What next for flight simulation?

In mathematics (science) a "dimension" just means another, independent variable. A friend in college did a problem for Bell Labs with thousands of variables.
 
A2A and many other developers are now stepping up and using the magic that is simconnect and the SDK to its fullest.

The A2A cub has custom code to create a realistic sideslip, as Scott mentioned in the podcast on FSBreak, its very easy now to 'omit' the stock fsx stuff wth your own :engel016:

The word 'limitation' with regard to FSX tends not to work together as they would for FS2004. These days its about time and manpower.
 
Actually, I meant exactly what I wrote. Pitch, roll and yaw are angles. Angles are measured in degrees or radians. An angle is a dimension.

Google 'angular dimensions' and see what you get.
 
Hi Folks

Gerry -
Fully understand your intent,
and my apologies for my original flippant reply.



However -
As both Sundog, and MS, say -
its 6 degrees of freedom, (DoF).

i.e.
With displacement/orientation occuring by -
- Translation, (x,y,z).
or
- Rotation, (p,b,y).



Those 3 rotations, or "angular dimensions" you refer to, (i.e. measurements, or numerical values),
only exist
in those same 3 dimensions, (i.e. x,y,z, coordinate planes).



sparks said:
FSX.EXE calculates acceleration, speed,
and position in 6 dimensions
Click to expand...

So FSX uses 6 dimensions, (i.e. measurements), for calculation,
but does not do so,
in 6 dimensions, (i.e. coordinate planes).



HTH
ATB
Paul
 
To quote Michael Zyskowski of MS ACES 'The SimEngine is based on the core concept of simulating in the 6-DOF space (rotational – pitch, roll and yaw; and translational – longitudinal, lateral and vertical). This provides the fidelity required to simulate any possible aircraft orientation and position in a three-dimensional (3-D) environment.'

If a 'space' has 6 degrees of freedom, then 6 dimensions are required to describe a position in that 6-DOF space.
 
Like FS2002 and FS2004, FSX will keep its fan for the next decenium. I asume that for a reasonable price (or amount of efforts) the simulation part of FSX can not be improved so in my opinion most improvements will be additional eye-candy.

But for me the next generation is already there, or in a final stage of development. As I'm a fan of combat sims and vintage aircrafts I more than happy with the arrival of Rise of Flight. The way it keeps developing is definitely promising! Its a diffenrent thing but definitely equally enjoyable.
For more "modern" warfare I'm looking forward to the IL2 successor Storm of War. ALthough the release date keeps shifting I'm convinced it will be released somewhere....

Cheers,
Huub
 
huub vink said:
Like FS2002 and FS2004, FSX will keep its fan for the next decenium. I asume that for a reasonable price (or amount of efforts) the simulation part of FSX can not be improved so in my opinion most improvements will be additional eye-candy.

Cheers,
Huub
Click to expand...

But bearing in mind its only relatively recently that the simulation part is being understood and built upon, eye candy is just eye candy, adding a heart and soul us somthing else. If anything its actually the other way around the eye candy will stay roughly the same whilst the hardware catches up and the simulation part will be built upon
 
huub vink said:
Like FS2002 and FS2004, FSX will keep its fan for the next decenium. I asume that for a reasonable price (or amount of efforts) the simulation part of FSX can not be improved so in my opinion most improvements will be additional eye-candy.
Click to expand...

It may be just the opposite. :)

You can't improve FSX eye-candiness that much, because you are limited to how the graphics engine works. Sure, there are many addons which drastically improve visual side of FSX and plenty of great looking aircraft, but you won't get nice soft shadows, rain on a windscreen, 3D clouds or forests like there are in Rise Of Flight. On the other hand FSX look already so good, that these extra graphics features would be only icing on the cake.

But when it comes to simulation part, its just as Lewis said. There are still many things that can be improved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top