Longranger

And it is a bit ridiculous to always blame Austin. He doesn´t has complete control about X-Plane. I am certain that severalfeatures were implemented more or less against "his wil"l In fact it is a well known secret that nothing can kill your company better, than to listen to your customers! The customers have no idea about the real problems and costs. There is a very important reason why they didn´t bother with weather for 11.0 . Their basic rendering engine was years old and no longer suitable for todays GPUs. Furthermore, they had severe restrictions in their workflow. But everything depends on these mechanisms! It would stupid to make nbig changes in the weatherrendering, when you have to change basic shaders, too. If you change the basic shaders you have to rewrite the weather system anyway. Now they setup the background ad want to stabilize it. This has nothing to do with gimicks, this is simply sensible engineering.They have integrated several new components into X-Plane 11, but it will take some time for these changes to show results. This is in fact one of the biggest necesities for .0 versions. This is the only time, when you can integrate major changes in the background. The weather system has the major advantage, that it is only weakly connected to other systems. Plane or scenery designers don´t have to change anything, if you change the weather system. So it would be rather stupid to renovate this system at this time.

It is finished, when a Release Candidate Version doesn´t produce significant bug reports! There are no such things as release dates for the final version. Instead the release candidate gets a new name.

X-Plane.org has nothing to do with Laminar. If you use these mods you are on your own! They don´t offer any support. Instead there are clear warnings: Art-Datarefs can change anytime, without any warnings!

Exactly there is a problem. People expect that the change to 64 Bit immediatly changes the sim. This is wrong! Only the OOMs might disappear, nothing else. The first thing you get from a change to 64 Bit: You loose many things. It takes time till more and more Add-ons and Plug-ins are updated or replaced. A 64 Bit conversion is no magic wand. Only after you are back on your feet and scenery designers, plane designers and the programmers have learned the new limitations you really discover the new possibilities. But to achieve this, you have to develop new workflows, establish work arounds to really use the new possibilities. You discover that you are only at the start , not near the finish line.

I don´t think that he means it either. The typical problem of a developer. I often talked with a customer and I knew I already had this feature implemented for more than a year. The ground textures are Dataref depend. You can exchange them without additional costs. You only need the artwork. And now they have the money to pay artists for it. And John Maxx is still working on a Seasons Add-on. With the exception of the artwork you could implement FSX seasons right now! But is it worth the trouble? If you have additional shaders you at least get some results on photo sceneries and so on.More or less a problem that the FSX had too. How often did you reach an airport in winter and on the airport you had summer. It got even more ridiculous if you looked out of the window and people were wearing T-Shirts... For P3D such advances wouldn´t be a problem either. But they have ther trouble how to sell it to their accounting? They must not argue from the perspective of hobbyists but what could we sell to the Pros with this feature?

I don´t think the argument against X-Plane is so simple. Austin is no longer really the problem. Laminar had the problem that the cor of X-Plane 9 was years behind the FSX. And while they made the fundamental decision for X-Plane 10 to break several key components but they had the problem that they had never developped a GPU based system and OpenGL doesn´t really teach you, what happens in the background. This was a key problem of X-Plane 10.0 . But they learned. IXEG, PMDG and so on finally got their override systems. Systems that are now used by AirFoilLabs and simCoders. These features improved the flexibility for designers compared with the beginings of X-Plane 10, when they more or less had the options to tweak the aerodynamic profile. Fundamentally there was nothing wrong in this approach but if you wanted good planes it got really expensive. The default GPS and FMS were far beyond, even the default FSX. The shaders in X-Plane 10 were ratehr simple Unified shaders. Far beyond the capabilities of todays graphics cards. But they are used to break compatibility if it helps, and the developers have learned not to complain, but to follow. LM on the other hand.had the trouble that there were a lot of developers that were used to do what they wanted. FSX was not moving. In X-Plane such a developer would have got an ice cold reply: "We never allowed you to do this, so deal with it." X-Plane simply switched to 64 bits in 10.20 . They didn´t wait for a full version. They simply said to the developers: "Sorry guys. We have to switch. We are running into OOMs." The 3rd party developers were not excited, but they saw the same problems. LM didn´t dare to do this and they have the problem that they must not target directly hobby pilots. Not they but DTG have the necessary license. The mangement of LM wouldn´t have a problem to simply put the whole blame on the shoulders of their developers if they would get complaints. LM has the advantage, that they could have in theory a much bigger budget. But they have to fight for this budget. Laminar had trouble, when they developed X-Plane 10. They had talked to early about it. I think without X-Plane mobile, we would have never seen X-Plane 10! While the market share of X-Plane 10 was tiny compared to FSX and P3D it was multiple times bigger compared with X-Plane 9. And they increased their developer pool. Now they really got an achievement. No one knew when they started with X-Plane 11 exactly. But with the release of the DC-6, the IXEG 737 and the AirFoilLabs X-Plane 10 increased their popularity significantly. Half a year before no one knew what X-Plane 11 might be. And even after they showed it EVERYONE expected a release at the end of next year. No one was more shocked then the 3rd party developers, when they heard: No, not next year, this year. A lot of developers were afraid that they would get something thrown together simply to have something against DTG. And now we look at X-Plane 11. Even in its beta it is more stable than X-Plane 10.1 . The development tools are more or less ready. PMDG decided to support X-Plane in a big manner even before X-Plane 11 was an open secret. Even this made X-Plane 10 a potential plattform for several FSX developers. Now it is more a question: Can I survive if I don´t support X-Plane? The big advantage of LM was the compatibility to the FSX. But now they are in a position that they have to drop the compatibility in several places and they have a rather restrictive license policy. One of the biggest problems in the eyes of PMDG. You won´t find P3D on steam, you won´t find it on your phone or your iPad. The FSX Steam Edition was due to its price more interesting than X-Plane 10. But X-Plane 11 plays in a different league. When you start with this hobby even the steam edition is too expensive since you have to buy several add-ons to compete even on the ground. In X-Plane 11 we will have two weather add-ons that compete with each other. If Rex or ASN don´t think about X-Plane now, they won´t have to bother in one or two years. It takes time to learn the basics on a new plattform. I was an FSX user till X-Plane 10 and I had P3DV3 on my last computer. But on my new computer I didn´t saw a reason to install P3DV3. P3DV4 would be a different thing but the 3rd party developers won´t adapt for free. If they change the scenery ORBX would have a huge problem. which part of your catalogue to convert first? A problem that in X-Plane 11 only bothers Carenado. But they have the advantage that it is rather simple to get their X-Plane 10 planes working in X-Plane 11. But to fully support X-Plane 11 they can probably sell it as a new product. And DTG? A huge problem. At the moment they have no user base! How to attract 3rd party developers for their plattform? What do they have that X-Plane or P3D can´t offer? A bigger compatibility to the FSX? Would this be an advantage?

Yes and No. SkyMaxx Pro has such a feature. But I think only the upcoming 4.0 will be really adapted to X-Plane 11.

Hmm, In my version the gateway airports are there.

You can kill any PC with X-Plane 10. You simply have to reduce your settings. In this area X-Plane 11 is better: It reduced the number of settings. But a 4k Monitor is never advised, since it takes 4 times the pixel rate of a 1080p display.

It depends on the time. One of the big problems when X-Plane 10 was released: It wasn´t really ready. It more or less took from 10.03 to 10.1 till X-Plane 10 really stabilized. The default 172 was very well known to be unstable. A bit of crosswind and it was difficult to start it. The plane was really bad. But in later versions it was replaced with an improved version. And the 172 in X-Plane 11 is simply a complete new plane. There is a reason why it is the only version with the new FMOD sound engine. This will be the sound engine of X-Plane 11. All other default planes use the old default sound system. Nearly all payware planes in X-Plane 10 brought their own sond engines with them. This was the first reason why they started to use SASL.Later Gizmo got Sound Support andf Dreamfoil distributed their Dreamengine. For X-Plane 10 they had to drop a lot of tools and systems, that were used in X-Plane 9 but the tools were simply not ready when they had to releas X-Plane 10. Now the situation is totally different. A lot of changes that happened in the last year in X-Plane 10 will became active in X-plane 11. I think the current Beta of X-Plane 11 is at least as stable as the final version of X-Plane 10.03. But a lot of people bought first version of X-Plane 10 tried it for a week and deleted it. One of the main reasons why I stayed: I was never satisfied with the local roads in FSX. I started X-Plane and every road was in the correct location. And even more amazing: At this time there was a major highway conversion in my place. They had to reroute the whole traffic multiple times. When I got X-Plane 10 it had the correct route that I had to drive for the last 6 months. They only switched 5 days before I got X-Plane 10.

There won't be any effect on current models. X-Plane reads the version of plane maker that wrote this plane and sets up the flight model accordingly. So older planes get the old system. But if you store the plane in a newer version of plane maker it will use this version.

Hardly a big surprise, since they both use the same background mechanisms. Although it is at the moment a CPU effect, but if I see it correctly, it might become integrated into the GPU code.

Errm, youknow that the 757 was the last plane that Philipp was making full time for Flightfactor,before he started at Laminar. He was always the FMS specialist since his CRJ 200.

I think you overexagerate a bit. In my opinion this was simplya shot onone of the development machines, with a developers settings. They simply want to show a certain feature and developersdon´t want tobother with bugs in other components. At the moment,they wont have any free machines.On a test machine, they could have multiple crashes,before they have shot the video so it is sensible to shoot it on a developer machine. They don´t work in an environment that we use to simulate. In my opinionthey don´t even have a real marketing cmapaign running. They simply show the current status.Interested people and developers will change at once anyway, while the rest will change, when the major bugs are solved and the first big planes are released.

I am not so sure if even Flight School and DTG Flight Simulator will use the same engine.

Careful: PBR and PBR doesn´t mean, that they really use the same shaders. There is some selection available, as well as differnt optimisations. PBR only means that the shaders obey certain rules. Different PBR renders can generate different looks.

Well many Reflections can be described as PBR (Physically Based Rendering), they simply has to obey certain rules. 1. conserve energy: This means objects must not reflect more energy, than they receive. But this has several consequences: They have to use HDR internally, before they color map to the display as the last step. Otherwise rounding errors destroy the results. Since they added the feature between versions I don´t really think, that they really changed anything major to normalize values. Since the normal reflections didn´t use these features I think that they simply replaced the static reflections with dynamic reflections. It wouldn´t harm anything, but it couldn´t be called PBR. Even if two engines use PBR you shouldn´t expect that they use the same shaders.

To be more prcise: an improved G-1000. In a way there already was an instrument that was meant to be something like a G-1000. The big question is: What can it do and how are the APIs to harvest such foundations in other payware planes.

X-Plane 11.0 ? No. It is imposssible to answer this better. As an example X-Plane 10.0 was not a 64 bit program, but they were 64 bit aware. This means that the developers knew that 64 bit might be an upcoming feature. In the same manner better weather effects and seasons are on the table for some time, but it wouldn´t be sensible to release them before they are ready. Will they be ready within X-Plane 11? Idon´t think Ben or Austin could answer this with certainty.

Well in your case I would say the Boeing 767 or the IXEG 737. JARDesign planes work more or less ok, for many people, but sometimes you really find quirks that stay the same. The Flight Factor A350 has the same problem as the QPAC A320 and the GW A330. They all depend in their Avionics on the same guy, an airbus engineer who writes them in his spare time.

To be a bit more prcise: The Reality Expansion packs replace the X-Plane engine logic. So you have to prime the engine if necessary, watch the temprature and pressure. You have to do an outside inspection before the flight. It replaces the aerdynamic model and enhances the flight characteristics. Sound effects are improved. They actively support their own headshake plug-in (freeware). They give warnings and advisories about the plane. In general they become a totally different plane. As an example the Car. Bonanza F33 and V35 have more or less the same charateristic. But eqip them with their REP plug-ins you see that the tail of the V35 isn´t as stable as the tail of the F33 9if the wind comes from the side. And you learn why many owners of this plane have equiped them with wing tip fuel tanks. It improves the stability.

10.50 is in the release candidate state. Since you are buying the DVD Version: Simply Download the latest installers/updaters from http://www.x-plane.com/downloads/x-plane_10_installer-updater/ to install X-Plane on your computer simply make a new directory on a drive like F:/X-Plane 10 and simply tell the installer to install in this directory. When you start X-Plane it automatically looks for updates and installs them. I simply started with X-Plane 10.03 andf from then on it simply updated without any major problems by itself. How often did I completly install/reinstall P3D? 7 or 8 times.

Well, there is no F35, but the Carenado V35 works great together with the V35 REP plugin under 10.45 and 10.50.

As long as you don´t know the area, yes. Then they get a pretty good general impression. If you know the area the normal reaction is Nope. It doesn´t fit.

The streets have a totally different layout generation. X-Plane only knows several anchor points and the type of road that is has to use. Then it looks into the mesh and tries to place a believable road ontpo the mesh, that connects these anchor points . It even has to decide on its own when to put a bridge into the terrain. Only after the roads have been placed the autogen can start and try to place objects between these roads. Among these objects the street lights.