Board index FlightGear Development New features

Vatsim in FG

Discussion and requests for new features. Please note that FlightGear developers are volunteers and may or may not be able to consider these requests.

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby Vikthor » Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:41 pm

I guess, if done right, there should be no fundamental difference between MSFS and FG traffic, so it boils down to: Can FG handle lot of traffic? We will see, I hope ...
Vikthor
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 10:16 am
Location: Prague,Czech republic
Callsign: OK-VIK/Vikthor

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby Liam » Fri Feb 19, 2010 8:54 pm

I know what VATSIM does thanks, but im saying why do we need this GPL oatabix system when your asking for data to be crossed from VATSIM when its not GPL.
How can you create something GPL which sends voice/position transmitted by VATSIM users VIA OUR GPL system, surely you can't run them both together, so this means we would either use VATSIM and see all sim pilots, or use our open source alternative and only see open source sim traffic (FlightGear being the only one, that I know of..)

Im affraid this GPL barrier permits us to touch any of this, or it would have already been done. we can't use stuff from VATSIM, and we cant use VATSIM, and if we make an alternate software we would either need to ask all VATSIM users to switch to this GPL alternative or feed the data via both of them simultaneously, something which VATSIM would be in riots about.

Understand what im saying?.. you cant give an alternative to solve the problem unless you make everyone from all simulators switch to it. Its not a case of whether we can support the traffic, its a case of we simply can't take traffic from other systems- when VATSIM does so, unless you beat them at their own game and encourage all the thousands of pilots to switch (which they won't) and by any means, VATSIM is a large organisation and we are not- and I highly doubt any of you will intend to operate such a vastly capable and complex system, for GPL software ;). Many times it has been said that VATSIM won't and have not agreed to anything of the sort, so please don't try to make it seem like we can give an alternative when we have no means to do so.

greetings.
User avatar
Liam
 
Posts: 1907
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 3:33 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Callsign: Liam
Version: GIT
OS: MAC OS X

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby MD-Terp » Sat Feb 20, 2010 5:34 am

Lots of things seem impossible until they are accomplished. Powered flight itself is a great example.
Cheers,
-Rob.

"Retired" from FlightGear involvement as of July 2010.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8809
User avatar
MD-Terp
 
Posts: 2420
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 6:37 am
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Callsign: N531MD, AVA0025

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby Liam » Sat Feb 20, 2010 11:02 am

Well unfortunately legal issues don't tend to be things you can work your way around easily. I am not saying making it is the problem (although thats a whole different story), but if you can find a way to switch every simmer in the world to our GPL alternative, or have VATSIM share their data seamlessly between the two then I wish you all the luck- I am sure they will be more than happy to share their information with what they will see as a rival, as they have refused in the past to even acknowledge FlightGear, and why would we need an open source alternative when we are the only open source flight simulator?, sure the Payware people can still use it as an add-on but why would they when VATSIM is so large, Free and operated by a large organisation.
As far as I can see; this is totally an unnecessary project which will continue to hit brick walls for as long as its thought up. Before any of this nonsence is rambled, its best to focus on our simulator, which still has a long way to go until it can be a direct alternative to other sims.
User avatar
Liam
 
Posts: 1907
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 3:33 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Callsign: Liam
Version: GIT
OS: MAC OS X

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby reeed » Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:42 am

I wrote a little program in python called
SquawkGear that would allow me to fly FlightGear on VATSIM, using a
couple of old VATSIM clients, SquawkBox 747 and Advanced Voice Client.
I'm awaiting VATSIM approval to distribute my work.

SquawkGear sits in the middle as a proxy, exchanging data between
FlightGear and SquawkBox747 in a way that requires neither to be
modified nor re-programmed in any way. (SB747 has been unmaintained
since 2005, and the source code is not available.) SquawkGear makes no
network connections to any VATSIM data or voice server, and it has
absolutely no knowledge of VATSIM network protocol or algorithms. All
VATSIM network connectivity is provided by SB747 and Advanced Voice
Client, both of which are currently approved clients according to:

http://www.vatsim.net/network/docs/approved/
(retrieved on 24 Feb 2010)

Image

The pitfalls of my software solution for FlightGear-on-VATSIM include:
1. all FG aircraft would appear as type "B744" on VATSIM because
changing the aircraft type is not possible in SB747.
2. no multiplayer support
3. FlightGear runs on multiple platforms (include Windows, Mac OS,
Linux, etc) but SB747 and AVC both require Windows. Use of these two
clients under virtual machine or emulation environments is possible but untested.

Stay tuned.
reeed
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 5:21 am
Location: Singapore
Callsign: SQC7294

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby CJohn » Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:57 pm

reeed,

Good and promising work!
You may scroll back a few pages on this topic to see there's partial but open-source and workable implementation of VATSIM FSD protocol. This may eliminate the need for platform-dependent proxying altogether.
CJohn
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:10 am

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby reeed » Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:33 am

Hi CJohn.

I have read almost everything out there with the keywords FlightGear and VATSIM :-) and have seen the arguments from both sides of the fence.

Good work on the FSD protocol, but because of the legalities I cannot possibly use your work. Moreover, VATSIM governors already know about my work, they just haven't replied.

My hope is that this program is a little step forward in bringing FG and Vatsim closer together. I see it as a temporary workaround until a full-fledged FG client can be built. Sometimes, getting a peek and a taste of the 'promised land' gets people thinking beyond legal and ideological hurdles, and turns dreams into reality :-)
reeed
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 5:21 am
Location: Singapore
Callsign: SQC7294

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby SP-CEZ » Thu Feb 25, 2010 8:38 am

But let me flow a bucket of a cold water...

Could someone tell me, what "we" (as FG) want to join VATSIM for? Why it is a "promised land"? It's not, at least not for me. I'm not against the project, but having a choice between joining VATSIM with all their pompous great virtual pilots (read: maniacs) and building something-as-MMO-air-traffic-for-FG (call it whatever), I prefer the second one.
SP-CEZ
 
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:45 pm
Location: Bydgoszcz (EPBY), Poland

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby CJohn » Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:56 pm

SP-CEZ wrote:But let me flow a bucket of a cold water...
Could someone tell me, what "we" (as FG) want to join VATSIM for? Why it is a "promised land"? It's not, at least not for me. I'm not against the project, but having a choice between joining VATSIM with all their pompous great virtual pilots (read: maniacs) and building something-as-MMO-air-traffic-for-FG (call it whatever), I prefer the second one.

Many people (except me) find VATSIM attractive for its policy of following real-world ATC procedures as close as possible. Also, the rank system invokes competition by itself, much like many other MMOGs.
CJohn
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:10 am

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby MD-Terp » Sat Feb 27, 2010 4:53 am

SP-CEZ wrote:Could someone tell me, what "we" (as FG) want to join VATSIM for?

Absolutely.

For a network of trained and (loosely) certified air traffic controllers who know what they're doing, instead of dealing with ATC in FGMP which can range anywhere from "wonderful and highly professional" (you, SP-CEZ) all the way down to "kids who know absolutely nothing about real terminology and procedure but just enjoy ordering people around" (others).

For the most part at any given time on FG, only one or two airports are staffed, and usually with a single controller. VATSIM seems to offer a chance at a more realistic experience flying in controlled airspace. It could be that it's not all it's advertised to be, but it sure seems like it's run a lot more organized and professionally than the current state of FG ATC, which is very very hit-or-miss.
Cheers,
-Rob.

"Retired" from FlightGear involvement as of July 2010.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8809
User avatar
MD-Terp
 
Posts: 2420
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 6:37 am
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Callsign: N531MD, AVA0025

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby SP-CEZ » Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:06 am

Rob, please, I'm not "wonderful and highly proffesional". Your words sound a bit sarcastic... ;(

But I got your point. Especialy the second one. This can be a reason I agree with.
SP-CEZ
 
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:45 pm
Location: Bydgoszcz (EPBY), Poland

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby MD-Terp » Sat Feb 27, 2010 3:53 pm

SP-CEZ wrote:please, I'm not "wonderful and highly proffesional". Your words sound a bit sarcastic... ;(

Oh, no, not at all what I intended. I was as sincere as I've ever been with that comment. If you'll recall the day I flew into Warsaw under your direction and began IMMEDIATELY and AGGRESSIVELY recruiting you for my TGA events, that should give you some indication of how I felt about your performance. LOL!
Cheers,
-Rob.

"Retired" from FlightGear involvement as of July 2010.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8809
User avatar
MD-Terp
 
Posts: 2420
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 6:37 am
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Callsign: N531MD, AVA0025

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby SP-CEZ » Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:42 pm

Cool. I feel flattered. ^^

Anyway, I'm still aware of my imperfections (last TGA example). However, I must agree with your opinions, even I fell a bit alergic for VATSIM people.
SP-CEZ
 
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:45 pm
Location: Bydgoszcz (EPBY), Poland

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby reeed » Sun Mar 07, 2010 2:56 pm

If anyone would like to beta-test my program (http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=533&start=60#p66399) please send me a PM or email. :-) Vatsim gave me verbal approval; I'm awaiting the official email.
reeed
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 5:21 am
Location: Singapore
Callsign: SQC7294

Re: Vatsim in FG

Postby MD-Terp » Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:22 pm

reeed wrote:If anyone would like to beta-test my program (http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=533&start=60#p66399) please send me a PM or email. :-) Vatsim gave me verbal approval; I'm awaiting the official email.

It sounds intriguing, but if I understand correctly, there are a few limitations:
(1) the user appears as a 747 to VATSIM regardless of what they are flying in FlightGear.
(2) the other VATSIM users will not be visible at all to the FlightGear user.

Is this correct?
Cheers,
-Rob.

"Retired" from FlightGear involvement as of July 2010.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8809
User avatar
MD-Terp
 
Posts: 2420
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 6:37 am
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Callsign: N531MD, AVA0025

PreviousNext

Return to New features

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest