Thorsten wrote > -----Original Message----- > From: thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi [mailto:thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi] > Sent: 01 December 2010 11:43 > To: FlightGear developers discussions > Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft model/cockpit rating > > > So, if you claim that your rating is _not_ a beauty contest, then I'd > > ask you: After taking the above mentioned thoughts into account, what's > > left as a criteria for your rating ? > > Martin, I see no need to repeat myself over and over. Please read the > explanations I have given so far, if you feel dissatisfied there is a > factor of three times more explanation, response and disclaimer in the > forum. > > If you think the scheme is grossly flawed, please point to a specific > example where, then we can discuss that, maybe that's more productive. > > > > Now, when I know a cockpit from real life, when I start FlightGear with > > the corresponding aircraft (or vice versa) and I'm instantly getting > > the feeling "ah, this looks pretty familiar", then I very much claim > > this to be a valid criteria for judging about the grade of detail _and_ > > realism. > > I'd be happy if this were the main issue as it would indicate we have a > high level of realism to begin with, but a fair share of aircraft has _no_ > gauges at all... > > Cheers, >
If I might interject here, I would draw your attention to the KC135. It has a nice cockpit, albeit 2D. A working autopilot, a radar, a reasonable looking exterior. And, hey, it pumps gas! It should get a medium/low score shouldn't it? Perhaps equivalent to one of our early B737s? Or something? Now let me tell you that I knocked it up over a weekend in response to a request for a flyable tanker. The panel is a modified B737 with a few more bells and whistles. It has some photo-realism, but it is absolutely NOTHING like any version of the KC135 that I'm aware of. The 3d model is a conversion of the B707 which was already in data. It shouldn't be - the fuselage of a KC135 is narrower than a B707. The FDM is auto-generated by Aeromatic: good enough for government work. The only really authentic bit is the livery. How should it be rated now? Nil? Nevertheless, it's fun to use and fulfills a role in FG. I'm aware of several more models which come into this category. The point is that your rating system can't possibly pick this up. It is a subjective opinion of the "attractiveness" of a cockpit. Or, as I said, a beauty contest. This does have some value, and we certainly gain from drawing attention to those models that have no, or only rudimentary, cockpit interior details. Vivian ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App & Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base & get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
