Board index FlightGear Development New features

Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

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

In your opinion, should FlightGear go for VATSIM Network?

Poll ended at Sun Apr 25, 2010 7:58 am

Yes, that would be great!
10
36%
Neutral, i don't care
9
32%
No, i'm against going for VATSIM.
9
32%
 
Total votes : 28

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby MD-Terp » Sat Mar 27, 2010 1:54 pm

I can pretty much tell you, at least from my impression, that the core FG developers pretty much only take on areas of FG that directly interest them. So no one will STOP developing some other area of FG just to further work on VATSim integration. That latter work will be done by someone who has that interest at the top of their mind. And it's not like any of the work they might do will in any way hinder the further graphical development, further aircraft development, further sound development, or any other area that's presently underway. Seriously, there's absolutely no harm in it.

To those that are concerned that VATSim capability would replace FG's own MP servers -- I don't think anyone is suggesting this at all.

SP-CEZ -- you're correct that there's much I would have to study up on before considering myself ready to fly on VATSim. But they seem to offer plenty of tutorials on the matter.
Cheers,
-Rob.

"Retired" from FlightGear involvement as of July 2010.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8809
User avatar
MD-Terp
 
Posts: 2410
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 6:37 am
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Callsign: N531MD, AVA0025

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby SP-CEZ » Sat Mar 27, 2010 2:44 pm

Rob - I didn't mean particularily you as "a vatsim enthusiast". It was general opinion based on (no offence to anybody) level of advance of FG pilots, including myself. Profile of FG forum topics shows it the best. I'd like to learn more as well, but I see one more problem, than just simple "plug in" task. Vatsim bases on most updated navigation data, comparing to it our FG environment is highly incompatibile. How do we want participate in vatsim air traffic, if ATC sends us to fix which doesn't exist in our database? Or how can we taxi on airport which looks different from that on vatsim?

I see much more problems from FG side than "just" licence issues and software solutions.
SP-CEZ
 
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:45 pm
Location: Bydgoszcz (EPBY), Poland

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby Lukosius » Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:29 am

I would love the ability to use VATSIM with FlightGear.

My reason is solely geographic.

Unfortunately my location (Australia) means that I rarely see more than 15 people on the MP servers unless I'm up very late, or into the early hours of the morning. When using a flight sim, my preference is some type of multiplayer experience. At the moment I'm not getting that experience at the same level that most of the rest of you in North America and Europe are.

At the moment i know of two other regular Australian FG users. Apparently on the VATSIM network there's somewhere between 200 and 300.

Yes, I would prefer to (and will) keep using FlightGear's MP network, but if I also had a second option (VATSIM) for when you guys are asleep, of course I'm going to want to use it.

You will always find FG administrators, developers and users pushing the FG product. Unfortunately due to a small user base (compared to the other sims), FG users are very heavily weighted towards the Americas and Europe. I raise the question... where are all the East Asian and Australian flight simmers? That's a HUGE base to draw upon. I expect there's a lot using VATSIM-capable flight simulators. Just imagine the additional users you could convert to FG if you had that capability.

The whole VATSIM idea should be used as an enormous opportunity to attract more users to FlightGear. I already know of two friends who use X-Plane who would quite happily convert to FG if it was VATSIM-capable. So I'm guessing there would be plenty others!
Callsign: Lukosius (or Lukosiu if you only see 7 characters)
Preferred Aircraft: 777-200ER, 787, IL-96, MD-81, Citation X, B1900d, DHC6, Seneca II
Physical Location: Kalgoorlie, Western Australia
User avatar
Lukosius
 
Posts: 358
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 10:53 am
Location: Kalgoorlie, Western Australia
Callsign: Lukosiu, AVA0017
Version: 2_4

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby mattt » Mon Apr 05, 2010 10:59 am

Luk,

Well said, and exactly my reasons for teaming up with QF52 to realise SOA as a going concern...

I guess I need to learn more and better follow the FG <-> VATSIM discussion - my own FGVS project might well be able to assist "it's" VAs with an interface, once a clear path to doing so has been developed / established...

Cheers,
Mattt.
FG CVS on: E7400 @ ~3.2ghz, Asus P5e, 4gb RAM, 512mb 8400GS, MS FF Pro, Logitech Illum KB, 2 x 19" LCDs
Favourite aircraft: 737-900ER, 777-200ER, 787, A380, F-14b, F-18, C172p
FGCom usually at 122.75mhz
FGVAS: http://fgvas.mattts.net
User avatar
mattt
 
Posts: 421
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 7:33 am
Location: Lockyer Valley, Queensland, Australia
Callsign: Mattt

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby kyokoyama » Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:34 am

Did anyone mention this?
If MPFG v. VATSIM is the problem, could we just make some setting to allow users to choose between VATSIM servers and FG servers?
Like a server menu! (Maybe also able to be utilized to make different server networks for different pilot circumstances -one for casual, one to goof off, one for VAs and serious flight etc.)
Look for "B-BIRD" "N127KY" or "AVA0004" -that's me.

Despite having over 1700 posts here, I am not even close to being the most skilled guy here... I'm just words and bad drawing, not experience. :P
kyokoyama
 
Posts: 1981
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 2:16 am
Location: Earth
Callsign: B-BIRD, N127KY
Version: 2.12.1
OS: Windows Vista

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby Lukosius » Tue Apr 06, 2010 6:03 am

kyokoyama wrote:Did anyone mention this?
If MPFG v. VATSIM is the problem...

No I don't think this is the problem (and nor should it be).

It's simply a matter of allowing a VATSIM connection as another multiplayer option for FG users.

It will not be a replacement for FG multiplayer, and nor should it be.

So I think you can completely dismiss the FGMP vs VATSIM argument.
Callsign: Lukosius (or Lukosiu if you only see 7 characters)
Preferred Aircraft: 777-200ER, 787, IL-96, MD-81, Citation X, B1900d, DHC6, Seneca II
Physical Location: Kalgoorlie, Western Australia
User avatar
Lukosius
 
Posts: 358
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 10:53 am
Location: Kalgoorlie, Western Australia
Callsign: Lukosiu, AVA0017
Version: 2_4

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby DavidZhu » Sun Nov 28, 2010 8:57 pm

Is Vatsim even possible with FlightGear? If so, does anyone have a Tutorial, etc? (I'm using Linux... maybe that cuts down some opportunities)
Try flying on the East Coast of the United States more often. There are many improved airports that people scarcely use. You might find me somewhere near JFK (or BWI, IAD, ATL, RIC, BOS...)

Fly safe.

-David Zhu (callsign = DavidZh or N48DZ)
DavidZhu
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:16 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA
Callsign: DavidZh, N48DZ
Version: Git
OS: Linux Ubuntu 10.04

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby reeed » Sun Nov 28, 2010 10:56 pm

squawkgear.wordpress.com has all the info you need. :-)

I'm told that AVC and SB747 both run well under wine in Linux. :-)
reeed
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 5:21 am
Location: Singapore
Callsign: SQC7294

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby DavidZhu » Sun Nov 28, 2010 11:27 pm

I'm told that AVC and SB747 both run well under wine in Linux.


Yes!!! You just made my day, thanks bro

Edit: Hey, did you make squawkgear? cause your Website link under profile links to that site. just curious ;)
Try flying on the East Coast of the United States more often. There are many improved airports that people scarcely use. You might find me somewhere near JFK (or BWI, IAD, ATL, RIC, BOS...)

Fly safe.

-David Zhu (callsign = DavidZh or N48DZ)
DavidZhu
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:16 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA
Callsign: DavidZh, N48DZ
Version: Git
OS: Linux Ubuntu 10.04

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby reeed » Mon Nov 29, 2010 12:37 am

yep I made SquawkGear.
SB747 is made by hoppie (I know him).
AVC was made by Chris Serio from VATSIM (I don't know him).
reeed
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 5:21 am
Location: Singapore
Callsign: SQC7294

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby DavidZhu » Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:46 pm

reeed thank you,

I havn't gotten a chance to set everything up yet, I've been busy recently.

But I have one last question for you ;)

When I'm connected to the network, will I be able to see other pilots' aicraft who are online? Or will it be only other FlightGear pilots? Or can I see FSX aircraft? X-Plane?

Thanks ;)
Try flying on the East Coast of the United States more often. There are many improved airports that people scarcely use. You might find me somewhere near JFK (or BWI, IAD, ATL, RIC, BOS...)

Fly safe.

-David Zhu (callsign = DavidZh or N48DZ)
DavidZhu
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:16 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA
Callsign: DavidZh, N48DZ
Version: Git
OS: Linux Ubuntu 10.04

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby Tuxklok » Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:54 pm

You will be able to see everyone on the network, regardless of which they sim they may be using. Just be aware that due to how squawkgear is currently implemented you will show to others as a 747 regardless of what you are actually flying. Also flightgears AI models are mostly very basic looking and not really numerous, so don't expect to see others on the network in beautiful aircraft like you do on flightgear multiplayer. There also seems to be differences in altitude for some reason...other aircraft will appear to be driving above the ground to us, and us below the ground to them. Or maybe it was the other way round..haven't tried in a while.

cheers!
The Austria Scenery Project - more info
fg-scenery-tools - gitorious | videos
fgcomgui - Open source, cross platform, gui front end for fgcom. more info

More random musings and doings can be found on my personal site. (work in progress)
User avatar
Tuxklok
 
Posts: 1321
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:04 pm
Location: Orlando, FL
Callsign: Tuxklok / N1292P
OS: GNU/Linux

Re: Poll: Should FlightGear go for VATSIM?

Postby MaverickAlex » Fri Dec 03, 2010 5:54 am

I have flown a few flights now using FlightGear on Vatsim connected using reeeds SquawkGear using my Atlas Virtual Airlines callsign (AVA001). All were wonderful.
As long as you spend some time properly planning your flight and have some knowlege of ATC commands and responses then you will manage fine. You learn so much just from listening in.

Image

Image

using Vatspy to view the map is a great idea.
http://www.atlasvirtualairlines.com
Modeller of: TNCM TBPB MDPP TFFF TJSJ FMEE TKPK TFFG TQPF KLAX KATL EGNJ EGGW APACHE, EUROFIGHTER, HP VICTOR, DHC8
FGcom 122.75
creator Terragear GUI
User avatar
MaverickAlex
 
Posts: 1204
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 4:46 pm
Location: Kingston Upon Hull. UK

Previous

Return to New features

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest