guym-p

That's very sad news. Heinz was an inspiration to all X-Plane developers. Guy.

Plugin testing is a bit of a slog, but it's going well. With 451 custom datarefs, my first test was to check each one against a range of criteria: Basic functionFailure recognitionWhat happens if the Comet is loaded with engines running?What happens if I save and load a situation?PauseReplayMore detail on that here: http://dh-aircraft.co.uk/news/news.html Situations and replay are not perfect. They can not be without either waiting for a future version of X-Plane and the plug-in SDK that allows developers to register custom datarefs with the whole recording mechanism, or without writing one's own complete replay system, which would be reinventing the wheel. However, none of these tests check for the interactions between one dataref and another, therefore a large part of testing is churning through all the manufacturer's original check lists making sure every thing comes on when it should do: gauge needles spring into life, warning lights glow or extinguish, and systems become live when switches are thrown. These tests have thrown up some bugs which I am gradually chasing down and stamping on. I won't pretend that these are ways of catching everything. I'm sure there are some bugs scuttling undetected until I devise a new trap. My "master" development model is still X-Plane 9.70 on Mac OSX. As soon as that's done I shall port it to Windows, check that, then proceed with a wholesale upgrade to X-Plane 10. This mornings tests included checking interior light levels at various times of day. This is the cockpit at dawn: Guy.

Don't put pressure on yourself to come up with something in weeks, then give up when you can't. It takes a L—O—N—G time to become proficient in all the skills. I was so appalled by my early work that I scrapped the Comet and started it again, from scratch … twice. If you're one of those people who enjoy the journey as much as getting there, then it's all part of the fun. I regret I sometimes go for a week without tuning in to read the forums, but when you have questions (and you will) please don't hesitate to ask. There are always some in the community who seem to take great pleasure slamming newbies, who might say: "There have been dozens of topics on this already!" and then not give an answer, but there are others who will always help if they can. Search, read, but above all experiment. Don't be afraid to try a new technique. Even if it leads up a blind alley, you will have learned a lot. Good luck! Guy.

Another thing is how you choose to model instruments. If you map Plane Maker instruments to a 3D cockpit it becomes a FPS hog. Therefore if the aircraft you are designing has analogue instruments, model them in 3D with animated needles and flags. Obviously when you have to use Plane Maker instruments, e.g. for EFIS, then you must. Guy.

Stunning. Simply stunning. As for frame rates, the depth and quality of Tonka's work goes so far beyond expectations that the question is no longer whether the polygon count or texture detail is low enough to run on my computer, but what computer I must buy to run the Jaguar. Guy.

I think there is plenty of room for several Boeing 737s. It's been operating since 1968, and with yet another new version in development for 2017. I've travelled on so many of the things, from family holidays on 737-200 to the present day, that it's easy to ignore them as part of the furniture. In fact they have punctuated important events throughout my life, and, if I stop and think about it, there is a lot of nostalgia attached to them. I'm sure I speak for a great many (if not all) of us. 46 years. Is that the longest production run for any airliner? The longest production run for any jet aircraft was 50 years, but the 737 will beat that — especially if the 737 MAX is successful. Studying how the 737 has changed is to map the evolution of the modern jet engine, cockpit and navigation systems. It might be ubiquitous, or boring: the "Ford Mondeo" of the stratosphere; but it's an extraordinary achievement, and one that deserves to be celebrated with many different versions in X-Plane spanning its entire history. I'm all for it. Guy.

This is, quite simply, the best model I've seen. Full stop. Absolutely super work, Tonka. I can't wait for you to start posting pictures of the cockpit.

Very beautiful indeed. Lovely lighting.

I can't find one here, but have you tried searching in "Downloads" at X-Plane.Org? There is a Freeware Antonov An 225 by "Zeheron" for X-Plane 6.50 that was updated once by Gary Hunter, and more recently (Feb 2013) by Ramzzess. I've not tried it, but it might get you going. Guy.

Thanks! I've just finished the fuel system plug-in. Everything needs testing properly, of course, but the code is finished, a few changes or additions to the model have been made, and it's working well. A fuller write-up is here: http://www.dh-aircraft.co.uk/news/files/fb38443eed8229868c16b7817042f947-107.html The job list is getting smaller ... Guy.

That's a real nuisance. I have only ever used Blender in its vanilla state; I have never tried XP2Blender. Commiserations, etc ...

I'd endorse that, too. Absolutely possible, and you would learn an enormous amount in the process. Developing for X-Plane has always been very much about "learning by doing": there would be times when you're banging your head against a wall, and a lot of pleasure when the penny drops and it all works. Do you have 3D skills? If not, that will be a steep learning curve. It takes a while to get your head around navigating a 3D model and creating shapes by extrusion and manipulation. This has nothing to do with X-Plane. Like any skill, perhaps learning a language or a musical instrument, it takes time, effort and patience. It's definitely possible, though. The ACF format is modular, and you can drop a replacement cockpit straight in. As for Project Two, there could be an intermediate stage purely with animation. I am not familiar with either aircraft, but it's amazing what you can achieve purely with existing datarefs and animation. For example hiding the hot-spot for a key-click so that a switch can not work until another switch or lever is operated first — that sort of thing. Of course, if you want to extend the functionality of X-Plane itself, then you need to write a plug-in program. Guy.

Much as I admire Blender and its enormous capabilities, I have always found it unnecessarily complicated to achieve the most basic things. By contrast, AC3D looks like software from the 1990s, and appears to be light on features, but what it does it does well. I use Blender for its advanced lighting effects, but only once the model is made. I prefer AC3D for modelling, animating unwrapping and laying out a texture UV map, and exporting to OBJ8.

It's been a while since I reported anything new. Cosmetically, the Comet hasn't changed, so I have no juicy screen shots to show off, just continuing work in code. Today, however, I had written enough and compiled enough to see various branches of the project working together. Nothing comprehensive, but it demonstrates the level of detail I'm working towards: http://youtu.be/ORzg_Q2dfl4 Guy.

Yes: check lists often specify a maximum airspeed above which wipers should not be used, and it's surprisingly low. Rain repellent products were specifically developed for aircraft to reduce the speed at which raindrops bead up and roll off the screen in the airflow. It works extremely well on cars at motorway speeds, so that one can turn off the wipers and see better.