Longranger

Well, Lets look into what Dan Klaue and his Team has to do to convert a FSX-plane: They take the original 3D models, the textures ahnd the sound recordings of the FSX plane. Then they have to modify the 3D models. In FSX you have an inerior model and an exterior model. X-Plane on the other hand has one 3D model that contains the whole plane. After this is done they have to genrate a new plane in PlaneMaker. There they have to put the 3D model together with an aerodynamic model of the plane. They have to add the engine, its profiles, the basic controls, the instruments and so on. Then they add a number of plug-ins. This is they reason why X-Plane Carenados always behave differently to their FSX predecessors. They are new planes with the X-Plane default engine, their own aerodynamik model and several plug-ins that improve the flight model and add new features. And what does simCoders do? They add a few of their own models that replace parts of the default logic of X-Plane. Then they replace the aerodynamic model, add additional sound effects and replace the sound logic of the Carenado planes. So even Carenado can´t really say how the new enhanced plane behaves. And now tell me how anyoune should convert parts of these enhancements back into the FSX? It would be more or less a rewrite of the internal flight model in FSX. There is no way to directly convert a plane from FSX to X-Plane or vise versa. It is more or less a total exchange of the flight model.

They had some flight dynamics problems. The flight dynamics and so on were improved in the meantime significantly. But they are still some distance away from a "study level sim". If they ever become a study level sim is a totally different question. If we look at FlyJSims 727. It was originally quite a way to a study level sim, but 2.0 is study level although it wasn´t originally planned this way,

ddenn said it might be possible but he is concentrating on aircrafts right now. He doesn´t think that scenery objects would gain so much from this plug-in.

Another big difference between the two sims is the amount of free heigh quality addons. If you want to start with P3D now it will probably become very expensive. The biggest advantage that P3D has/had that it was rather easy to reuse old FSX add-ons in P3D. But it starts to feel the pain of this decision, so I wouldn´t be surprised if this changes in P3D v4. Another big difference is the run time of each major version. When you bought X-Plane 10 in 2012 (a totally different looking program without 64 Bit support..) this version is still totally fine. With the update installer from the Laminar website it will simply update to 10.45 at the moment, in a few weeks to 10.50. And it will probably be 1 or 2 years till we see X-Plane 11. In the meantime you would have bought P3D v1, v2, v3 and often a complete reinstall of P3D. On the other hand P3D and FSX:SE still have much better AI traffic, although you wont use it if you are using IVAO, VATSIM or PilotEdge. I wouldn´t start with FSX:SE now since I expect that its activity will significantly drop when Dovetail has its own simulator running.

I have to admit that the changes were not significant, neither in the look, nor in the framerate.

Well, I think fully functional isn´t really realistic at the moment.

You are wrong. At frirst many things in X-Plane look and feel weird, when you are coming from FSX/FS9. It taikes some time till you get used to the differences. When you have a few flight hours under your belt, things will improve gradually. When I mdae the jump (right after the release of X-Plane 10) I had real trouble to get used to the different keys and commands. Today I really have to wonder why I ever thought that the FSX keys and commands were logical..

Hmm, let me guess: You are using a 10.50 beta? This is a bug in the current beta.

That´s a well known problem. At the moment settings like Flaps don´t have a Nullzone, so it normally you can´t assign an axis to such values. I haven´t checked in the current beta, but as far as I know this bug is still open.

Vulcan and DX 12 are on a totally different level. They are responsible for the event handling and how to reach the GPU. PBR is simply a different kind of shader. For Vulkan, DX12 and OpenGL this is simply a different payload.

Hmm, for me SMP , the Real Weather Connector and FSGRW now work fine with the beta 4. Even the new 727 v2 now works in the beta. And RTH is broken by design. Since they are using Art controls that are only for internal purposes, they can´t complain if X-Plane changes some art controls.

Well according to some statements RTH will probably have to be rewritten anyway. The rendering was changed significantly so the Art Controls, that you SHOULDN´T use have changed. But RTH is based on the use of these Art Controls.

They could, at least in X-Plane 11 they could do it. But it is unlikely. The distributed approach has its own advantages. The plug-in is always the correct version, that fits to the product. If you have a global plug-in and there is a new version there is always the risk that a new feature breaks an old behaviour that an older product depends on. A global plug-in has to be maintained very well, otherwise it would become a huge problem in the long run.

And can you tell us, why you are so excited about the old AutoGen? The new AutoGen wasn´t even installed in Beta 1 due to a bug in the installer.

Hmmm, If i look into my w2xp_Europe these files are there, so I would expect that something went wrong with the download or the decompression. The Europe Library shouldn´t overwrite anything.

In the freeware there is a problem on one of the taxiways, otherwise it was tolerable. There wer not such huge problems as at Ketchikan. And once there was one designer, that was even able to improve the mesh he then also replaced Santos Dumont and this mesh solved everything and made the whole area to a kind if beauty.with several landmarks.

http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/30252-x-plane-library-installer/ might be helpfull.

Well, you should really start with the basics. And this is the HUGE amount of freeware, like the HD and UHD meshes from Alpilotx http://www.alpilotx.net/ . This will improve the autogen to decent levels, if you have at least 8 (HD) or 16 (UHD) GB of RAM and a GPU with at least 4 GB. Another important adress is simheaven.com The w2xp sceneries (which needs its world-models and the Europe library are more or less necessities in europe. And in fact the x-plane.org system. Follow http://www.simflight.de/2016/06/06/x-plane-kurznachrichten-nachtrag/ to the MisterX6 Boston Logan Scenery and the massachusets pro scenery (that needs additionalyy its own world-models library) . The right mouse button? Who uses the right mouse button. I prefer to put fast pan and tilt commands on my joystick. One of the basic misunderstandings of many X-Plane newbies: X-Plane was more or less tageted for GA-planes , They were slowly starting to get ihnto the airline world. In fact some of the missing features of the IXEG are more or less missing features of the whole environment: How do we program this, that it works everywhere?

Well, I would think that the 3 cloud layer limit will probably go, but I don´t really expect any major moves in this depatment. You need a totally different background to solve some of these problems. I think some additional opening for 3rd parties are much more reasonable. In fact I think the Real Weather Connector might play a major role in this department. They can already connect with FSGRW. And they have someone with the necessary background. I think in the next version of the Real Weather Connector it will move more and more in the direction of free interpretations of the METAR data. At the moment they still watch a bit to closely on the informations that METAR writes. Since OLaminar currently break their whole rendering engine, they will have to rewrite parts of their cloud system anyway. But I don´t really expect anything totally major in this department. There are too many other open subjects where their help is needed.

Who buys the livery packs, when the free liveries are on the same level?

Nope. Those are pretty good projects to integrate new members into the team. Add a new member and give him a totally new project, where even the basics are just now in pieces, like the new renderer. Serasons will have to be a part of the new rendering engine, but as long as this engine doesn´t run halfway reliable it is nearly impossible to write the shaders, that will have to change the seasons. Or how should he test and improve the renderers as long as he can´t implement them.

And even they can't be certain what exactly will be ready when they release X-Plane 11. It´s really ridiculous if people now start to think that everything that they don´t talk about right now won´t be a part of X-Plane. If they show contents now it means that they feel pretty confident that these features will be a part of X-Plane 11. I would think that they have a pretty good idea about their graphics, since I believe that htey currently try to get WED on the right track for X-Plane 11, so that they all genrate sceneries which are easily understood by X-Plane 11, before X-Plane 11 is released. This was a big problem for X-Plane 10. The tools were far from ready.. It would be better if the tools are already present, before the release so they can see and check if the new features really work in the new renderer.

If I saw it correctly Drzewiecki New York City http://store.x-plane.org/New-York-City-XP-_p_431.html Drzewiecki New York City Airports http://store.x-plane.org/New-York-Airports-XP_p_355.html Alabeo Cruz Pipersport http://store.x-plane.org/Cruz-Pipersport_p_336.html and SkyMaxx Pro http://www.x-aviation.com/catalog/product_info.php/skymaxx-pro-p-115

Why not. In X-Plane 12 or 13.

Without the necessary APIs it would be difficult. It would mean a rewrite of a windows version to DirectX, which means more or less a rewrite of the rendering engine. I would say it is too early to expect even a halfway compleate feature list for the next version.