Re: [Flightgear-devel] Why not use FS2002 aircraft files?

[throttle1000]

The idea would be to use the graphichs part of MS files. They have lot of nice airplane outside and panel graphics. That alone would take 1000 years to do.   Yes. They have errors! But one should only use what is good and ignore what is not correct. I am only saying that those files are easy to get and there are thousends of people writing new all the time.   Just add to them the FGFS physics files. And there it is. Easy and fast!   JOJ ----- Original Message ----- From: Jon S. Berndt To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 6:49 AM Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Why not use FS2002 aircraft files? This assumes that MS is doing things correctly and/or the way things should be done. This is an invalid assumption. This is one of the reasons I, personally, wanted to begin writing an FDM.   You may some day see MSFS in at least one way following our lead.   Jon -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of throttle1000 Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 9:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Why not use FS2002 aircraft files? That would add about 2000 different aircrafts in one night to the FGFS. There should only be an additional FGFS file which would give those parameters that are not found in MSFS files. And that could be some default file for most new planes until the actual parameter file would be available (if ever?).   The support for MSFS aircraft files is so large and there are lot of tools available. That would save about 1000 work years in FGFS project. And add about 1000 000 potential users!?   JOJ