David Megginson wrote:

You know, after reading some of the other comments, I'm starting to
like the idea of having just the c172p in the base package.

In combination with this change, I'd like us to start thinking about
changing the starting airport to Palo Alto (KPAO) rather than KSFO. It's more in proportion with the C-172, and with a few buildings,
etc., we could have it looking quite nice. A few minutes after taking
off from there and flying in a straight line, a new user will pass
over KSFO, which will be more exciting to look at from the air, and
then San Francisco, adding a nice sense of discovery.





David,

I would tend to agree with you with one exception. The default C-172 is very functional, but it is not our best model. A nice thing about including multiple aircraft is you can see some different nice things that can be done with FG aircraft. I think before we go with only 1 aircraft in the base package, we should really spiff up the C-172 externals and internals. Suspention animation, shadows, lights, and a much better 3d cockpit. If we go with only one aircraft, it should be really nice all around, and show off what we can do in FG.

Regards,

Curt.

--
Curtis Olson http://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/
FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org
Unique text: 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d



_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d

Reply via email to