Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, FeelThere said:

Craig, do you have any reference that you suggest for the next version?

Probably something like this!?

https://media.defense.gov/2018/Jun/19/2001933506/-1/-1/0/180615-F-BP532-0011.JPG
https://www.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/uploads/2014/12/calgarytower3.jpg
https://pilotseye.tv/wp-content/gallery/windstill/pilotseye_windstill_2560.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FeelThere said:

We have the following lined up:
-FAOR (by Gabor)
-KIAD
-KEWR
-EGLL
-surprise airport 🙂

Thank you

 

Vic

Egll is the one in waiting for

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FeelThere said:

-surprise airport 🙂

 

If I could make a wish for an airport, it would be rather KMIA, LEMD, RKSI or KDEN, and I sincerely hope it's not LTFM... 🥺

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DeltaVII said:

If I could make a wish for an airport, it would be rather KMIA, LEMD, RKSI or KDEN, and I sincerely hope it's not LTFM... 🥺

why not LTFM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/30/2020 at 9:05 AM, Avwriter said:

Perhaps the next version will be different in that regard, though personally I would prefer they keep their focus on the actual game functionality rather than on eye candy.

Totally agree and vote for functionality over graphics “eye candy” especially since we don’t know yet what the minimum and recommended computer requirements are going to be for Tower XX.  Some of us that are not gamers may not have the higher dollar computer equipment (processor, graphics card, etc.) that would be needed to support intense graphics at the possible cost of the simulation's functionality or slowing down the simulation.  As an ex-military controller I love the game for its challenging game play therefore super graphics are not all that important to me.  In fact, I usually don’t have much time to look at the graphics in detail since I’m normally concentrating on the ADIRS and DBRITE most of the time (normally I try to keep myself pushed to the limit of my controller abilities).  I further believe the new game should be developed on the basis of it being an actual ATC simulation and not just another video game.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Braf123456 said:

why not LTFM

The layout is a nightmare, especially between the runways with basically no holding area between them. It looks like KSFO's 28s between the 34s and 35s, respectively. And with 9 (!) ground frequencies in real life and the limitations of the game engine, I don't think that it's manageable from one tower (from tower 1 between the 34s and 35s, you have almost no sight at the terminals; from tower 2 on the south east apron, you have almost no sight at the thresholds of the 16s), let alone that the taxi routes via B and E1 will work. Just imagine trying to send an aircraft from 34L@A7A back to the south east apron via A7B, A, A4, E1, E, N1, F5 and TF...

It might work in Tower!XX, but there's no way it'd work in a non-frustrating way in 3D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DeltaVII said:

The layout is a nightmare, especially between the runways with basically no holding area between them. It looks like KSFO's 28s between the 34s and 35s, respectively. And with 9 (!) ground frequencies in real life and the limitations of the game engine, I don't think that it's manageable from one tower (from tower 1 between the 34s and 35s, you have almost no sight at the terminals; from tower 2 on the south east apron, you have almost no sight at the thresholds of the 16s), let alone that the taxi routes via B and E1 will work. Just imagine trying to send an aircraft from 34L@A7A back to the south east apron via A7B, A, A4, E1, E, N1, F5 and TF...

It might work in Tower!XX, but there's no way it'd work in a non-frustrating way in 3D

That makes sense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, FeelThere said:

Craig, do you have any reference that you suggest for the next version?

Vic

I shared this video (see below) In January 2019. It is very interesting and shows you glimpses of modern day equipment. Around the 15 minute mark they go into the training facility and you get great views of their digital strips, departure screen, and airport monitoring equipment. 

https://forum.simflight.com/topic/86502-dubai-airport-atc/

Regarding the current ADIRS - I have found little to no information on it on the internet other than an unrelated component used by Airbus. ASDE-X has been around for a while (before T!2011) and is used at most of the US airports you've released. Something like ASDE-X and/or A-SMGCS visually would be a massive improvement ... we definitely need something more than just a mod adding two colors to the current ADIRS.   

I guess you could argue the current STRIP is digital. But in today's electronic flight strips, as you can see in the above video and other videos, the functionality has been enhanced dramatically. 

The DBRITE is probably the least critical equipment used - for me at least. Not really sure of it's use today - maybe STARS instead. But, again, in the video, what they use is much more modern than what we have available to us.

Technology has advanced quite a bit - here's what the FAA has up their sleeve. https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/

Good luck ... research and talking to real-life controllers would probably be my recommendation. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Ron C said:

Totally agree and vote for functionality over graphics “eye candy” especially since we don’t know yet what the minimum and recommended computer requirements are going to be for Tower XX.  Some of us that are not gamers may not have the higher dollar computer equipment (processor, graphics card, etc.) that would be needed to support intense graphics at the possible cost of the simulation's functionality or slowing down the simulation.  As an ex-military controller I love the game for its challenging game play therefore super graphics are not all that important to me.  In fact, I usually don’t have much time to look at the graphics in detail since I’m normally concentrating on the ADIRS and DBRITE most of the time (normally I try to keep myself pushed to the limit of my controller abilities).  I further believe the new game should be developed on the basis of it being an actual ATC simulation and not just another video game.

Indeed it has an "actual ATC simulation" version however with a pricetag of an actual ATC simulator 🙂 
However I see your point. We will try to make the new version scalable so lower end computers can hopefully run it.

 

Vic

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, FeelThere said:

We will try to make the new version scalable so lower end computers can hopefully run it.

Thank you Vic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite the system requirement and eye candy concerns, the view from the tower is the most important “equipment” - at least that is the sentiment I hear from real life tower controllers. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, crbascott said:

the view from the tower is the most important “equipment”

Without the peripheral field of view it might be impossible to imitate that outside VR and I sincerely hope that Tower!XX does not go VR. FeelThere will have to come up with an intelligent solution for that, if they want to avoid that three or more monitors become a necessity for the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Graphically - it's hard not to have a desire for FT to push the envelope as far as they possibly can. You only have to look at the new MsFs2020 to see the leap forward that has made to the real-world environment. If the game is to hold it's own for 3-5yrs of a product cycle, it's wise to aim high at the start. I'm aware that has implications for upgrades/GPU etc - but, there is a middle ground. 

The simulation and realism of command and control is crucial to this type of game. Especially where so many of us are either active, or have a keen interest in this part of aviation. The current platform went a long way - especially with voice control (which to be fair is VERY good most of the time) so the next version should build on the good, and remove the bad. There was an incredibly useful thread a while ago with the WISHLIST, and im sure FT took a lot away from that.

I've said on another forum that I would be very upset if the next version did not "fix" the issues with T3DPro (commands/pilots crashing) and then build on the best parts (community/voice)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, crbascott said:

Despite the system requirement and eye candy concerns, the view from the tower is the most important “equipment” - at least that is the sentiment I hear from real life tower controllers. 

I can relate with what you are saying, especially since when I retired from the Air Force ADIRS hadn’t made it to the military yet (we were usually about a generation behind the FAA equipment wise) with the DBRITE being the only real control tower electronic aid available (yeah, I’ve been out for a while).  However, I’m not suggesting that graphics aren’t important, just that I feel you don’t need to have a lot of extra GPU gobbling resources needed for "cool" exterior details when you looking out the tower’s windows; especially since you are supposed to be primarily concentrating on the aircraft under your control.  Again, my main concern was having to have a higher end system to be able to effectively play and enjoy the simulation/game (i.e., not sacrificing functionality or speed for super detailed “cool” graphics for the non-high end systems).  I agree with @Lewisboy comments including that there should be some sort of middle ground available.  I also really appreciate Vic’s comment about trying to make a scalable version of the game (may also create more potential future customers).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, EliGrim said:

Without the peripheral field of view it might be impossible to imitate that outside VR and I sincerely hope that Tower!XX does not go VR. FeelThere will have to come up with an intelligent solution for that, if they want to avoid that three or more monitors become a necessity for the game.

I hope for resolution scaling.  I've had a triple monitor setup since... 2006 or so.  Right now I'm stuck playing windowed on a single monitor for full non issue play lol.  Spanning my three screens by the game just rendering the added pixels in the DOF would be great. Not holding my breath though. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ripskin said:

Not holding my breath though.

I sincerely hope that a multi-monitor setup will be supported. At the same time I hope that this will not be mandatory, i.e. it makes gameplay more difficult with only one monitor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thoughts. I so wish I could post a screenshot of a current version (indeed our marketing team would remove me from my position for sure) 🙂
We are not there yet to let me comment resolution, etc, but VR is a very possible option. More and more simmers are using it and once you try it there is no return. Indeed it shouldn't make the non VR users less important so we will try to make both version as best as possible.
Re: wish list. I think I posted it somewhere some statistic about the fact, majority of the requests made our list and most of them got high importance in our internal to-do list.

Thank you so much Folks

 

Vic

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...

×
×
  • 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.