Peter,Yep, that's where I got to. I have no problems porting the models themselves and textures are OK too. Defining moving parts is a humdinger! You can nominate anything to be a moving part but it must already be defined elswhere. This is the disadvantage of the open format. For example, there is no simple way of having props implemented, unlike in FU3. In FU3, a prop is easily defined as '@xxspin' where 'xx' is the axle number. No axle is necessary, just a bounding box where the prop would be - easy! Of course, the direction is predetermined and the rotational speed comes straight from the engine values.I guess I'll warm-up to it eventually ;)Jon Point*************************([email protected])*************************

Yip, the FlightGear project needs some kind programmers to write some tools to make addon development easier.It'll get there - it's just a matter of time.I'm writing some scenery tools for FG which I'll hopefully finish before 10 GHz CPUs are available. :)Paul

>what we need is ACCESS. Not in the form of source code>either. FGFS will progress much more quickly when the>developers come out with some good tools. Until then, it's for>'codies' only. I am not a 'codie', get no kicks out of running>scripts and are only interested in creating usable, lifelike>3D models and aircraft - I think there's enough work in that>alone.When creating Aircraft 3d models for Flightgear you canuse typcial standard 3d Modelers like 3d Studio Max or Blenderso extra aircraft developing tools are not necessary.Just export the 3d models as *.ac files so that you can use them in flightgear.The XML stuff to do something with the airplane, like animating theruders etc. is very easy documentation can be found about this on the flightgear website.Blender is a powerfull open source 3d modeleryou can get it here for free:www.blender.org

>Paul,>>I agree that FGFS needs support. My points related to the fact>that it would be easier to support with some good tools. It's>no good that the developers expect that everyone will even>wish to gain an understanding of the machine code or file>structure. >>Creators are artists, technically speaking, and do better work>when they can concentrate on the 'art' bits! Without Resviewer>for example, we simply would not have anything for FU3, same>goes for FLED (as primitive as it is). We need some equivalent>tools for FGFS.>>I will be spending some time over Christmas, looking at what I>can do. >Keep in mind that Flightgear is an Open Source project.If you can't code the functional things of an airplane you just have created with a 3d modeler then you can just send the 3d model to the flightgear developers mailinglist.There are enough other flightgear developers that can do the coding stuff for you.So it is a kind of work sharingyou create the 3d model the others do the coding stuff.The same is with the 3d Buildings for the scenery.Just create the 3d buildings and send them to the flightgear developers, the other developers will then include it in Flightgear for you.There are also plenty of other thins that don't need coding skills.For example creating nice textures for airplanes, buildings and the scenery, all you need is a progamm like Paint Shop Pro or Gimp.Or writing or translating some documentations etc.

Hi Honkar,Are you currently working on something in FGFS? Sounds like you've explored the project quite a bit.Peter http://bfu.avsim.net/sigpics/PeterR.gifBFU Forums ModeratorRenegade/Seawolf Design Group (RSDG)

I read all the Flightgear documentation that was available forthe developers, looked a little in the source code andi am learning how to use blender at the moment.But i did not have contributed something to the FGFS project so far.

Hello There!The "Flightgear" looks great,simulating real forces to an aircraftflying above ground.The real feeling of flight is the real need for many of us using the computer. You can not find that in a microsoft game like FS9.Microsoft Eyecandies is great and the sceenery is great, but I have the same feeling like FS98,-No challenge with weather and randomly "in-flight"This is events that you will find in the FU-series only.Dynamic weather for all aircrafts including gliders.The FU ATC is still the best I have ever seen.it can always through you into other scenarious not planned for your flight. The interactiveness of this is brilliant, and will give you a real challenge both to the weather and traffic conditions.THAT'S A REAL SIMULATOR!!I know that real sceenery will eat your harddrive, but that will not stop me flying over a city that is accurate into 4 meters.Then I know this is real.That said I still wish the FU-series Source-code would be released.There is all enough talented people who are able to do the FU4 with this old programming method, using the hardware of today.the costs of producing and marketing is only A couple of million Dollars.Only wishing for a good new simulator.It is needed for some more good new software of this genre.the talented people here doing all great addons for this sim is amasing !!!May be the Flightgear sim is the new way to go??I'll better stick to my old RC-aircrafts.Lars Peter.:-wave

Flight Unlimited 4 is the ONLY flight simulator that I would be interested in.Chris Low.

Great, Flightgear has now its own forum:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=198

Cool. Thanks for the announcement, Honkar.Peter http://bfu.avsim.net/sigpics/PeterR.gifBFU Forums ModeratorRenegade/Seawolf Design Group (RSDG)