Jump to content

Murmur

Members
  • Content Count

    4,607
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3,922 Excellent

1 Follower

About Murmur

  • Rank
    Member - 3,000+

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Italy

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

10,154 profile views
  1. Do you remember all the: "Last nail in the coffin for X-Plane"? 🤣
  2. Extensive flight tests of the DC-3 with a lot of curves, for those who wish to compare the simulated aircraft with the real one: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19930083829/downloads/19930083829.pdf
  3. Curiously, I have a distant and blurred memory from teen days of an A-Team episode where Murdock was flying a DC-3, and I remember it noticeably swinging his tail on takeoff. Maybe the real aircraft had marginal directional stability as well? It would be interesting to watch YT videos of DC-3s filmed from outside.
  4. I like dynamic camera if well done and I find it increases realism, although I reckon it's something subjective. I'm pretty confident it will be optional though, also considering that there are multiple use cases where it's not to be used. Most obvious one: professional flight sims (one of XP markets) don't use a dynamic camera, of course. So no need to get so upset over it. Something similar is already implemented in XP, it's called "cinema verite" and it's a sort of dynamic camera, reacts to accelerations but in a very subtle way. It's of course optional.
  5. Anti-aliasing is all done on GPU, CPU plays no part in it.
  6. Yeah Ben mentioned the new scenery will be raster-centric, but what does it actually mean? Instead of point and vectors, the new scenery will be divided into discrete "scenery pixels"?
  7. It is obvious that with the changes they are planning to implement, the autoexposure effect will not have the same end results it has now. It will likely be modified together with the other planned changes in the lightning pipeline, so that the end results will be what they're aiming at.
  8. @Biology it's so great that LR has an asset like you on board. I look forward to your contributions even to XP13 and beyond. 😁
  9. You seem confused and/or misinformed. I don't think that Laminar or its official developers (which is what counts) ever said anything like you're suggesting. Indeed, as i remember, it was not very long after XP12 launch that LR acknowledged that cockpit lighting needed further work. Surely on the matter there were differing opinions by some in the community, but that is normal. I for one am very excited that they are finally improving the issue for good, and doing that in a way to make life easier to aircraft authors, in that the upcoming changes are going to be of the "measure twice, cut once" kind, i.e. they should completely fix the issues once and for all.
  10. I'm a third kind, I'm an experimental simmer: just test-flying, test-landing and test-failing every aircraft to their limits. 😆
  11. Great news! Lots of thing the community was eagerly expecting. And yet more planned for later.
  12. Mike, in cases like these you can use the "spoiler" function (eye icon button in the reply window). Paste the log or any other long text inside the "spoiler" paragraph, and readers will have to click to show it, so only those interested will visualize it.
  13. Moon will illuminate clouds in the current XP release. I checked and runway lights disappear for example when looking at the runway from the side. So I think it's modeled.
  14. Better anti aliasing has been announced and is in the roadmap. 😁
×
×
  • Create New...