FU2 Models, Part 2

[Christopher Low 5,353]

Below are three significant screenshots from FU2.1. Aeroflop DC-10. Notice the cyrillic letters, since this airline is the virtual equivalent of Aeroflot. This isn't the case in FU3.2. Excalibur 777. Notice the TRIPLE undercarriage, which is correct for this type of aircraft. Now look at the FU3 equivalent. This only has a DOUBLE undercarriage. Why did LG do this ?3. Another gratuitous screenshot of the VASTLY SUPERIOR F18 Hornet model in FU2.Best Wishes,Chris Low,ENGLAND.

[Guest Pieter]

> Why did LG do this ?Unknown, but perhaps part of the reason behind the whole Looking Glass dilemma of the past: exactly about "complaints" like these. The same thing going on now about the X-Plane scenery and other visual nonsense that have very little to do with the actual relevant issues like flight modeling of the aircraft: wings and engines in the air! Nice to look at, but useless if one really thinks clearly about that. Also read Hennie's comment about the LG programmer's abuse. It really would bother me the least if another aircraft has one less wheel on the ground, while the tail-dragger I'm taxiing does not show the real characteristics of its simulated counterpart... Always, to use the slang expression, eye-candy, eye-candy, eye-candy, but talk about engines and how well they are simulated or not, and it attracts very little response.This makes me think that the majority of simulator pilots prefer arcade games rather than true flight simulation (and the companies make their money from arcade stuff). I've bought X-Plane exactly for that reason, as an example for "truer" flight simulation, and it turned into a nightmare of flames around issues like to add weapons to a GA simulator and other useless silly visuals. The worst scenario being that the developer (Laminar) succumbs towards that and left the flight modelling aspects as they were, two years old and way behind on its own technology. Sad, but true, with FU we can only speculate about the past and improvements we can add would be visually only. In that sense, and I repeat my view, FU is getting old, X-Plane's developer is immature and FS is a mammoth sloth where changes are small and take ages to add in jumps of 2-3 years.Just IMHO.Pieter

[Christopher Low 5,353]

Pieter,I would agree with you, apart from one very important point. Since LG already had the AI plane models from FU2, why did they downgrade them ? I suspect that it was because of the extra power required to run FU3 compared to FU2, but it was a mistake in my opinion.Chris Low,ENGLAND.

[Guest Pieter]

The written word as read may usually sound somewhat harsh. It was not my intention to provoke a fight about this dead horse again!>why did they downgrade them ? ... the extra power ...This might be, but I don't think it was downgraded, because all the programmers working on FU did not continue working on FU2 and the same is valid for the change to FU3. Furthermore, FU3 is still the best weather simulator and I'm glad that more time was spent on getting that done well than on the artificial visuals!!! Just the small differences (like manifold pressure gauges) between the different FU3 aircraft (those we can fly) made me believe that different programmers worked on the different flight models. Lastly, the "in-house" affairs, like pressure for finishing the job and final release dates, caused the programmers to get hasty and I presume they left superficial things to the last, like AI aircraft, taxi-lines and other non-flight concerned things. So they were not downgraded, they just remained unfinished to get the product to the shelves? That at the time caused the down-fall of LG. They are neither available for good comments nor flames anymore.We really purchased good (OK, convincing ;)) flight models, excellent weather, ridge soaring, functional ATC and many other relevant things like awesome scenery. That made me love FU3. Pity that some of the true "laminar flow mathematics" of the original Flight Unlimited aerobatics aircraft was lost. This is X-Plane's strength and still the best in this category, but it does not simulate the total picture of an aircraft in the air convincingly. FS2002 got closer with the ATC to FU3, but weather and flight models are still awkward. Fly! and Sierra PP are in-betweens for me, which never really could hold my attention for long. I always fall back on either FU or X-Plane when I'm in that mood for a "trip to the airport". :)Pieter

[Christopher Low 5,353]

Pieter,You are probably right that LG just didn't have time to finish FU3 as they would have intended. In fact, I suspect that this annoyed them a great deal.Chris Low,ENGLAND.

[Guest]

Hello Chris,1. Cyrilics, easy to fix if wanted. See attached file. The textures should be quite easy to handle, if you want I could give it a go.2. and 3. It seems that the 3D models of FU2 are a bit different, the texture mapping doesn't go as easy as in FU3. So no promises here, but stay tuned....Regards,Jokke

[adams 1]

Have you seen the planes at night ?B.Adamski