Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest s0436

A list of "true FSX" Freeware Aircraft for FSX

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

What does "true FSx" mean? -- you need SP2 installed? I installed an aircraft yesterday which was "see through" - I only have SP1 installed.Barry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can also use a model checker available here at avsim. I was amazed to find out that none of the planes I downloaded that are said to be FSX compliant were compiled with the FSX SDK. I expected many of them, but not all of them.Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>You can also use a model checker available here at avsim. I>was amazed to find out that none of the planes I downloaded>that are said to be FSX compliant were compiled with the FSX>SDK. I expected many of them, but not all of them.>>Bobyes, labelling is an issue. which is why I posted about it months ago with my taxonomy.and why now I wanted to generate a list of "true FSX" freeware aircraft that were compiled with an FSX SDK.I updated the blog post to point to modelchecker.zip, thanks for reminding me of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of the 54 aircraft listed, only 9 are linked in the AVSIM file library ... the lesson being that if you are only looking in the AVSIM file library for FSX addons, then you are missing out on a lot of high-quality addons available and might be of the misimpression that there aren't a lot of them available.Thanks Phil, for compiling the list. (Is it available on FSInsider?)If you're looking for missions, the AVSIM library has many, but Flight Simulator X Missions.com has many that are not available in the AVSIM library, and we also link to any that we can find anywhere on the internet.Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a minor clarification...one of the entries is "N2056's Pete". That plane is available here as pete.zip, it is a modernized Pietenpol Aircamper that my Dad & I built many years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Just a minor clarification...one of the entries is "N2056's>Pete". That plane is available here as pete.zip, it is a>modernized Pietenpol Aircamper that my Dad & I built many>years ago. thanks, I annotated the name. that is what it was called in the sim-outhouse thread,and I musta missed any correction there so that is what I used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact many of the planes in the list are available on Avsim. Just because he didn't choose to link here doesn't mean it's not here. (e.g. Rien's aircraft). But the corrolary is also true, not all of them are here.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>In fact many of the planes in the list are available on>Avsim. Just because he didn't choose to link here doesn't>mean it's not here. (e.g. Rien's aircraft). But the corrolary>is also true, not all of them are here.>the point I am trying to make is, using 1 site as a gauge of anything these days is not going to give accurate results. there was a post recently about "only 1 new aircraft this month on the hot list" and then trying to equate that into some sort of global statement about the "state of FSX freeware aircraft". I believe that is invalid because the sample set ( 1 site ) does not let valid conclusions about the "state of FSX freeware aircraft" be made. discussing whether or not some subset of the aircraft I presented are linked on multiple sites does not invalidate the point that "the state of FSX freeware aircraft" is sigificantly less dire than previously thought. 54 is not a small number, and that was generated by 1 person in roughly 1 day. are there more - almost certainly. it seems some freeware aircraft authors are actually making new aircraft, and in good numbers, who would have thought after reading the other thread?I repeat, you cannot use 1 site anymore as a judgement about freeware, the community is too dispersed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello from New Zealand Phil. Always interested in reading your posts in these hallowed pages. Thanks for that list. Gives me a good idea on what to spend my time in.Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the list. I am surprised no developer has made a freeware "true FSX" aircraft that is a modern airliner jet (that isn't just a repaint of the default a/c)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil,I wonder if the depth of knowledge required, in terms of tools and techniques, hasn't surpassed the level of commitment present or available for the average freeware author? Or, I wonder if there are techniques available in older versions of the SDK that the FSX-SDK doesn't support? FSX has been out for about 2 years now and it seems that add-on products (free and pay) are slow in coming.Perhaps the tools might simplify in the future? This is conjecture on my point but salient to the topic.Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Phil,>>I wonder if the depth of knowledge required, in terms of tools>and techniques, hasn't surpassed the level of commitment>present or available for the average freeware author? each freeware author has to answer that for themselves.it is true that features like bump-mapping, VCs, and shadows require more work. they also provide more of an experience. value for value. and all features do not have to be supported all the time. Piglet's excellent freeware aircraft lack VC shadows in many cases for instance, but are still excellent aircraft.the list shows some have decided yes, it can be done.> Or, I>wonder if there are techniques available in older versions of>the SDK that the FSX-SDK doesn't support? for aicraft, no.> FSX has been out>for about 2 years now and it seems that add-on products (free>and pay) are slow in coming.I see that in the last 6 months the rate of release of add-ons for FSX has greatly increased.And that many high-quality add-ons that provide features and experiences that are not available in FS9 are now released.And that many more are in the pipeline.And that major add-on producers are starting to migrate to "FSX-only" or "FSX-mostly" production. And stating so publicly.So I see this claim as backwards looking and not forwards looking.>>Perhaps the tools might simplify in the future? Unlikely.Any time you add features and capabilities that raises the bar.Plus given GMax is done as determined by Autodesk, FS11 will likely require learning a completely new modeling tool.Old dogs need to learn new tricks. That is just the way of the world.The one piece of relief I can offer is we are changing how the existing shadows are done and are not using volume shadows in the future. That will simplify aircraft model production a little bit by not requiring models to be manifold ( closed ) surfaces.>>This is conjecture on my point but salient to the topic.I see a list of 54 "true FSX" freeware aircraft that is an existence proof your conjecture is false. The content exists, some freeware authors are busy making it.I see a continuing problem is authors who do not want to invest in FSX and want to continue the practice of creating FS9 content and then labeling it as for FSX. The longer they wait to learn the new techniques, the further behind they will be. But that too is natural, as in natural selection.>>Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites