John Wojnaroski wrote: > As Curt noted we've already crossed over into the "twilight zone". If > you're opposed to the idea then lets remove ALL models of military > aircraft AND civilian derivatives and ALL operations that have a > military/combat purpose (e.g: tacan, HUDs, air-to-air refueling, carrier > operations, etc). By the same token, if you are of this opinion and use > any of these models or features your argument and position seems a > little disingenuous. > > I've not done a count by type of the aircraft in Flightgear, but there > are a large number of military aircraft which are designed and built for > one reason only and one reason only -- combat or combat support. I'm > not a big fan of selective morality -- "Oh, I like to fly these > airplanes and build the models, but...
Sorry, John, this has nothing to do with "selective morality" - as you allege. After reading these lines I'd say you have severe difficulties telling the difference between flying and shooting/killing. To make understanding it easier: Many/most of the old but also the modern warbirds are fascinating aircraft from a technical as well as from an aviatic point of view - no doubt. Yet this is significantly different from actually performing the shooting at some other aircraft or dropping bombs. > Flightgear is more than a game and while there are highly sophisticated > and sound engineering elements to the code I would not classify it as a > true flight simulator, rather within a context of lower, limited > applications. For a *real* flight simulator one might consider: [... lots of interesing features ....] Certainly not all of these features are part of FlightGear's development goals - multi-platform portability for example excludes using only RTOS' exclusively as foundation of the simulation. Nevertheless you should consider that the fidelity of such a simulation is always depending on how much manpower is available for implementing these features. You sound a bit like a weisenheimer by judging the goals of the FlightGear project just by features that are _currently_ not implemented. Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel