----- Original Message -----
From: "Boris Koenig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "FlightGear developers discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 2:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] IVAO vs. VATSIM (get it straight)

> Another thing:
> As I seem to be the only one so far, who's got in touch with them,
> I would not mind continuing the exchange to a point where things
> get specific, but I would appreciate some help concerning the
> things that we should get straight with them - I mean, I have already
> asked quite some stuff, but everybody has probably his/her own
> imaginations regarding a possible collaboration, so what I
> brought up so far is certainly far from complete, e.g.:
> -> protocol should be open (?)
> -> cross platform software
> -> integration of VoIp software (?)
> ...
> ...
> So, why not collect these things and discuss the needs of
> the FlightGear project ?
Will FlightGear provide a pilot entity, controller entity, or both? The
needs are driven in large part by the scope of operations the individual
wishes to perform -- from a few circuits around the local airfield, a short
flight with the family to visit the grandparents, an IFR cross-county, a
commercial 737 from KLAX to KDEN, a 747 flight from KJFK to EGLL...

> That way we can also determine what's acceptable and what's not.
> As soon as these things are clear, we'll see their *real* ;-)
> attitude.
By all means, keep the dialogue open...

As to the three points:

1) the protocol has to be open. Security should not be an issue, if it is
then there is something wrong with the design and/or implementation

2) the protocol should be platform neutral (although there might be some
issues with # of bytes for data type and big endian/little endian).

3) probably need both "live voice" and an ASR/TTS capability to handle a mix
of live and AI controllers. If we ever get to the point that the AI
controllers can pass the Turing test maybe we can "shoot" the live
controllers ;-) or at least provide a more robust expanded controller

 This almost begs to be a separate project under the FlightGear umbrella
(aka JSBSim). It would not be all that hard to write a network module to
output FG parameters -- there is a plethora of protocols defined in
../src/Networks adding one more won't cost that much.

The AI/ATC module is another bigger question, and we need to hear from the
author. it would also be interesting to hear how the virtual ATC community
feels about the idea of mixing AI and live controllers. This would also
complicate the protocol to some degree....

John W.

Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to