Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums

Pdubya

Members
  • Posts

    108
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Pdubya last won the day on October 18 2021

Pdubya had the most liked content!

About Pdubya

  • Birthday June 3

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Virginia
  • Interests
    Transportation, railroads primarily as well as airlines. Games. PCs, both using and building. Ships (former US Navy).

Recent Profile Visitors

1,638 profile views

Pdubya's Achievements

Apprentice

Apprentice (3/14)

  • Dedicated Rare
  • Reacting Well Rare
  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare
  • Week One Done Rare

Recent Badges

31

Reputation

  1. My 2 cents would be that taxi speed or ground speed first and foremost needs to be situation-appropriate; we previously discussed the real Tower3D frustration of final approach aircraft touching down on the runway and decelerating far too quickly. Overall I agree with their sentiment that acceleration is a bit too low and the old turn-in speed from runway to taxiway was (at times) ridiculously fast. So, perhaps a focus on both the aircraft situation (location and destination) and also transitions from one taxi "state" to another, i.e., Runway to taxiway at 90 degree angle, acceleration from holding at a runway to cross and clear said runway, etc. Pushback should be slower than the old game and stick to the taxi tarmac lines to avoid collisions with other parked aircraft. I seriously doubt that aircraft IRL would be doing 20+ kts close to the gate areas, more like half that. I suppose a good question for you Vic is does the new game have or support assigning a speed to a specific segment of taxiway? This might be a way to elicit a more appropriate plane behavior instead of a blanket 20kt taxi speed everywhere. I can appreciate it would mean more work, maybe there is another better way to achieve the same result? As a slight aside, part of what I mentioned in old conversations about how not assigning taxi exits, gates, etc. early enough has a negative domino effect. If the Controller can give runway exit instructions early enough then the game can appropriately slow down the landing aircraft (provided the exit is not too early for the aircraft to do it) to make a proper exit at an acceptable speed. I am no expert on when IRL the controller gives taxi and gate commands to aircraft, but given that in Tower3D we as the player have to do it all ourselves, it would make sense to ease up on any tight timeline to convey instructions. For myself, nothing ruins the controller experience like commands unacknowledged and aircraft needing to be deleted.
  2. I figured that a high % of systems in the new version would take more time to develop, but looks like it will be worth the wait (and effort on the team's part). Thanks for the clarity Vic, looking forward to the June update.
  3. Looking great Vic- I particularly love the terrain height and features (trees, bushes, etc.). It should really enhance the whole immersion factor to see planes in relation to actual terrain on takeoff and arrival. Can't wait to see other shots and airport reveals in the future.
  4. Vic: Having just read the updates MJKERR and crbascott posted and being a "big picture" guy, the following comes to mind: Community dedicated users who make mods that the community can choose to use as they please. As long as their configuration files asks are included by FT I believe we end up with airports around the world (in-game) that really represent how each specific airport handles traffic throughout the day and night, incorporating runway changes, cargo vs. passenger vs. general, etc. (within reason of course!) That way, FT doesn't bear the brunt of man-hours committed to minutia concerning real-world operations at a given airport, they only need to provide accurate airport layouts and the means for modders to configure the files as they see fit. About the only downside I see at the moment is needing to either: a) expect each individual owner to backup their original config files before applying mods -OR- b) FT institutes file structure suitable, i.e., sub-directory specifically for mods that the game checks; if "enabled", it would load and use the mod config vs. the FT default one that stays safe and can't be overwritten. To me it ends up being an enormous WIN-WIN. The community wants airports and their associated components (gates, sizes, restrictions in the real world) to mimic reality as closely as possible. Somewhere in there is a happy medium between realism and effort involved.
  5. Thanks for the update Vic, great stuff. I would like to hear your reply to EliGrim's post above as well. Not certain how granular the control/options needs to be, but the capability to have flexibility with regards to gates and assignments, overflow and emergency side-cases are part of what I would like to know at some point. Essentially, anything that helps us as the user to plan ahead so we aren't trying to do this stuff when a given aircraft is on final would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again!
  6. Vic: A question for you regarding the lighting. If you had a airline whose paint scheme was more matte in appearance, is that something that can be part of the airline file (or airframe file) instead of gloss on a global scale?
  7. Wow... just wow Vic. This is some seriously impressive stuff FT is putting together. I get that testing still has to ensure it can work with various hardware (to one degree or another) but what a rush! Me and my shiny new AMD 5900 with Radeon 6900XT are now officially on the bandwagon. Thanks for the update! Paul
  8. No need for an apology Vic. We know it's hard to keep track of all us knuckleheads. 😁
  9. That sounds like a good start Vic. As crbascott noted above, I am Paul... and I'll be your Captain today. Oh, wait... wrong game! 😅 It's all good Vic, just happy to see the fruits of all your team's labor. Cheers!
  10. Vic: First off, thanks for launching the update phase, congrats! Looking good so far. I am quite curious how the ATC "console" we see in the above pic will translate to... let's say a 32" 16x9 single monitor. Can you elaborate on that? I guess the old guy in me wonders how my aging eyes are going to "see" all these different parts of the game. Perhaps Function Keys or the like? Just curious! Thanks again!
  11. Ah, finally. Really looking forward to the release, whenever that may be. Can't help but feel (no pun intended) that our little community will play a part in helping make Tower 3 great. Thanks for the info Vic, can't wait for updates.
  12. Well, credit given where credit is due Vic. We talked at length months ago about opening up the development process a bit more, and I think you have given the idea a chance. This is great progress in my opinion. My hope is that it helps the second version of Tower3D launch much closer to software entertainment that everyone is excited about and anxious to play. Look, at 56 I am more of a realist each and every day. Some aspects of ATC will not be included for various reasons, many of which people like myself don't understand. I am OK with that and am just glad we built a bridge between the community and you and your team. Here is to a better release and continued development. Cheers!
  13. I think as long as the coding allows for the basic flexibility we talked about things should be fine. Nice to see it all coming along Vic, kudos and keep up the good work!
  14. Vic: It is great to see that the FT crew is far enough along to warrant pics, even if they aren't truly "in-game". So far they look spectacular to my eye, concessions aside. Glad to hear that progress and milestones (reading btw the lines here) are happening, that is a heartening trend. Myself and most others here have pretty high hopes and standards for our next gen Tower3D "vision". Heck, why not? Go BIG or go home as the saying goes, eh? Looking forward to continued tidbits Vic. Oh, and a personal thanks for opening up quite a bit to suggestions from all of us in the peanut gallery... or was that the pig sty? 💣 ANYhoo, hope everyone is maintaining through the pandemic. Stay safe! Paul
  15. Another thought. It might be a cool option to have an AI Controller Partner if you are learning or need a gentle nudge now and then. Any time as a Controller where you are approaching the closing of a crucial (or perhaps not so crucial) timing window, the AICoP would perhaps "remind" you with a popup text (or even voice) message that 'inbound flight ZX001 lacks clearance and gate assignment'; thus helping you avoid the dreaded penalty and go-around dance. Alternatively, we need some way to help us keep track of whether flights have all the clearances and instructions they require yet. Perhaps it is linked in some other way with the gameflow, like a particular icon or color, etc. You get the idea. I just feel that no controller works in a vacuum in real life. They have bosses and coworkers nearby to manage the traffic load.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. Guidelines Privacy Policy We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.