3 hours ago, Bjoern said:

Still waiting for IFR support.

IFR "support" is technically already live (you'll hear AI aircraft get headings on radar for example), but only had a small amount of testing because everything I had lined up with the ATC guys and doing my IFR rating fell through because of the zombie apocalypse and pretty much all the worlds aircraft getting grounded.

Then, to top that off, the 744 autopilot for actually testing it exploded - twice.

So I'm claiming force majeure on that plan.

3 hours ago, Bjoern said:

based on the regular Global Airports cut from the Gateway.

That should actually "just" be a single click my side, but the last time I cut it things broke (or rather it caught lots of things that were broken), building up the energy for the sleepless nights expected when I cut it again. The main issue with the stations from XP is they are only about 30% complete, so they are supplemented from several sources, then overridden by an airport definition when someone points out one is wrong. Getting and keeping that current is probably going to need its own "gateway".

Then, to top everything off.

Interest in X-Plane is generally completely dead, everyone really did pretty much abandon the org forums thanks to their shenanigans, 2 years ago that would have been 500 views on the first day regardless of when it was posted, now its 34 in about a week and gone from the main page so will get very few more. If I didn't have the discord so popular I'd have had no choice but to abandon it..... Its hard work, mostly thankless (have had a couple of phenomenal thank you mails though) and messages like jarmstros now hidden message are actually mostly "empty" - by and large people think they want a realistic ATC, then when they find out how much harder it makes an already hard hobby decide they don't really want ATC.

On the other hand, while I can't say anything about XP12, I can say I have high confidence in AutoATC v1 for XP12 (exact naming to be decided, prior versions do not and will not work with it) and the renewed interest in X-Plane it will bring when it goes live, and that none of the work so far was wasted.

I can also confirm that

https://developer.x-plane.com/2022/02/wake-turbulence/

Quote

plugins that show traffic in X-Plane 11.50 are compatible with wake turbulence generation and will gain that base functionality automatically when used in X-Plane 12.

Is true, is nice, and that I already have all the data needed to upgrade from the "generic learjet" - there is also more, that I can't talk about just yet.

So just plodding along, fixing and adding what I see or gets highlighted. Some recent additions include the radio distortion is now based on range, VFR stuff is now basically all in, "tickets" already fixed most of the really nasty issues (e.g. getting sent to the runway instead of gate after landing).

But there is not much point in shouting about it, because no one is really listening, and all the new guys and gals that come in here havn't even tried X-Plane, let alone got into its plugin system - but hey, at least a half interesting thread gets more than 30 views and no replies, and avsim will get the traffic when people start googling for X-Plane 12 ATC.

 

Edited March 3, 20224 yr by mSparks

AutoATC discussion continued here to keep this thread clean: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/608465-autoatc-flight-testing/?do=findComment&comment=4732893

On 3/2/2022 at 6:11 PM, mSparks said:

A whole country for the price of one MSFS airport, and you're complaining about the price?

$39 AUD for 98000sqm scaled up to the whole earth surface (only land) make $23318 AUD for the whole globe. $23000 vs. $100 is not making a good argument for price...

But this doesn't matter, because ... the term OrbX TrueEarth is a bit of an overstatement. I doubt, they have covered more than a low single digit percentage of the earths landmass. So at the rate OrbX is releasing these packages, you will be able to spend the 23000 around when XP47 will arrive!

 

 

3 hours ago, mrueedi said:

$39 AUD for 98000sqm scaled up to the whole earth surface (only land) make $23318 AUD for the whole globe

a LOT cheaper than 11 AUD each for 30000 3D msfs airports, $330,000 AUD for the whole globe.

But it doesnt matter because msfs still doesnt have a single half decent plane or helicopter to fly to them in yet.

Come back when they either do or they give up because its to hard. Either way XP12 is going to be well out of early alpha by then (an early alpha that is already better in every quantifiable way)

Edited March 8, 20224 yr by mSparks

I have to agree with everyone. XP is dead. XP is the greatest thing since the invention of the wheel. MSFS is better then XP12. MSFS has everything you will ever want in a flight sim. Orbx not worth the money. Orbx is great. XP11 is for real pilots not for desk jockeys. Every airport in MSFS is a joy to behold except for all the addons that are payware. The flight models in both sims are just as I expected. I can keep going but what the heck. Just Fly!

MEH!

On 3/8/2022 at 3:03 PM, mSparks said:

But it doesnt matter because msfs still doesnt have a single half decent plane or helicopter to fly to them in yet.

I am not posting at a high pace here, but for this I have a reply.

Every second default aircraft is equipped with the industry benchmark implementation of the G1000 NXi, capable to accomplish what is called a wonder in XP11 and costing exactly zero (which is quite a bit less than XPs 650).

About the airports: I bet that from all the airports presented here the majority looks less realistic in XP. I picked the first airport (ICAO 44TX) when stopping the video at a random place and have prepared a screenshot. If you would be so kind to show a screenshot of 44TX in XP I would post my screenshot too.

except maybe for msparks, I don't think there are so many here to play this mine is bigger/better game.

4 hours ago, mrueedi said:

but for this I have a reply.

Sure, no problem with asking me to clarify what I mean by a "half decent" plane. The rules apply equally to all flight sims

My minimum standards are:

• Almost all the buttons in the cockpit work
• 60fps minimum in VR (can never go back to flying 2D)
• Door animations work so I can get in and out of it
• Take off, landing and power characteristics match the pilots operating manual
• good selection of failures for practising "not dying" 
• clean cockpit graphics that give you a sense you are actually in the cockpit

Anything else is the difference between "half decent", and good/exemplary etc, but if it doesn't meet those minimum standards its not worth my time, there are already hundreds of ones that do for xplane (and hundreds that don't), and I've not got through them yet.

The closest I've seen that meets that minimum standard for MSFS the DC6 by PMDG, but that was pulled from the XBOX store for being broken (xbox being the only device I'd have windows on in 2022), xbox doesn't have VR, and even PC can't manage the frame rates needed.

Hence "not a single half decent plane to fly to them in yet"

Edited March 12, 20224 yr by mSparks

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

Sure, no problem with asking me to clarify what I mean by a "half decent" plane. The rules apply equally to all flight sims

Avsim has 262695 users so there are 262695 definitions what a "half decent" plane is.

Your criterias are nice but they are not more representatitve than e.g. mine. I like the VR part though (even if the fps requirement is exactly unrelated to the planes a sim has). But I agree that VR flying is a paradigm shift and I also can't go back to 2D flying. 2D flying is like visiting places on Google street view. For me taking of the first time in VR at LSPM, flying down the Leventina and sensing the cramped cockpit of the C152 is the most memorable, intense and enjoyable event I ever experienced with a PC. Despite that my machine at that time was below minimum specs and probably made hardly more than 1/6 of your requirements. Btw. the quality of the aircraft interior modeling of literally every single default aircraft, which I consider on par with the best standards offered only by the most expensive payware, creates a stunning experience if you do nothing than take a seat in the cockpit in VR and look around. Doing just that more than once was literally breath taking.

The Kodiak, the Just Flight PA28 or the Just Flight Hawk cover your criteria also quite well.

3 hours ago, mSparks said:

60fps minimum in VR (can never go back to flying 2D)

well it is 2d just on 2 screens. And its a virtual reality whether you have them google on or not, because none of its real. And i find Trakir enough, for my virtual reality.

Edited March 12, 20224 yr by mjrhealth

31 minutes ago, mjrhealth said:

well it is 2d just on 2 screens. And its a virtual reality whether you have them google on or not, because none of its real. And i find Trakir enough, for my virtual reality.

I'm so happy I never got TrackIR, or I might still think that. but its a very different discussion and there is a thread for it here:

 

52 minutes ago, mrueedi said:

The Kodiak, the Just Flight PA28 or the Just Flight Hawk cover your criteria also quite well.

3 almost half decent planes to fly to them in. also, that's my minimum requirements of any aircraft. They are competing against the likes of

https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/79609-dhc-2-beaver-by-soulmade-simulations/

Which, tbh, at this point is the minimum bar they need to exceed in order to charge money.

Edited March 12, 20224 yr by mSparks

2 hours ago, mSparks said:

I'm so happy I never got TrackIR, or I might still think that. but its a very different discussion and there is a thread for it here:

Didnt know this one was about VR??

4 minutes ago, mjrhealth said:

Didnt know this one was about VR??

Its not, that's why I linked the other one???

Edited March 13, 20224 yr by mSparks

Do we know what will the XP12 weather be based on? After the MSFS fiasco reverting to static weather and animated bitmap Cu only clouds I’m having high hopes for a realistic weather simulation here.

1 hour ago, Mark1616 said:

Do we know what will the XP12 weather be based on? After the MSFS fiasco reverting to static weather and animated bitmap Cu only clouds I’m having high hopes for a realistic weather simulation here.

REal weather as is always being the option, just better, There are videos if you search.