OwenHewitt

Great!!!

I'd like to see an airport with other aircraft present perhaps. Not the big stuff, GA will do. We'll see what they have up their sleeves!

Looks pretty good to me Brandon!

No sir, I honestly do not know more than what has been released to the public. I'm sure we'll all learn more very soon.Regards,Owen

Wow ... Thank you for taking the time to show these nearly identical snapshots from each. I already see a less cartoonish appearance of MS Flight compared to that of FSX, namely looking at the aircraft itself. It is great how they've reduced the texture stretch on the coastlines too.Regards,Owen

Read this thread: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/323466-a-new-lease-on-performance/

No sir, everyone is on the same playing field with this project ... I know just as much as everyone else or has been posted on the internet.It is a complete 180 compared to the development of FSX where team members were encouraged to blog about the project prior to release.Regards,Owen

There's always been some humor involved in calling this program for what it really is...a simulation. I guess MS is trying to really drive home that this is not just a sim anymore, so I thought that I'd have a bit of fun. I totally believe that this is a sim ... take a look at this other post I did.Best,Owen

Since I am commenting on an almost 2 year old blog post, this may have been referenced long ago ... but since I have seen some recent comments regarding concern on performance, I thought that it was a worthy post. Please give it a read and give comments. Why FSX has Rough Performance.Regards,Owen

Some reflection on the initial post and on the comments left here. Thanks again for leaving your comments!Owen

Very interesting news! Thanks for sharing.Regards,Owen

Thanks for the mention Rhydian!Regards,Owen

Perhaps I am comparing apples to oranges in the broad scheme of things, but as a developer, I am very interested in the idea of security being tightened with such a Marketplace. Either you get it from there or don't get it at all. I agree that it would probably not be in the best interest to make this portal the exclusive place to obtain expansions, especially those that are freely offered. But again, this is all pure speculation and I'm sure we'll learn the specifics soon enough. I appreciate the civil and well supported arguments on this discussion.Regards,Owen

No sir, I'm no longer a MS MVP but I have maintained contact with a few of the folks who remained to work on Flight from the former ACES team. I have not been given any specific information regarding this topic and it is pure speculation at this moment, but my gut tells me this is indeed the direction that MS is going with their software, especially firmed up with the press release mentioned in a previous thread.Regards,Owen There will still be a place for "grassroots" developers I believe. Much like the situation with the Apple app store ... there are tons of apps there that are first time endeavors and tons of free ones as well. We'll have to see what the plan is when things become more concrete in the future.Regards,Owen The mention of reduction in piracy is a pretty valuable one for developers such as myself. I cringe when I do a search for a colleague's project on google to find that it has appeared in some pirate warez site or something of the like.Regards,Owen

I posted a new blog entry giving my prediction of how MS Flight will impact the 3rd party developers. Care to give it a read and comment? MS Flight Add-On Store?Regards,Owen

There is a cool article in the latest issue of Popular Mechanics magazine that describes [a href=http://www.popularmechanics.com/marketing/covers/?fullSize=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia%2Epopularmechanics%2Ecom%2Fimages%2Fcovers%2F200808%2Ejpg&caption=August%2C%202008]Mojave as being the new Area 51[/a]. It's a pretty good read.Best,Owen

>How many of those people work on just Flightsim and Trainsim.>Or does ACES studio also develop for XBox?Hi Matthew,From Phil's post ... ACES team members are a part of one of 4 groups: Core, FS, TS, and ESP. ACES does not develop for the XBox platform. As the technology basis is the same, certainly there could be some overlap of people on each of these groups.Regards,Owen

Haha ... no chance. I've never seen anything of the sort IRL! :DOwen

>Well.. I see the trade off. But I would like to disagree or>do not like that choice too much. I am not sure if its such a>good idea to accommodate very slow systems at the cost of>making the Cirrus look less eye candy.>>The Cirrus SR22 in FSX is not too bad as far as performance>go. It does good in my system. A core 2 Duo E6600 OC to 3.3G>>I like the Cirrus eye candy. If it can be done without>lessening the resolution of the textures or without making>round objects less round, then sure. >>I like a good VC.>>Just a difference of opinion here!>>:)>>MannyHi Manny,No one said we were going to reduce any "eye candy" for the Cirrus. Sure, there are textures that will be able to be consolidated onto others, but at no reduction of resolution or quality. Believe me, there is quite a bit of open space on some of these textures to accomodate that. I just wanted to point out and set the record straight that, aside from completely re-mapping the Cirrus from a blank slate, there isn't going to be quite the performance boost due to efficiency of the model and texture counts as is the case in the TC. I'm a simmer just like the rest of you - I like things to run as smoothly as possible. If I can find a way to make things run better, I do it. Hope this helps!Owen

>>this is really a great airplane! Most astonishing for me is>>the fact, that it virtually has ZERO impact on framerates,>>very smooth and stutter-free flying! In terms of performance i>>can easily compare it with the RealAir planes.>>>>I own the Eaglesoft Cirrus and the Liberty for FSX as well,>>and although the planes are very, very nice, i never was too>>happy with the framerates of these aircrafts, but this has>>changed dramatically with the Comanche!>> >>Maybe there is hope, that the same techniques will be used in>>a future update for the Cirrus and the Liberty, to make them>>perform as nice as the Twinkie.....!!?? >>>>Congratulations for this airplane!>>>>Thanks a lot and cheers from germany,>>Michael>>>>>Actually those same techniques will be used in our upcoming Cirrus>SR22 G2/G3 Turbo Package for FSX. :)Thanks Michael for your comments! In all honesty, to get a model to perform as well as the Twin Comanche, efficiency of texture count and poly counts must be part of the project from the very start. Both the Cirrus and Liberty were designed by less experienced modelers who did not take into account how the number of textures impacts performance. We will do our best to improve performance with the SR22 G2/G3 Turbo for FSX, but due to the sheer number of textures in that particular project, it will not perform like the TC. It will certainly be a case of comparing apples and bananas. HTH!Best,Owen

>Let me "re-iterate". This new airplane, the Twin Comanche>from Eaglesoft is phenomenal for realism and frame rate. I>just hope and pray that other developers realize what really>can be done if a serious effort is made and the "simmer" is>considered a priority.>BRAVO on the the Comanche. >I'm now going off to fly this baby for the 20th time.>>StanThanks again Stan! How about sharing some of your flights in the screenshot forum? I'd love to see where you are exploring the FS skies with her! :DBest,Owen

>>All of our current feedback shows no problem with sim>>performance whether running Acceleration or not. >>Read this entire thread along with those at Sim Outhouse and>>Flightsim.com FSX forums for sense of user satisfaction:-)>>I have read all the posts, and this sounds like a great add>on, but I'm still wondering if I should expect better>performance over the Liberty XL2?>I would hate to have to apply for another refund.>>Thanks again,>Patrick Patrick,It should perform better from a model's stance. There is a much lower polygon count versus the XL2, and the texture count is lower, even with the additional specular maps. Hope this helps!Owen

> I dont know Owen Hewitt however I feel this guy makes the>most accurate aircraft in all of Flight Simulator. I thought>the Columbia 400 was terrific but this light twin is just>super. With the reduced price you cannot go wrong. >>FrankHi Frank,I greatly appreciate that comment!To set the record straight, Bob Hayes did the model for the C400 - I merely refined it a bit for the FSX version! But the Twin Comanche's physical model is all mine! I also did base textures and Bob kindly tweaked them! :DBest,Owen

>Aha, I found the web info on Roy Wilbanks PA-30. It looks>like he won this in 2004 in some sort of AOPA contest.;)>And you're right, this is no ORDINARY PA-30! What a Ferrari!Not only is it a Ferrari, but has the economy of a single. When you get her leaned out at altitude, you can get 6.5 gph on each engine!! :D>What would happen (for grins) if: I added a turbocharger to>it (adjusting critical_altitude, etc. in the cfg)?Knock yourself out!Owen

It is a 1965 baseline PA-30 with Lycoming IO-320. But ... it has been heavily modified by an organization I cannot mention, but is very famous for giving away an aircraft each year. ;)The engine cowlings are aftermarket from LoPresti. Other speed enhancements are from Knots 2U. The engines are fuel injected, and have been overhauled by Penn Yan Aero.Trust me ... this is a one-of-a-kind PA-30!! :DOwen