MatthewS

Thanks for the update! There is so much work left to do on the FMS!!!

Yes very true! I've had my morning 'rant', sorry Anton

Ok that's good news then that it's still coming out. Can you please give a release date? Saying "it's ready when it's ready" does not indicate any real commitment to finish the product. Frankly, I very much doubt this product will be released in 2011. History has shown that seriously delayed products usually don't materialize though I really hope I'm wrong about the CRJ! And no I'm not paid to come here and complain. I have no affiliation with any FSX or XP developer. edit: If you ready what Japo says about Anton sounds to me like Anton is finding the systems programming far too complicated to finish anytime soon. It's the 80/20 rule. Sure fast progress is made in the initial stages (hence what we saw in the preview movies) but finishing that last 20% is going to take 80% of the time. If I think about PMDG and the 747/MD11 or LDS 767 those companies had multiple developers working 2 to 3 years on the systems. Really it's not reasonable to expect Anton to be able to finish the CRJ systems to the same level of completion. Don't get me wrong, Anton is obviously a talented developer. I just think the effort to do the CRJ systems is probably far more than anyone realized.

Lets face it, the CRJ is dead! So many delays and we find out Anton now has a real job. He's not going to waste time on the CRJ when he is making 100x more at his new job than the CRJ will ever make for him. As others have said XP has no product that is comparable to what the likes of PMDG have produced for FSX. The CRJ was meant to be the shining example of what is possible but I think Anton has really let down the JRollon team and XP in general. Yes XP has fantastic modellers but where are the developers that are capable of PMDG level systems programming? I think we will NEVER see any XP products that are as good (or even close to) products by PMDG, unless PMDG themselves decide to work on something for XP. But that is very unlikely now that Microsoft Flight is coming out very soon (this year). Why not release a "lite" version of the CRJ with simple systems, and then later if you ever find someone to finish Anton's work you can release the "advanced" version. Like so many products that "fail to launch" its always because of the "weak-link" in the development chain. Verbal contracts, only as good as the paper they're written on.

Nice find... can you post an url?

It went up...probably not what you were hoping for when you tried to prove a point. Yes and since there's no transparency how do I know you didn't bump it up to -6 just prove your point? edit: But anyway it hardly matters, this is a forum and it's not like the forum police are going to come to my house and have me arrested for bad karma.

IMO the karma system is not a good idea. Why? 1) There's no transparency. We should be able to see the log of a person's karma history (who voted a person up/down, and a link to the post where it occurred). Systems that are not transparent are open to abuse (ie abuse by forum users or forum moderators). 2) It's a form of censorship because be people become too "scared" to say something that might affect their karma negatively. Ok my karma is -8 as I post this.... lets see what happens to my karma now!

yeah sure.

Yes true its definitely the best default 747 external model in any sim! Shame about the roof though, it could have been almost "perfect" with that fixed.

Yes he does do great work but how could he miss this very obvious error with the hump? You seem to be implying that because its the default 747 then quality doesn't matter. Surely it's precisely because it is default 747 that quality matters more since this aircraft more than any other in XP10 will be held up as the "poster boy" for XP10, and therefore should not contain such a serious flaw like this, just IMHO of course.

Yes but IMHO he should correct it (on his own time) as a matter of pride. Such an obvious "bug" in the model reflects badly on his reputation as a AAA developer for X-Plane.

Compare this http://x-plane.com/images/v10/aircraft/week2/747_distance_shot.jpg to this http://www.airliners.net/photo/United-Airlines/Boeing-747-422/1772424/&sid=e400e2ea46099d1e38b978ae0ba0943e Notice how the "hump" should actually start bending down just after the second set of windows on the top deck. In the XP10 model it starts bending down after the first set of windows on the top deck. Surely this is easy to fix? It's so obviously wrong its hard to believe it hasn't been noticed before by JRollon. It's not like its just a rivet out of place, it's the entire second half of the top deck roof.

Could you take a look at this post over at AVSIM? http://forum.avsim.net/topic/296181-xp10-news-from-austin/page__st__40__p__1839092#entry1839092 It shows why the 747 "hump" is not correct. Would be so great if this "bug" could be fixed in your model, pleaaaaaaaasssssseeeee.

+1 for Intel + NVidia Ive heard ATI compatibility is bad for OpenGL (just read the problems the Outerra guys have with ATI cards running OGL).

True! Will you be able to post some "preview" screen shots of the airport buildings etc? You have many fans that are eager for any info on XP10.

In FSX too, really? I haven't used FSX (or XP) for a few months, though in FSX I usually fly PMDG so maybe its not obvious in their aircraft. Next time I start up FSX I double check the replays for flickering... thx

Ok... must be a XP/OpenGL limitation? I cant recall any z buffer flicker in FSX or FS9.

Ok... but this the 747, the glamour aircraft of all time, and its a default aircraft in XP10, so it will be seen/flown by more people than any other aircraft in the XP "world" IMO. If I could wish for just one thing it would be the fan blades spinning a little faster, like with your CRJ. At the moment it looks like they are at idle (not even that).

Just a couple of comments regarding the 747... 1) The fans seem to spin a little slow. Could they have more "blur"? 2) On landing the main bogies seem to stay tilted until the nose wheel touches the ground. Shouldn't they progressively move to a level attitude as the pivot point gets closer to the ground (ie even before the nose wheel touches the ground). Ive never seen double bogies done right in any sim (FS9/FSX or XP). Would be amazing if you could get them working right for XP10. Maybe XP10 has better support for animating these double bogies? If not then surely Austin would take your request for such an enhancement seriously. 3) That's are hard landing for sure but do you think the wing flex at the tips is just a little excessive? 4) Also, why do the slats seem to flicker, some texture issue? (I'm referring to the landing sequence) 5) During the landing roll the 747 seems to "rock" as it rolls along the runway. Is this artificial rocking still in XP10? You think Austin could be convinced to make it configurable, I just dont think it looks right (too much "rocking") 6) I know you said it has no VC or custom 2D cockpit, but do you plan to sell a separate VC or 2D cockpit that can be used with the your default XP10 747? Even if it had no custom systems/no custom gauges but just a nicely textured VC using default XP gauges would be a good seller IMHO. Anyway, congrats on this aircraft and an amazing looking model! Really looking forward to XP10.

Actually ignore what I said... I watched it again at 720p (and not 240p) and it looks great!

Wow! All those aircraft look great, congratulations!!! Are those aircraft all still WIP? One small thing I noticed with the 747 is that the "hump" doesn't look quite right. Are you doing a new 2D panel for the 747 or will it just use the default XP9 version?

You guys are 'nit picking'. That video is presenting progress to date, Outerra is not finished. Naturally they need to add extra textures, tree models, rivers/lakes, more accurate land classes, weather modelling etc. According to the devs Outerra is running Open GL and using "compute shaders". That means it leaves a lot of CPU power for modelling things such as flight dynamics, aircraft systems, ATC and so on. Its designed to be very plug-in friendly, I believe that even the flight modelling (which is currently using JBSIM) can be replaced with other flight modelling plug-ins. Outerra as a base platform would seem to be far more capable graphically than anything XP or FSX is capable of! Of course we have not seen XP10 yet (or for that matter the upcoming Microsoft Flight). I really hope XP10 ups the 25NM visibility limit. For a flightsim 25NM is very "last decade".

Wrong! The whole Outerra worlds IS that good! Go visit their site/forums/blog to read/see why its so. http://outerra.com/ http://outerra.blogspot.com/

Airliner pilots will still appreciate this high level of ground detail at airports! Also, Outerra seems capable of visibility of many hundreds of NM, unlike XP9 which is limited to its 25NM "tunnel vision". At altitude Outerra promises to be very convincing, I have no doubt that the Outerra guys will be able to add very realistic weather modelling too. Can you imagine flying at FL3300 and seeing a cold front approaching from 150nm away? Outerra promises to be just as impressive with its atmospheric modelling as it already is with its terrain modelling.

At the moment maybe, but it wont take the Outerra team long to import OpenStreetMap data just like what's happening with XP10. IMHO the scenery engine in Outerra is very far ahead of XP (or even FSX).