What about changing the aerodynamic computation so they take place based on radius from the earth and at what would be sea level change the air density to that of water. Then any object below sealevel "flys under those equations. It would allow for surface ships and submarines.
And load in the whole terrain map of the world including all bathespheric data The water surface could then just be a specialized cloud layer. That would give a great start. On Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:30 am, Steve Hosgood wrote: > Martin Doege wrote: > >> Hi Steve! >> >> Naval simulations are great, but if integrating tides into the >> present-day ocean in FG is such a big technical challenge as it seems >> to be, I would not think that a "real" ocean with rolling waves, >> reefs, bathymetry, etc. is right around the corner. I think you would >> want to have something like in Virtual Sailor or Silent Hunter III and >> that is simply far removed from the blue plane that is currently the >> sea in FG. > > Hi Martin. > > I'm not sure the tides issue is likely to be a "big technical > challenge" actually. In the space of about 4 postings here, a workable > scheme was proposed of colouring certain triangles "sea" or "mud" > according to their datum heights as compared with a local simplified > tideheight generator. > > I can provide the maths for a tideheight generator, the only "problem" > is providing a suitable set of triangles (tagged with datum heights) > in a known tidal area. Also, on a tile-by-tile basis, a set of > (probably four) tidal vectors has to be given. > > The graphics engine needs to know how to do the colouring on-the-fly, > but compared with the magic that the 3D experts on this project have > already acheived, that'll be done in an evening as soon as someone sets > out to do it! > >> But in general naval simulations don't always need flashy graphics to >> be fun, so finding a good graphics engine is probably not so important >> at this point. > > I ws intimating that I don't have to find one - I've found it! Right > here. :-) > >> As with all simulations, what really makes them absorbing is the >> feeling of "being there", and while good graphics don't hurt, good >> gameplay matters more. For example, the submarine sim Red Storm Rising >> mostly had only tactical displays to look at that look about as boring >> as it gets, and yet it was an engaging game and the suspension of >> disbelief worked well. > > That's about what the current "surprise" program (windoze or linux) > has. It's really just a wrapper around the "FDM" to let the "FDM" be > used for something. > >> So instead of hoping for great seascapes from FG/SimGear in the near >> (or not so near) future, I would first improve your existing "FDM", >> add the ocean, include navigation aids, etc. > > Stars, sun and a stopwatch. That's all you get! > Ok. Ok, I'm joking of course. That's all you get in the 18th century, > but if sailing ships worm their way into the FG world, they'll be > usable in any timeframe. After all, tall ships are still with us in the > 21st century. > >> Cannons and a damage model should also be added since you are >> mentioning Hornblower. > >> As in Sid Meier's Pirates!, the crew should also be simulated, [giant >> snip] > > Funny, you've just written almost exactly what I wrote to "The Admiral" > (Peter Davis) last year. His comments were that he never planned to > make a game of the sim - his sentiments in fact matched closely to > those we hear all the time here on the FlightGear discussions group. > It's to be an accurate sim first and foremost, but if people want to > add guns/missiles etc then that's up to them. > > I talked about crew, crew morale etc. (I've been a pen&paper RPG-er for > a long time.) Same sort of response - basically, he (Davis) is only > really interested in getting the sim to work well and would be > disappointed to see the project "degenerate" into "just a game". > > Of course, done well then there's no reason why any of the additions > you mention would degenerate the project - they should be seen as > enhancements. > >> Graphics could initially be fairly minimal, perhaps isometric view or >> 2D. > > Dovetailing into FG would allow 3D models from the start. I really > don't want to have to build a custom isometric or 2D graphics engine > just for "surprise". > >> This would also give you time to develop a good interface. > > All your points are very valid - especially this one. Unlike aircraft, > saling ships don't have a single "point of control". The nearest (in > 18th century parlance) is "the quarterdeck" where the master or captain > issues the orders, which then have to be relayed through several layers > of middlemen to the grunts who pull the ropes. There is of course a > "ship's wheel" but it's not a single point of control to compare with > (say) an aircraft control column. > > Try it with "suprise". The ship's wheel does precious little unless the > ship is moving at quite a lick. It's the set of the sails (especially > the spanker) that really steers the thing. > >> I would also use a higher-level language for faster development and >> improved flexibility. Python comes to mind and has the advantage that >> the existing BASIC code should be easily converted to it and that >> there is Libglade and pyGlade. It is also nicely modular and its sane >> implementation of object orientation as well as its use of generators >> are definite boons for simulations. At a later point, 3D graphics >> could be added if desired, e.g. via PyOpenGL or using code in C/C++. > > The existing code isn't BASIC, it's 'C' that looks like BASIC :-) > > As I stated before - Davis wrote the original in BASIC and ported it to > 'C' many years later. > > I'm looking for volunteers, me hearties! First jobs involve completing > the linux version to have all the features of the windoze original. > Then there's the work involved in completing the segregation of GUI > code from the "FDM". Then there's work in making the new sources > compile on windoze to provide the same functionality it has now, but > cleanly this time. > > Then there's the possibility of heaving the ship FDM into FlightGear, > probably mis-using a "3D cockpit" idea to provide all the controls of > rudder, yard-arms and sail-setting. Following that, a 3D model of the > ship to make the "view out of the cockpit" look roughly like what you'd > see over the rail of the quarterdeck. > > If this all gets left to me, it'll be 2018 at least before I'm anywhere > near it! But with interested vounteers aboard, anything is possible. > Tomorrow even. > >> PS. You might want to consider registering your Linux port of Surprise >> at Freshmeat. > > Currently, I consider it too incomplete. Also, the source code is an > embarrassment! > > Source code is only available to people who sign a "non embarrassing > disclosure" agreement :-) > > (Nahhh, not really. Anyway, it's GPL as you all well know. It's just > *embarrassing* GPL, that's all.) > Steve. Bush's family and Saudi partners make higher profits/prices by preventing Saddam's huge Iraqi oil reserves from ever being sold. They'll Enron the world - George Watson 2001 For Hurricanes www.globalboiling.com For solar wind and earthquakes www.electricquakes.com Typos caused by two inch mobile phone keyboard _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
