Hi all. > Another big issue I was thinking about is how we would deal with our > differences in > terrain data? Maybey we should keep the technicall problems for a later > stage, but > having planes taxi meters above (or below) you just doesn't look good...
As far as I know FG uses the same geographic mode than IVAO network. Good thing is they both are based in real world, so theoretically there shouldn't be much problem. Regarding terrain differences, that's something usual sometimes in IVAO itself, where users have sometimes different versions of an airport, for instance. It's common to hear a controller asking "what airport version have you got, sir?", and this is perfectly understood by the controller or other users. > Joining IVAO is a great oppurtinity for FlightGear. But I agree with most > "senior" > developers that we should think out everything very well before we do > something. > It's easier to call something off than to revert it. There actually are a few simulators living together in IVAO (MSFS, X-Plane and Fly!), and there seems not to incompatible. > The IVAO team could implement a FlightGear compatible interface into their > network. The work would be done on their servers, but then nothing would > need to change on the FlightGear side. The IVAO team would not need to > expose their proprietary communication protocols, but instead would create > an implementaion of our open protocols at their side to accept FlightGear > connections. They could create their own proprietary interface to our > protocol as long as they don't grab any of our code to do so (or maybe the I thought that if we at IVAO don't distribute the GPL software then we can use it, modify it and keep it private in our network? Wasn't it stated before by Arnt? Anyway, a few changes should be made in FG MP protocol, as IVAO needs authentication information, but also full Flight Plan, for instance. And regarding the joining of the networks instead of adding FG possibility into IVAO servers, if we proceed merging networks, your network will have to comply with IVAO rules and regulations automatically, and I don't think that's fair for you. I think freedom of choice is necessary for pilots that have fun in different ways. IVAO should be just adapting itself to FG MP protocol specification changes, though IVAO would be making requests about changes so that it fits the needs. > ..any news, Pep? You doing it all in-house with no distribution, > means no copyright or license policy mess, which again means you > can have things decided at brass levels closer to yourself. ;o) Well, even if I think it makes a lot of sense, I can not decide by myself and go for it... IVAO is burocratic in this respect. I have already proposed this solution. Let's see what it comes out, but as I've said before there's a big interest in the software development department to see the FG simulator onboard. > ..my impression from what little I've seen here on this list, > (I haven't had time to join the fun), is our "social" MP > things are MP airshows and fly-ins, in the http://eaa.org/ > and http://airventure.org/ style spirit. > > ..these events fits nicely into RL air traffic in RL and I see no > problems with IVAO's serious relism traffic servers joining our > MP servers, and maybe you could write a NOTAM generator plugin or > something, so these serious IVAO etc people are properly notified > about FG's MP fly-in and airshow activity like in RL? ;o) C'mon, we are not that serious and boring people!! :o))) Perhaps something you might note is that even if IVAO is quite Real-Life, the main aim is FUN. No need to say that hitting other planes, etc. is forbidden in IVAO, but that's because someone in Real Life decided to forbid it!! ;o)) I agree it takes a bit more to become confident flyer in IVAO, but if the events are planned and executed in a more or less RL style they are perfectly legal in IVAO: airshows, formation flights, military flights, races, serch and rescues, humanitarian flights, chopper contests, etc. Every division (country) sets up events, followed by many many pilots, which make IVAO events something really funny. > Can you describe the value-add that FG gives that would be used for > ROI assessment for IVAO? If you are asking what has FG to offer to the IVAO network, I'd say A LOT. In the first place, IVAO community increases, as more users can join the fun (ok, call it serious fun ;o)). In second place, there are IVAO users that have stated their interest in FG due to the fact that they stick to Microsoft Windows because of IVAO: they wish to have the possibility to fly online in IVAO using exclusively Linux (though X-Plane is also present, but it's not free). Personally, I think this is a strong reason. Actually I'm personally putting my efforts in this because I use FG, and I've been a lot of time flying offline (I quitted MSFS time ago). Please help me go back to online flying ;o) The other way round applies: many IVAO users that might not know FG will be attracted to try it, and chances are that many of them (even a few of them will do) will switch to FG. Hope it answered your concerns. Best, Pep. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
