Finally we will have something that should have been in since clouds have been in FS, cloud shadows. Now this will be worthy every dime!http://f111raaf.blogspot.com/

Just like in real life! LOL!

I'll believe it when I see it.

As the developer of Tileproxy I'd be pulling my hat if you can do this.The only way that I think this is remotely possible would be by hooking either into the DirectX API or by somehow intercepting calls between FlightSimulator's own DLLs (internal APIs).Moving cloud shadows would certainly require texture intervals of several updates per minute to look realistic.Christian

>As the developer of Tileproxy I'd be pulling my hat if you>can do this.>>The only way that I think this is remotely possible would be>by hooking either into the DirectX API or by somehow>intercepting calls between FlightSimulator's own DLLs>(internal APIs).>>Moving cloud shadows would certainly require texture intervals>of several updates per minute to look realistic.>>Christian>>Not to mention doing dynamic sun position calculations as well as object collision detection for buildings and such to ensure you're not putting shadows where they can't go. ;)

I was the one who originally discussed dynamic texture swapping with Peter Wilding 2 years ago as a programmer who knows how to accomplish this feat. You *WOULD* have had changing weather and cloud formations on the fly. He and I were going to work together and make that a reality over a year ago. Unfortunately I had my own business which ended up taking up most of my time and I could no longer pursue this back then. Needless to say, Peter wasn't happy with me that I didn't respond to his emails or MSN messages in a period of weeks and decided to send me quite a negative email. I have no ill will toward him as I understand his zeal for quick pursuits and I just couldn't spend the time that he was looking for back then. My apologies to you all and congratulations for his sticking with moving forward that I'm sure many people have enjoyed the newer offerings.

Matt Tomkins and I are the texture guys who paint the ground canvas, and soon Peter will be doing the same for FTX_EU. Chris Norris however, is the coding guru who makes a lot of these cool things possible inside the FSX runtime environment, and yes, it is a black science which I don't fully understand. One thing I do know, if Chris says he can do it I have no reason to not believe him based on what he's shown us thus far.To the naysayers, realtime intercepts at DLL level while the sim is running is not magic nor impossible. In fact Christian does this sort of thing with TileProxy. Just give us time to get the tech working and the rewards will be there for us all.I also agree with Holger that the quick and dirty way to get snow happening is to use the Winter Wonderland theme; that's how I did it in Australia for the alpine regions in rural/crops valleys where there should have been snow during mid winter. However, the step we're taking further is to allow the user to define the snowfall patterns so it's persistent based on seasonal variations. Again, don't expect all of these goodies "out of the box" - FTX is a long term project and all the candy will take time to bring to market.The main thing is, that we've got the vision, the skills and the motivation to do it, and that's what counts ;)

Intercepts... intercepts of cloud renderings so you know where they physically are? Their size, density? What about lightning strikes and their effect on shadowing?Sorry... but as a developer I know that FSX offers no such information... which means you're hacking into the core of FSX itself to get there. If you're having to hack that deep... I'd be extremely wary about placing such stuff in my FSX, personally.

>Intercepts... intercepts of cloud renderings so you know>where they physically are? Their size, density? What about>lightning strikes and their effect on shadowing?>>Sorry... but as a developer I know that FSX offers no such>information... which means you're hacking into the core of FSX>itself to get there. If you're having to hack that deep...>I'd be extremely wary about placing such stuff in my FSX,>personally.Well then Ed, don't select that option in FTX. All these visual extras will be optionally selectable from the front-end, so you can use your own discretion for enabling those features or not.

>Well then Ed, don't select that option in FTX. All these>visual extras will be optionally selectable from the>front-end, so you can use your own discretion for enabling>those features or not.Then you intend to provide information regarding what features required you to hack FSX and what features did not? So it is known how to completely disable any of the hack code?I'm not trying to be a jerk here... but I, as a professional developer and a consumer, don't like it when I purchase software that sneaks behind the scenes and monkeys with other software I purchased. It tends to break things in a hidden manner, which makes tech support for the primary software as well as any other add-ons that are potentially affected a flippin' nightmare.As a case in point... someone, somewhere out there released either a freeware or commercial add-on gauge(s). The gauge(s) required the use of the Glass Gauge font that ships as part of FS. However, they modified the base Glass Gauge font, left the name the same... and "stealth-installed" it on user's systems who installed the gauge(s). The end result was some seriously wonky font displays on systems that had the modified font file. It was initially being reported as a bug in the software, yet... it wasn't.

This is a valid point and I'm sure the FTX team will disclose and allow the bypassing of any and all features that require that kind of "hacking" (for a lack of better term).We need only look at Microsoft's recent stealthy updates of certain core Windows files to see what kind of maintenance nightmare NOT disclosing important information can lead to. I'm sure the FTX crew would not want to kill their cash cow by deciding to keep that information private. Microsoft might expect to get away with something like this... but small-time developers can't (and I mean no disrespect with that - it's just the natural outcome of being compared to a behemoth like Microsoft).

Hi sightseer, not sure what you mean about water variations? FEX has enormous water variations, as each single water depth pattern can be selected seperately and then manipulated.Perhaps you have not seen this aspect to FEX? :-)Warm regards,Chris

Hi Ed, and point is noted. Certainly it is a design goal to avoid breaking anything else indirectly, and hopefully a thorough beta period will minimize any unforeseen problems.In respect of cloud shadows and other environmental stuff, they will of course be entirely optional.Warm regards,Chris

>Hi sightseer, not sure what you mean about water variations?>FEX has enormous water variations, as each single water depth>pattern can be selected seperately and then manipulated.>>Perhaps you have not seen this aspect to FEX? :-)>>Warm regards,>>ChrisHi Chris - welcome back from vacation.I was referring to the 'real time water variations' which I assume mean 'weather induced real time water variations' for example calm water when there is little or no wind and chopppy water when the wind is up. You might even have dark blue/green water when there is no rain and grayish water during rain and then muddy looking water after it rains.I have no idea what you all are up to but I'm sure it will be good.Good luck and welcome back.I'm eagerly awaiting the weather engine and the updated airport textures you mentioned.

>Hi Ed, and point is noted. Certainly it is a design goal to>avoid breaking anything else indirectly, and hopefully a>thorough beta period will minimize any unforeseen problems.>>In respect of cloud shadows and other environmental stuff,>they will of course be entirely optional.>>Warm regards,>>ChrisI'm about 100% certain one could say that is ACES' position on releasing service packs for FSX... however, it never works that way... for them, or just about any software company I can think of.Based on your responses here, I'm now getting the impression you won't be publicly admitting what features are only supported by hacking the FSX code.Which means for the rest of the developers to be able to support their software... the first requirement will be to tell the user to uninstall your add-on to ensure it isn't causing a conflict or other bug. I'm certain you can agree that's not a position you desire to be in if you had to support software. Just imagine what response you'd get from your customers if the first thing you told them was to get further support they must first uninstall something else.So... think about it... don't just "note it".