Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers wrote:
First post on the mailing list after lurking for a while. My name is Jeroen
Hoppenbrouwers and I have been active for about five years in a niche of the
flight sim world, the (very active) community around Aerowinx 747-400
Precision Simulator (www.aerowinx.com). This is an extremely detailed
systems and IFR sim, with nearly no outside view.
I wonder about two things:
1. Many people nowadays slave the Microsoft sim to PS1 to get a full outside
view on a secondary system without having to "fly" the MSFS. This gives
them best of both worlds. I wonder whether FlightGear at present time
would be capable to fulfill the role of a scenery generator?
Yes, I've seen such an interface for MSFS to be used with PS1, too...
I think it is *theoretically* possible, basically one would need to
disable the standard FDMs (flight dynamic models) and let PS1 export
the corresponding values via some simple IPC/sockets mechanism - how
is this currently done ? I'd believe, they use FSUIPC for that purpose ?
So that FlightGear gets the FDM-speficic data from PS1 and FG serves
only as visual frontend for what PS1 wants it to do - probably one
would also need to fetch/use values that are responsible for values
such as weather, date/time etc. - so that this is also reflected
within the outside View of FlightGear.
Probably, it would be helpful to know what the MSFS <-> PS1 app
essentially exchanges between the rendering simulator and PS1 itself ...
I don't remember the webpage of that application anymore, but certainly
you do - if you could come up with a listing of variables/data that
needs to be exchanged, I'm sure people here could tell you in more
detail HOW feasible it would really be to adapt FlightGear and where
exactly in the source code you have to modify things ...
My current impression is that this might not even be SUCH a big
issue, but I may very well be wrong :-)
2. I saw comments about VATSIM/IVAO floating by.
Yes, this is currently a topic of interest for some people here,
mainly not because of these two particular networks, but rather
because of the desire to offer "virtual ATC" capabilties to
I wrote a fully certified
client for both networks that is built in such a way that connecting it
to FlightGear should take an hour at most (www.hoppie.nl/sb747).
It sounds interesting, indeed we are already in touch with with either
of the two networks, VATSIM also indicated that they were interested to
cooperate for FG-client, on the other hand they put their emphasis on
CLOSED SOURCE collaboration...
there be interest to do this and offer it to VATSIM/IVAO for re-certifi-
cation (re-, as the base software won't change at all)?
It's certainly an interesting option, I think.
Portability is no
issue as everything is in Tcl/Tk -- however we still suffer from the
"security by obscurity" dogma of both networks, so I can't release all
sources just yet.
that's exactly the kind of problem we faced during our 'negotiations'
with them ...
But how can you use "CLOSED SOURCE" with TCL/TK ? Do you additionally
use binary libraries ? (that's what we were suggested to do ...)
Flightgear-devel mailing list