Board index Other Hangar talk

Anyone here play FSX?

Talk about (almost) anything, as long as it is no serious FlightGear talk and does not fit in the other subforums.
Forum rules
Please refrain from discussing politics.

Re: Anyone here play FSX?

Postby patstan » Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:03 pm

Flightgear Flight Dynamics are much better than FSX's IMHO. But, it seems FSX has caught me (due to much realism and better FPS compared to Flightgear) so much so that i havent been on Flightgear for nearly 2 weeks :O
patstan
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:27 pm
Callsign: patstan
Version: 3.0
OS: Windows 8

Re: Anyone here play FSX?

Postby CaptB » Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:36 pm

patstan wrote in Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:03 pm:Flightgear Flight Dynamics are much better than FSX's IMHO. But, it seems FSX has caught me (due to much realism and better FPS compared to Flightgear) so much so that i havent been on Flightgear for nearly 2 weeks :O


You mean to say realism of some of the payware eyecandy. This is something I am certain we can make happen in FG just by doing our share to complete aircraft and scenery.
CaptB
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 6:36 pm
Callsign: EKCH_AP
IRC name: CAPTB
Version: 2018.1
OS: Xubuntu, Win7 64

Re: Anyone here play FSX?

Postby Bjoern » Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:06 pm

HJ1AN wrote in Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:40 pm: [F-16 CP]


Interesting bit. I never knew that there was such an excessive F-16 sim besides the Falcon series.

Speaking of, if you miss the F-16 and its systems, you can give BMS a try, which is basically an addon updating Falcon 4.0.

Probably the best free military sim there is.
http://www.bmsforum.org/forum/content.p ... fcb4154bd4

(I, of course, still proudly own the original Falcon 4 with its 500 page manual.)
Last edited by Johan G on Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Removed a bad suggestion
Do a barrel roll!
User avatar
Bjoern
 
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 10:00 pm
Location: Nearest: THF
Version: Next
OS: ArchLinux, Win 7

Re: Anyone here play FSX?

Postby patstan » Mon Jan 12, 2015 4:04 pm

CaptB wrote in Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:36 pm:You mean to say realism of some of the payware eyecandy. This is something I am certain we can make happen in FG just by doing our share to complete aircraft and scenery.


You are indeed correct Sir. FSX is nothing without payware addons, however once you get into it, its hard to go back it seems.
patstan
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:27 pm
Callsign: patstan
Version: 3.0
OS: Windows 8

Re: Anyone here play FSX?

Postby Hooray » Mon Jan 12, 2015 4:46 pm

islandmonkey wrote in Mon Jan 05, 2015 6:09 pm:I do suppose the ATC/AI system is very far behind. I don't even touch it in FlightGear because I'm not particularly sure how it works :D, other than, of course, the actual AI aircraft in FG which is very slow and unreliable. I have always liked the virtual ATC in FSX, we do have one in FG but it's an odd and erratic thing :?



These days, you really only need to learn a bit about Nasal scripting to create an ATC/AI system that can be whatever you want it to be - traffic can be procedurally created and controlled using scripting, and equally flight plans, route manager, autopilot and FDM functionality exists already to varying degrees - in fact, you could argue that "tanker.nas" is a simple ATC-controlled aircraft following instructions. Extending this to support maneuvers other than flying a refueling pattern is pretty straightforward - using different aircraft is just a matter of switching the 3D model. You could even add virtual pilots or virtual ATC controllers, too.
While the underlying C++ code hasn't been touched in years, we have an increasing number of scripted AI efforts creating traffic. The bombable addon even implements dog-fighting using a bunch of "bots" using just a fraction of these tools.

  • adapting tanker.nas to support different aircraft/3D models: 1 evening
  • adapting tanker.nas to support additional maneuvers (takeoff, DPs, STARs, IAPs): 2-3 maneuvers per evening
  • adding ATC/AI interaction into the mix will roughly take 3-4 weekends (just the prototyping)

So all the components are there already - and you could even watch the whole thing using an existing Canvas/MapStructure radar screen to visualize what your virtual controllers and pilots are doing.
This isn't rocket science - it's just taking existing stuff, adapting it a bit and working through a handful of tutorials if you are new to Nasal.
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11340
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: Anyone here play FSX?

Postby islandmonkey » Mon Jan 12, 2015 9:43 pm

But surely there ought to be some optimisation required underneath in the C++ code, right? Nasal looks easy peasy, but I'm quite familiar with C++ :wink:

Nevertheless, I do see what you mean with Nasal and Canvas though. It would seem very easy to replicate something like this:
Image

Adding onto this is perhaps refining the new text-to-speech system -- we can call it okay, even if it seems like the person announcing things has some sort of chronic throat infection. It would be good to use this system for ATC.

On the point of AI, well, I am aware of how easy it is to create routes etc - but what it really needs is some optimisation.
User avatar
islandmonkey
 
Posts: 784
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 8:51 pm
Location: EGCN (uni), EGHI (home)
Callsign: G-MNKY
Version: 2018.3
OS: Ubuntu 19.04

Re: Anyone here play FSX?

Postby Hooray » Tue Jan 13, 2015 2:27 am

islandmonkey wrote in Mon Jan 12, 2015 9:43 pm:But surely there ought to be some optimisation required underneath in the C++ code, right? Nasal looks easy peasy, but I'm quite familiar with C++ :wink:

Someone familiar with a language like C++ should be able to get started with Nasal immediately - the syntax is very close, the main things that differ obviously are memory management (i.e. there is none) and FG specific APIs (think: fgcommands, extension functions etc).

And to be absolutely honest, I cannot think of a single C++ modification necessary to come up with a pretty compelling prototype doing scripted ATC/AI interaction.
Creating such a demo should be between 500-800 lines of code, e.g. by adapting existing sources - and you'd end up with two classes for creating AI pilots/controllers in scripting space.

Subject: Ask help for TCAS demonstration

Hooray wrote:Hi & welcome,

yes, this can all be done by using the AI system and creating scripted traffic via Nasal: http://wiki.flightgear.org/Status_of_AI_in_FlightGear

Here are a few more pointers discussing the whole approach and its limitations/requirements:

You can even create Canvas-based PFD/ND instruments for AI traffic fairly easily using the MapStructure/ND frameworks, including TCAS TA/RA support:
How to display Airport Chart?
Image

As you can see, these are all independent ND instances, driven by AI traffic - all purely implemented in scripting space. We already do have a very basic TCAS/TRAFFIC ("TFC") layer for the ND: http://wiki.flightgear.org/Canvas_MapStructure_Layers

Creating conflict scenarios should be fairly easy using the tanker.nas demo code, and some creative use of the APIs provided in geo.nas

Overall, this should only take 2-3 weekends - i.e. coming up with a working prototype.



The UI shown above can be easily replicated/re-implemented using Nasal/Canvas, without requiring any C++ changes either.
However, Nasal can definitely be extended via C++:

http://wiki.flightgear.org/Nasal_for_C% ... rogrammers
http://wiki.flightgear.org/Nasal/CppBind

On the point of AI, well, I am aware of how easy it is to create routes etc - but what it really needs is some optimisation.


The Nasal route would allow you to entirely circumvent the hard-coded system and build your own AI system with virtual controllers and pilots flying their own routes, responding to weather and routing changes. These are things that are in fact much more straightforward in scripting space than in C++ or XML space - you could in fact create a DSL just for ATC/piloting purposes.
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11340
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: Anyone here play FSX?

Postby dtlan201 » Fri Jan 30, 2015 12:30 pm

Why can fsx fps better than FG?
dtlan201
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 3:49 am
Callsign: MIA0774
Version: 3.7
OS: Windows 7

Re: Anyone here play FSX?

Postby Bjoern » Fri Jan 30, 2015 12:42 pm

Because written for older hardware, because optimized and because not bleeding edge.
Do a barrel roll!
User avatar
Bjoern
 
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 10:00 pm
Location: Nearest: THF
Version: Next
OS: ArchLinux, Win 7

Re: Anyone here play FSX?

Postby StuartC » Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:18 pm

Running ( vanilla out the box ) FSX at the same resolution and similar quality settings drags my PC to its knees where FG runs fine.
StuartC
 
Posts: 2737
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Arse end of the Universe
Callsign: WF01
Version: 2018.3.2
OS: W10 64 bit

Previous

Return to Hangar talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest