On Friday 14 November 2003 23:50, Curtis L. Olson wrote: > Today I had a chance to see a driving sim located at KMSP. They use > it to train drivers for driving around on the airport grounds > (taxiways, runways, service roads, tunnels, etc.) The really > interesting thing about this sim is they had a beautifully done model > of the airport. Every light, every sign, every painted line, every > building, probably every tree and squirrel was modeled and placed > accurately. You got a very good sense of being at the actual airport > without having to rely on memory/imagination. > > They said they started with cad drawings of the airport and then > someone came out and took about 3000 digital pictures of everything. > It took them over a year to complete the modeling. > > Supposedly they have about $1.5 million into it in terms of equipment > and labor. Aside from the beautiful modeling job, they had a real > fire truck cab to sit in, and a 3 projector 180 degree cylindrical > visual system. They had one windows machine to interface with the cab > hardware, but other than that, everything was running linux on > commodity PC's. Pretty nifty system ... > > Curt. > -- > Curtis Olson HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project > Twin Cities curt 'at' me.umn.edu curt 'at' flightgear.org > Minnesota http://www.flightgear.org/~curt http:// www.flightgear.org
Interesting. It's something I think about whenever I start a model - what can I see & what do I include? In many respects, the finer into the detail you go, the easier it becomes to model. However, the longer it takes to complete the scene, as a consequence. I think it's because the more you break something down, the easier the individual parts become to identify and model, but you then need a lot more parts to complete the picture, so it can take longer. LeeE _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
