Leaderboard

First tests in X-Plane

Valentin; better to remain silent and be thought the fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Next time somebody posts " why is it not out yet" I think I will refer them to this post. Another example of what sets this product apart from anything we have seen for x-plane or quite possibly any sim.

haven't flown this one for a while… grat fun!

SASL is a tool for developers...I am a developer. What do I have against SASL? Not aggressively developed anymore, Philipp patches it as needed.Very limited feature set compared to the x-plane SDKNo LuaGL...means only "low level or simple" custom graphics through SASL API.....only suitable for simple stuff.No access to, nor patterned after a large portion of the x-plane SDK, limiting design optionsAircraft only. danklaue makes this sound bad, but guess what? A push back plugin needs to be global...gizmo can do that. "Smart" ground operations or automatic jetways or catering trucks? In sim flight planner, moving maps...All that's gotta be global. You won't see SASL doing that. Gizmo author is most talented 3rd party programmer in the history of x-plane, has a history of longevity and success that goes back over 10 years. I think the original author of SASL is "gone", but this is heresay. I know Philipp has had to take over some patches of it.And finally...as far as Gizmo "causing problems", you don't know 1/10th the story...you've bought into the .org hype or haven't done your homework lately. In the last few months, we're seeing the MU2, Falco, Saab and 737....released or about to be released with absolutely minimal technical issues and showcasing some of the most sophisticated simulations available for x-plane and we've only scratched the surface. Don't see SASL doing this for developers.....don't even see DreamEngine doing this: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/955680/sound.mp4 TomK

Did you have trouble reading about it being a joke? These complaints of yours are invalid for today's current customer: http://blog.x-aviation.com/2012/11/gizmo-and-sasl/ You've made multiple recent purchases at X-Aviation that utilize Gizmo over the past few weeks. I'll bet you didn't even know they use Gizmo because of the problems you don't get...

You're right. The last images look very good with the road and everything. Gonna model those buildings?

Taking a break from studying for my math final tomorrow... got the trees done. God, what an awful tree system, but what a beautiful road network system. I can't believe how amazing orthophotos look with those roads on top... amazing. I honestly can't wait to see what this small but sweet airport looks when I'm done with it. Too bad my mega project has to exclude all local roads as the OSM data is extremely faulty (it's an island, and none of the roads are even on the island)

Went to high school here- go Borderites!

she's quite well done, this is the kind of quality we need over in x-plane.org and x-pilot!

Here's how I do it....just an FYI. I use a CAD program myself as a "virtual measuring tape", measuring the offsets in CAD and then just input the data into Plane-maker. This is akin to Ben's suggestion above but I find the 3D objects in PM can visually get in the way sometimes and they don't show up in the section editors anyhow. This only gets me about 75% of the way towards the right shape though....as I mainly hit the "major dimensions". Then I go "by eye" from there adjusting the and this is the tougher part and will not be the same for everybody as to whether it is easy or difficult. I happen to have a history of dealing with boat line drawings and can "see" shapes rather well visually so this works really well for me. BUT I don't import 2D images into Plane-maker as it's just a major pain to deal with IMO. I know those who do not have access to CAD software are not as fortunate. As an aside, you can type numbers into those numerical field boxes in Plane-maker..you don't have to use those up and down arrow keys. That speeds things up a bit. TomK

Try modelling yourself a rough mesh in a REAL 3D application. (aka blender in this case) Then export this rough mesh to X-Plane OBJ format. Import the OBJ into PainMaker and use the OBJ as a guide to model your ACF mesh. This will stop you from losing your mind fighting with PainMakers insane GUI concepts. (eg; it wont rescale everything when you try and move one thing)

It's not just you. PlaneMaker is a pile of shit. And that's putting it nicely.

The CRJ was initially released with an agreement that X-Aviation was the launch distributor. This lasted for a better part of almost six months, and Gizmo's initial role was to handle customer database activations for this product. Keep in mind, for other products it actually was the driving force behind some simulated systems. As time does and has progressed, its purpose is expanding in many aircraft. So much so, that it's an essential tool to produce what are notably some of the most amazing add-ons in development and (some) currently previewed for any flight simulator to date. There's a few things to note here. Up until X-Plane 10.2 (basically when 64-bit came out around November of last year), Gizmo interfered with a number of plugins. Most noticeably of any of these was SASL. Gizmo and SASL both use the LUA library, and both used OpenAL for sound. This caused some major conflicts that were very hard to pin down, and in a lot of cases when the two were installed together, sound would go haywire to the point having them installed together was rather...annoying. It took a long time to pin down all the issues in this, mainly because we were years into the making already with Gizmo before SASL was around, and a lot had to be re-written and made better to fix these issues. Changes also had to be made on the Laminar side to accommodate both plug-ins. There are no longer conflicts that exist with Gizmo and other plugins. It took a lot of work, but we got there with an entirely new version of Gizmo. As time moves forward, you are going to see Gizmo used in a lot of the top add-ons being produced for X-Plane, and this extends into the systems simulation. There's nothing to be concerned about any longer (look up the date of the threads you see negative reaction on...they're old). Plainly put, it's not going away, and judging by the developers approaching us as of late, it's rapidly expanding. It's definitely reached its prime time. You can read more on the conflicts that used to be, and how/when we came to a resolution here: http://blog.x-aviation.com/2012/11/gizmo-and-sasl/ Hope this helps calm your nerves. We are extremely attentive to continually checking compatibility with add-ons these days...even one's we do not produce or sell, because we do not want to cause conflict and annoyance on others' computers. There are growing pains with anything you do to break the barriers in a market. We've finally nailed this issue and don't anticipate ever having to look back.

Why windows compatibility only? From the looks of this all you are adding are different sky colors. Why not just have the user install them into the proper folder. Seems like you are complicating this add-on. Additionally are you adjusting the colors of the sky or are you working on or also the ambient lighting to include cloud color and sunlight color? These are affected by the skycolor.png The reason I ask is because all I see in your images are clear skies and to put together a nicer set of colors one should look at all the ways those PNG's are working in the sim. And the effort of adding an installer does not justify a pricetag my friend...... Now please refrain from ever mentioning me and any of my stuff in a post ever. I am not threatened by what you have going but you operate as someone who manipulates others to do all the work for you. You have no interest with being part of the community, only to profit from it and I have serious doubts you know how to properly develop at all. Aaron I have kept my distance from you, I advise you to do the same...... Folks he tried manipulating my time and effort out of my hands to include I offered a version of UrbanMAXX with his OSM add-on but was insistent on trying to take credit for it . His glacier textures included in the OSM package are mine, I told him go ahead when I cut ties with him. The OSM add-on is freely available BTW and his version does nothing to warrant a price tag. I am seeing my name thrown around by you on different social outlets and to be honest I am starting to get tweaked. I refrain from posting anything even though I know you are a fraud because it will seem self motivated. It isnt guys and I am sincerely trying to keep an eye out on the community. I see how he operates.....

"Difficult" comes in many flavors and is different for each team member, so I can only give my own perspectives. There has been difficulty with the 'tediousness' of the work, difficulty with maintaining motivation, difficulty with team dynamics, difficulty with algorithm concepts etc....but in a more tangible sense, the most difficult part...conceptually... for myself was developing the lnav route calculation algorithm. Its done in spherical trig and attempts to be 'smart'. If you have a right turn over a waypoint for example..but decide to make it a left turn, we re-run the algorithm with the new data, considering aircraft performance and draw the new route...and if its doable (i.e. next waypoint not inside the turn radius)...then the plane will follow it (see screenshot below). This is an ongoing 'difficult' problem though and we still have several issues to solve...but I think the fact that the FMS route calculations, both lnav and vnav...being the last thing we have to tackle pretty much sums up that it's one difficult challenge. TomK