Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Burkhard

Wishlist for version 5.4

Recommended Posts

I started work on the next major release planned for October/November now. If after 5.3b you wish the addition of other new models, new paints, updates of paints, or any other stuff please state until end of April, later the work load will be defined and not easy to change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I would love to see is that some of the existing models were remade instead of more models being added. It'd be also very nice if parts such as wings were made to look shinier and more detailed than is often the case now. So, a small list of things I'd like to see redone:

- Boeing 767 (mainly nose region)

- Boeing 757

- A320 family (CFM engines)

- Commercial jets wing textures (so that they are made to look more detailed, maybe more metallic?)

- Commercial jets engine exhaust cone textures (that cone at the back of the engine: with many planes it's black. Could it be made to be metallic and shiny, which is the normal color with most, if not all, planes?)

- many aircraft (more gear detail, like gear doors, would be nice. I realize this might be a huge amount of work, though)

As I see it, MTX is a wonderful product: huge amount of AI all around the world of many airlines and airforces, customizable and easy to use and understand. Its only drawback is the collection of simplistic AI models. I understand that asking to redo some of the models is easier than actually doing it (because I guess that the repaints might have to be redone also to fit the new model). Nevertheless, I hope you will be able to honor some or all of my requests.

EDIT: By the way, I would like to say thank you taking the time to listen to us. Your support has always been very good!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I would love to see is that some of the existing models were remade instead of more models being added. It'd be also very nice if parts such as wings were made to look shinier and more detailed than is often the case now. So, a small list of things I'd like to see redone:

- Boeing 767 (mainly nose region)

- Boeing 757

- A320 family (CFM engines)

- Commercial jets wing textures (so that they are made to look more detailed, maybe more metallic?)

- Commercial jets engine exhaust cone textures (that cone at the back of the engine: with many planes it's black. Could it be made to be metallic and shiny, which is the normal color with most, if not all, planes?)

- many aircraft (more gear detail, like gear doors, would be nice. I realize this might be a huge amount of work, though)

As I see it, MTX is a wonderful product: huge amount of AI all around the world of many airlines and airforces, customizable and easy to use and understand. Its only drawback is the collection of simplistic AI models. I understand that asking to redo some of the models is easier than actually doing it (because I guess that the repaints might have to be redone also to fit the new model). Nevertheless, I hope you will be able to honor some or all of my requests.

EDIT: By the way, I would like to say thank you taking the time to listen to us. Your support has always been very good!

Thanks for that list, and indeed some of these ideas also are in my long term potential plans. The hard constraint on them is that whatever I do to improve the models, it may not increase the frame rate hit originating from the grafical display of the model by more than a few percent. Textured wings as example mean also textured ailerons, flaps and spoilers, even with some simplification 10 textured moving parts = 10 more textured drawcalls per single aircraft, with maximal 500 allowed per scene for everything MyTraffic displays. So we can go this way only in very small steps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I would like to see is full equality between DX9 and DX10 airliners and paints.

Which would just mean removal of the DX9 models, since only the P3 Orion and maybe the Harrier I could see to justify the investment of 300+ hours needed for a new FSX model. There is no contemporary ailiner in the DX9 only mode left. All the rest is models that no longer fly and create no interest at all, since 5 years the time machine has been mentioned in the forum 4 times only out of about 6000 posts, and never there had been any active contribution to it.

So your proposal to me sounds like oinvest 5000 hours = two years of hard work for nothing - unless you convince me of something else by showing me an active interest in the historical side of MyTraffic. I would love to do more in that direction - if there were any feedback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that list, and indeed some of these ideas also are in my long term potential plans. The hard constraint on them is that whatever I do to improve the models, it may not increase the frame rate hit originating from the grafical display of the model by more than a few percent. Textured wings as example mean also textured ailerons, flaps and spoilers, even with some simplification 10 textured moving parts = 10 more textured drawcalls per single aircraft, with maximal 500 allowed per scene for everything MyTraffic displays. So we can go this way only in very small steps.

Hm, I understand the problem here. It's good to know that some things are already in your plans. What I think are the most pressing matters, are the Boeing 767 and 757 models. I'd already be grateful if these were redone. If engine exhausts modeling for for example the A320 family was redone, that'd be a bonus. Regarding the texturing improvements, I understand that it might impact the FPS. But, changing the current black texture to a dark grey/grey texture that for example the A320 family has for the engine exhaust, would that also impact the FPS? I don't necessarily mean that it should be more detailed, just a different color.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm, I understand the problem here. It's good to know that some things are already in your plans. What I think are the most pressing matters, are the Boeing 767 and 757 models. I'd already be grateful if these were redone. If engine exhausts modeling for for example the A320 family was redone, that'd be a bonus. Regarding the texturing improvements, I understand that it might impact the FPS. But, changing the current black texture to a dark grey/grey texture that for example the A320 family has for the engine exhaust, would that also impact the FPS? I don't necessarily mean that it should be more detailed, just a different color.

It was a gray one some versions ago and several users insistet it to be black, so I have to look myself.

757 and 767, I will see if I can do anything about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, thanks Burkhard :-)

EDIT: As a small clarification, here's what I think might be changed about the 757 and 767 models:

767: mainly the nose. Hard to describe what looks wrong, but it seems a bit bluky, and not 767-like.

757: The plane looks a bit fat and the nose is a bit off. If you could make it look slimmer and make the nose a bit more realistic, that would already help a lot.

I understand that repaints shall have to be adjusted to fit the new models. I'm offering my help with that, if you need it. I want to see a better-looking 757 and am prepared to do some work, if need be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Burkhard,

Not an addition, rather a deletion for the 2011 schedules. As you may know, the RAF has been decimated by recent cuts to the UK Defence budget and the following aircraft are no longer flying:

RAF Harrier - all Mks,

RAF Tornado F3,

RAF Nimrod MR2 & MRA4 - but the two Nimrod R1 that were supposed to have been withdrawn at end March are now flying for at least another 3 months; the Nimrod MRA4's have alraedy been scrapped :( ,

RAF Dominie T1 - BAE 125 derivitive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Burkhard,

Not an addition, rather a deletion for the 2011 schedules. As you may know, the RAF has been decimated by recent cuts to the UK Defence budget and the following aircraft are no longer flying:

RAF Harrier - all Mks,

RAF Tornado F3,

RAF Nimrod MR2 & MRA4 - but the two Nimrod R1 that were supposed to have been withdrawn at end March are now flying for at least another 3 months; the Nimrod MRA4's have alraedy been scrapped :( ,

RAF Dominie T1 - BAE 125 derivitive

Will be a pity to dump them, maybe the Nimrod can be sent to VHHX?

At least this saves the task to remake the Harriers, their shape is really hard to model...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will be a pity to dump them, maybe the Nimrod can be sent to VHHX?

At least this saves the task to remake the Harriers, their shape is really hard to model...

Burkhard,

There will be many, myself incuded, that agree! The current world situation requires certain types of operational, Nimrod MR2/MRA4 were not just Maritime patrol/recce, and support (training) aircraft. Tornado F3 also had great potential beyond its main role of long range Air Defence.......

Pleased to be of service... I suppose you could retain 1 Nimrod as a display aircraft ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Burkhard,

There will be many, myself incuded, that agree! The current world situation requires certain types of operational, Nimrod MR2/MRA4 were not just Maritime patrol/recce, and support (training) aircraft. Tornado F3 also had great potential beyond its main role of long range Air Defence.......

Pleased to be of service... I suppose you could retain 1 Nimrod as a display aircraft ;)

Is there any Airbase in the UK that shut down and is not converted to a Ryanair/Easyjet hub? I think nobody would complain to have a few Tornados/Nimrod down there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any Airbase in the UK that shut down and is not converted to a Ryanair/Easyjet hub? I think nobody would complain to have a few Tornados/Nimrod down there.

There are a few airbases remaining, Burkhard.

Again, for information:

EGQK - Kinloss: No more Nimrods, except very few visits by R1. Increased traffic from P3 - USN, Canada and Norway, plus French Navy Atlantic.

EGXJ - Cottesmore: Closed, no traffic! Though the Harriers are stored there for the present time.

EGCD - Woodford: Nimrod factory. Currently a small number of GA movements but will close to traffic completely by September 2011.

I hope the above will be of some use... I will advise you of any other changes, if you would like, as they are released in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Burkhard,

I know i discussed this with you already, but I would really like to see a Lockheed C-141 Starlifter in the next relase.

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Burkhard,

I know i discussed this with you already, but I would really like to see a Lockheed C-141 Starlifter in the next relase.

Jim

I remember, but keep reminding :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a tool to check which add-on airports a user has installed and have it remove the MTX versions of those airports. I find that everytime a new version of MTX is released I have to remove a load of your airports to ensure there is no compatibility problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Normally speaking, though, provided there are no ICAO naming clashes, that's achieved by simply placing the MTX scenery layer lower than the add-on scenery version...

It only becomes an issue if a: the add-on developer hasn't excluded the default airport (unusual) or b: the MTX scenery layer is higher than the add-on, in which case the MTX airport will take priority. I can see your point about the possibility of including a tool to spot clashes, though, if it is possible?

Ian P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not all addon developers are equal though, some developers are still not making AFDs in proper FSX format and this causes problems in FSX as I'm sure you are aware i.e. it breaks the scenery layer priorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not all addon developers are equal though, some developers are still not making AFDs in proper FSX format and this causes problems in FSX as I'm sure you are aware i.e. it breaks the scenery layer priorities.

In order to replace an airport, all of its header has to be identical to the one it is intended to replace. So an airport EGLL at West 1 North 52 will not be replaced by an airport EGLL at West 2 North 53.

Now, from the Jeppesen data 2002 used for FS9 to the one used for FSX some airport have been redone, resulting in the change of its center coordinates, as example when a runway was added. So, if you use an FSX airport and an airport based on FS9 code, they will not be the same if the center port is different, leading to prblems like aircraft parking over each other etc.

Unfortunately afail the dump airports tool only reports once of these instances, so getting knowledge of the second one is nothing I could achieve nor is foreseen by Microsoft to be achieved as an AI traffic option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about an application that can allow the user to create a list of MTX airport bgl's to remove. When this application is run after the next MTX update it can also list any new airports MTX has added that weren't in a previous version and then ask the user if they wish to remove any of those new airports. A tool like that would certainly help save me a lot of time, especially if you do a lot of beta testing and reinstalling, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about an application that can allow the user to create a list of MTX airport bgl's to remove. When this application is run after the next MTX update it can also list any new airports MTX has added that weren't in a previous version and then ask the user if they wish to remove any of those new airports. A tool like that would certainly help save me a lot of time, especially if you do a lot of beta testing and reinstalling, lol.

That might be simple. I would the program directly let create a batchfile that can be run from Communicator every time one wants, and can be modified through a simple application.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been many changes "Downunder".

Freedom Air are no more.

Air New Zealand now have B77-200ER and 300ER series.

All Air New Zealand B767-300ER's now have winglets.

The famous Pacific wave on Air New Zealand is being dropped.

Virgin Blue are now Virgin Australia and have embraer 170 & 190 ,also A330-200 joined fleet as well as ATR 75?

Tiger now flies internally in Australia, as well as Alliance using A330 and A320-200 equipment.

Qantas has ceased New Zealand operations and been replaced by Jetstar.

Qantas still flies Australia New Zealand but now with B737-800 fleet.

Hope all this is usefull info.

As always great addon, enjoy it all.

Cheers, Tesza :smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been many changes "Downunder".

Freedom Air are no more.

Air New Zealand now have B77-200ER and 300ER series.

All Air New Zealand B767-300ER's now have winglets.

The famous Pacific wave on Air New Zealand is being dropped.

Virgin Blue are now Virgin Australia and have embraer 170 & 190 ,also A330-200 joined fleet as well as ATR 75?

Tiger now flies internally in Australia, as well as Alliance using A330 and A320-200 equipment.

Qantas has ceased New Zealand operations and been replaced by Jetstar.

Qantas still flies Australia New Zealand but now with B737-800 fleet.

Hope all this is usefull info.

As always great addon, enjoy it all.

Cheers, Tesza :smile:

Thanks for the list, I will see what I get done...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Olympic airways and Olympic aviation in Greece do not operate since 2009.They have been replaced by Olympic air a complerely new airline with new paint and completely new fleet.Please update your database in version 5.4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • 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.