on the world, or our impact on theirs.:-hmmm

[Guest Andre_Hedegaard]

>> The FS engine would go sub surface too, providing>simulation of the world beneath us, gaining usage for marine>biologists with eco systems and their impact they have on the>world, or our impact on theirs.>>:-hmmm Yes, examples could be tracking shark activity, where they migrate. Shellfish, how they reacte to chemical pollutants from industry/shipping. The degeneration of coral reefs and what conditions it takes to reverse changes. In this way, the FS engine would become an ocean physics engine, but still reacting with atmospherical conditions above surface.

[Guest fsxcess]

With all this talk of flightsim or the computing world trying to mimic the real world... would it not just be easier to go outside and experience the real thing? After all, evolution had billions of years to create such a masterpiece so why we all want to create it in virtual reality is a horrible waste of time, don't you think?This I am putting into action by training for my PPL this year :)

[Guest Robin.B]

On an Even Grander scale;The name Flight Simulator will change into Life Simulator :)

[oktorn777 0]

I would love to see the ecosystem modelled too and with fs x enabling animals we are coming a tiny step closer to that goal. :-)But i doubt it will ever happen, because the ecosystem is way to complex to fit it into a binary code.

[Guest alex333]

>On an Even Grander scale;>>The name Flight Simulator will change into Life Simulator :)Interesting thoughts. As we enthusiasts want to experience "the real thing", the more real it gets, the better it is.... Or is there something wrong to this thought?I would love FS to become more and more realistic over the years (surely, FS X seems to be a huge step towards this aim). One thing that was reflected in one of the FS blogs was the ground terrain to evolve from a texture to a 3D thing, simulating grass, gravel etc.But even as I marvel about what FS could be in ten-twenty years, I do sincerely hope that it will remain a game, a simultion, not a true-to-life real time rendition of the world. I would not every FS user to see my current whereabouts via an online satellite feed ;) As for the comment "Why not simply go outside and enjoy the real thing?" - there is something true to that. It may be a little ironic, that FS has taught me again to look more closely at nature's real wonders.But my time up in the air is very limited. I am not a pilot, and my budget allows for maybe two flying trips p.a. In addition, it's simply a wonderful thing to adjust weather, time etc to in the simulation to render a specific environment situation and to fly whereever and whenever I want to. Thus the current development of FS and its add-ons make me very happy ;) Keep it getting more and more realistic!

[Guest Andre_Hedegaard]

>But i doubt it will ever happen, because the ecosystem is way>to complex to fit it into a binary code.Oh I don't know about that;10 For EcoSystem=Simulation-Realworld20 PRINT "EcoSystem"; EcoSystem+130 Next EcoSystem40 IF EcoSystem=Realworld THEN STOP50 GOTO 20Get tdragger to tell pixelpoke to draw it, Hal9000 to test it and us to play it.;)

[Guest jrobert]

>With all this talk of flightsim or the computing world trying>to mimic the real world... would it not just be easier to go>outside and experience the real thing? After all, evolution>had billions of years to create such a masterpiece so why we>all want to create it in virtual reality is a horrible waste>of time, don't you think?>>This I am putting into action by training for my PPL this year>:)For a lot of people, "experiencing the real thing" involves spending a major amount of money. That's money that just doesn't come easy enough for some people. Sure, the "real thing" would be a whole lot more fun but it's also more expensive. Also, the "real thing" is on the order of a billion times more dangerous than a computer simulation. In the "real thing", if you screw up, you're finished - you've met your maker. In the simulator, if you screw up, you learn, and it's fun.Regards,Joshua Robertson (creator of FS Real Time)3D Softworks Design Studioshttp://www.3dsoftworks.net

[Guest Robin.B]

And how is that a billion times more dangerous? :)

[Guest jrobert]

>And how is that a billion times more dangerous? :)Well... I may have exagerated when I said "a billion" but "real world flight" is far more dangerous than just sitting in front of a computer simulation. Take for example the fact that almost any aircraft has on the order of about 10,000 to 30,000 moving parts. (I'm guessing at that number.) Any one of those parts could fail quite possibly with fatalistic results. A desktop computer typically has about 25 to 50 moving parts - maybe up to 150 if you include the keyboard, mouse, and joystick. None of those parts will kill you if they fail. Moreover, a simulation has no moving parts; because it's software... Well... I take that back because FS2004 requires you to open and close the CD-ROM drive to insert disk 4 but that isn't going to kill you. :)Regards,Joshua Robertson (creator of FS Real Time)3D Softworks Design Studioshttp://www.3dsoftworks.net

[JSkorna 137]

My wife wants to kill me almost every day because of FS. Does that count??Hope this helps,Jimhttp://www.hifisim.comhttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6...development.jpg http://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-proud.jpg

---

http://www.jdtllc.com/images/rcv4bannersupporter.jpg

[maxter 0]

Phew, amazing, I remember having a moment like this when I was about 19, wayyyyy too many years ago. It involved a beach, some nice... Nah, too much info :-)Cheers,Chris Porter:-outtaPerthWestern Australia

[Guest cwright]

>I would love to see the ecosystem modelled too and with fs x>enabling animals we are coming a tiny step closer to that>goal. :-)>>But i doubt it will ever happen, because the ecosystem is way>to complex to fit it into a binary code. DNA is effectively a binary code - except that each digit has four possible states instead of two! I don't believe there is any fundamental limit to computing power, particularly with quantum computers on the horizon. In another decade or so the Pentium will have taken its place on a museum shelf, along with the abacus. Then FS may finally have become As Real As It Gets.... Best regards, Chris

[Murmur 3,941]

> I don't believe there is any fundamental limit to computing>power, particularly with quantum computers on the horizon. In>another decade or so the Pentium will have taken its place on>a museum shelf, along with the abacus. Then FS may finally>have become As Real As It Gets....I wouldn't be so sure about that, nuclear fusion and solar energy have been on the horizon for 40 years but we still burn oil. :)Marco