Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

236 Excellent

About Pascal_LSGC

Profile Information

  • Gender

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

3,366 profile views
  1. I couldn't agree more ! I remember that Flight Unlimited III (1999) had some micro-weather modeling that I have never seen again in any simulator. It accounted for the effect of valleys on wind's direction, thermals, and turbulence inside cumulus clouds was really a thing! Frankly, it was mind blowing at the time and would probably still be! I don't remember if upwind and downwind around mountains where simulated though. The fact that it was a defined region probably made modelling these effects easier, maybe with some hard-coding of valleys influence. But I don't see why it would not be possible to implement some local effects in current engines. Of course it would require some serious aerodynamic research, but so does the flight model. And we know that the flight model doesn't take that much processor power, so there is definitely room for this. And if there is any doubt about the importance of micro-weather effects, we should remember they are nearly always part of the causal chain in accident reports for small aircraft/paragliders. Thanks Murmur and Janov for bringing up this point! Pascal
  2. Excited ? Nah, he's very calm there, he used to write everything in full CAPS! 😆
  3. So you spent 3 years fine tuning your X-Plane, and now you feel insulted because everyone will get it by default ? Frankly, you should stop with your usual "I feel insulted" mantra. Your eventual point would be more interesting without it. Pascal
  4. Exactly this ^^ And the reflections will now be calculated with "ray marching". The water, for example, won't depend on a single mirrored rendering any more. Which means you won't see the sudden jumps of reflections on lakes and rivers, which plagues XP11 since it's inception. Of course, that could bring new bugs 🙂 Pascal
  5. Thanks Murmur! I missed the info yesterday! Looks very very good, searching for infos on what is a photometric lighting model now. I suppose (and hope) they revise the atmospheric effects shader, it's not up to the standards now. Pascal
  6. Maybe the gauge is right, and the world outside is reversed, in which case he's in serious trouble! 😄 Thanks for the info! Looks interesting. Pascal
  7. And you said earlier: So, on one side, it beats every established sim out there, and on the other side, we have to lower our expectations... Which one is it ? 🙂 Pascal
  8. True. But may I remind you that we are not talking about space exploration here. We are arguing about if we should pursue the goal to be a multi-planetary specie, or not. And I tried to explain that having people on Mars is not the same as having a fully autonomous civilization there. I don't mean that it could not happen in the long term. We don't know the future. I mean that it's not a reasonable goal. And may I remind you that we didn't even put one human on Mars yet. And you're already talking civilization. In french, we have a nice saying for that: "mettre la charrue avant les boeufs" - oh wait... it exists in english too: "put the cart before the horses" ! 🙂 Here's a video that explains a bit what's involved in manufacturing chips, and of course, it just scratches the surface:
  9. Birdguy, you misquoted me, I didn't write that, Martin-w did.
  10. And the big advantage vs saving the situations is that you keep the state of the aircraft. I didn't try with complex aircraft add-ons, though. Once you have chosen your restart point, you can come back and retry as many times as you want. You can't rewind before the point you first choose, of course. Good for perfecting those landings 🙂 Btw, Tony, maby this thread would fit into the Tips and tricks forum ?
  11. I'd like to add: don't get me wrong, I'm very passionate about discoveries on Mars, and a future human habitat. Mostly for scientific reasons. And yes, science could help us survive too. I'd even say it is absolutely necessary to know our solar system better.
  12. No. These people has studied the possibility to colonize Mars. My main point was to explain that this is not equivalent to being a multi-planetary specie, in the sense of two or more non-interdependant civilizations. And it was my point to try to explain that is absolutely not the case. In fact, I hope not to hurt you, but I find this point of view very naive. It takes a whole civilization and a great diversity of materials only available on earth to make an advanced technological object. But all I ask is that we study this technological dependency chain very seriously. And those who make the "multi-planetary" claim never do that. There are different time scales here. First, we can become extinct (or at least our civilization collapse) because of our own doing. That can happen in a time scale of decades, or maybe centuries. And yes, sadly, the risk seems very high. But the probability is not calculable. To calculate a probability you must have several samples of the event. Which we don't have. That's our first time. Then, there are the scales of catastrophic asteroids or cosmic events. It happens every few million years. At worst, a risk still exists in the few thousands years to come. We don't even know what humanity could look like so far in the future, and what we will be able to do or not. Those are, with supernovae, the only kind of event that are are certain to happen, but we can't project that far to calculate a probability of survival. So, in short. you have no scientific basis to affirm we will become extinct. But at least, the shortest, and immediately dangerous time scale is in our hands. We can try to do something. Of course, that doesn't say that we will. But the moment we start to look somewhere else to solve our problems is the moment we escape our responsibilities.
  13. I finally watched the video and find it very interesting, it gives a nice overview of all the technologies and ideas that are being developed. And I think it is probably possible to live on Mars. But I have a big problem with the premise: being a multi-planetary specie. I think we should study that question more seriously before pretending we can be one. Having a colony on Mars or another planet does not protect us from extinction. At all. Even a big colony with millions of people. Here's why. Living on Mars requires a high level of technology. That technology is dependant on ultra-specialised knowledge of hundreds of thousands of scientists, and on the technical and industrial infrastructure present all over the earth. Not even speaking about the material ressources. Look at your smartphone or your computer: not one human on earth has the complete knowledge of all the science and technical processes that are involved to make it possible. Which brings me to my main argument: A colony on Mars will never be completely independent technology-wise. So, you destroy Mother-Earth - or even more likely: our civilization collapses - and it's only a question of years until our colonies in the solar system slowly die, deprived of any support from their home planet, lonely on a planet they where not evolved for. I truly believe there is no escape from the fact that we must find ways to solidify our survival on Earth. That's not only our cradle, that's our home, and for a very, very long time. Any suggestion that we can escape that fact is ultimately dangerous and irresponsible. Pascal
  14. Who said that? This article says otherwise: https://phys.org/news/2016-11-bad-mars.html Pascal
  • Create New...