Simviation Forums

I have asked this question many a time, yet I have never been given an answer that wasn't shady in some regaurd.  I've stopped using FS (of all varieties) for the last year or so because I just could never find suitable aircraft.  Here are the demands, basically:

• Reasonable poly count (there's no reason to have 128 sided fuselages)
• Interactive VC
• Panel, whether included or foreign party
• No co-pilot on the inside (if applicable)
• Excellent textures.  This is the most important.  Bumpmapped preffered.  (I'm not talking about very good, or really, really, really good, but excellent)
• No wierd key assignments (spoiler key to open cockpit)

I often see aircraft with great textures, or a great VC or a greal model etc, but I don't remember seeing one together. (The POSKY 767, for example, looks great, but no VC (they also use a boatload of polys)) I'm sure they're out there, but lot's a searching hasn't done me all too well.  I just gave up awhile ago and accepted I was too picky and called FS quits, but it never hurts to try again.  Any kind of aircraft will do, warbirds or military, GA etc.

PS: Mods, 'twas not put in the "Aircraft Wanted" forums, as it never produced good reults their either.  I'm not looking for a specific aircraft, either.

...mmm......sounds like something we are all searching for Skorp...I guess you might say that proverbial needle in a haystack!
Meanwhile you have elected to bin the sim as it were, whereas most of us are happy to enjoy the "best of the rest"..... your choice of course, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder and IMHO there is a whole lot of stuff out there that is EXCELLENT.....to my eye at least.  Your choice as I said but sadly YOUR LOSS too in not flying with FS anymore.....commoner.
 
   

What you're looking for isn't going to be built, it's simply too weird a combination of characteristics...very little demand for anything in that range.
[list]
[*]Reasonable poly count (there's no reason to have 128 sided fuselages). Poly counts are on a general upward rise...even for experienced modellers who normally are good at keeping counts low. It wasn't all that long ago that a designer could brag about a 16 sided fuselage, then 32, then 64... Designers want their designs to be the best possible, and that means more polys.

[*]Interactive VC. Can only currently be done in gMax, which means that many old-time modellers are are of the hunt immediately.

[*]Panel, whether included or foreign party. Perhaps shouldn't be on the list? This is for you to find...tastes are so different that what keeps you happy may offend others.

[*]No co-pilot on the inside (if applicable). Most don't want the pilot shown...but the co-pilot is iffy. Many like an animated co sitting beside them doing things.

[*][b]Excellent textures.

I have no idea about poly counts. But one of the easiest and best flying with either the VC or the standard cockpit, radar installed as part of the plane not an additional download, is the CRJ 900.

This is just one of the planes that I have from http://www.premaircraft.com/index.html  and I love them all.

It isn't "bumpmap" it is "bitmap"

www.protu-154.com
Payware quality for free.
If the standard textures aren't good enough, there is a 5-part set on avsim that has 2048x2048 weathered ones for the Krasair that make it look like it has 2 days left before D-check

Sorry Skorpion, I don't have too much sympathy with your point of view.

Where do you think all that freeware stuff comes from? That's right, it comes from aviation/flightsim enthusiasts who are prepareed to spend hundreds, or even thousands of hours of their time creating the stuff. Without freeware the sim would be a rather sad object with only the default aircraft and sceneries to choose from and aside from the fact that it could be seen as a bit churlish to then criticise the efforts of these guys, it begs a question.

The existing freeware creators got off their backsides and created the aircraft which regrettably do not come up to your expectations so what are you doing about it? Are you starting to do your own designs that do come up to your idea of scratch, are you starting your own design group? My guess is neither of those things.

It's about time people realised that they don't have a right to freeware. It's donated to them through the generosity of the people who strove to create it and I for one recognise and appreciate that even if from time to time I delete an aircraft that I know someone took the time to lovingly create and upload for my and the benefit of all other simmers.

Edit....

Sorry, I've just re-read your original posting and I'm astonished at its arrogance. 'Demands' indeed.

Please do us a posting listing all the things that you have given to the flightsim community and then we might pay more attention.

Mods, sorry about the tone of this post because as you know I'm rarely rude to other forum members without very good reason but I have flipped a bit with this posting  ???

...mmm.....with you on this one Roller..........all the way.......commoner

I agree with rollerball,

If you want all that, why not go out and buy a Payware aircraft, most have a panel, VC, excellent textures and sounds. I don't see why you should 'demand' anything. I am the founder of a design group, our designers do their best and whatever they can't do, we don't push them to do and i'm sure it is the same with other designers. Atleast if you buy a payware aircraft, the designers, Texture artists etc. are being rewarded for their hard work but people who design freeware aircraft do not get anything for all of their hard work.

I am sure that many people here would love to see you design an aircraft, that meet the standards of Payware aircraft. But if you can't, then why demand something if you cannot do any better.

Dog

Sorry Skorpion,

But i'm well & truly on Rollerball's side in this one.

If I came across as arrogant or condescending, I apologize.  I realize my wishes - I didn't think too much of the word: demand - are overly critical of all aspects, however I'm not making any conclusions off of it.  I realize how difficult it is to produce an aircraft, as the only one I ever started was abandoned halfway through it because of the time it took.  However, that only makes the fruit of all the designers that much more important - because they stuck with it in spite of having jobs, families and other hobbies.  I repeat: I do not wish to slander designers.  They produce as they see fit.  If they do not include a VC, who am I to judge?  Maybe they don't think it's necessary, or it's too demanding, but whatever the case, they didn't do it.  I'm not saying they're baser aircraft - they're all still excellent aircraft - but I personally don't like them.  I realize I'm odd man out, so I'm not expecting much.  I'm not insisting that these aircraft be produced and delivered to my doorstep, but because of the wealth of aircraft available across a span of numerous giant sites and infinite little sites, if anyone knows of aircraft like this, could they please tell me of where to get them.  That

Hey - don't bother. Just because we disagree with you doesn't mean we don't like you. You're still one of the family  ;)

Bumpmaping isn't just drawing something to "look" 3D...it's actually a techniques whereby one of the channels in the bitmap texture gives 3D information to the video card for rendering purposes. This same channel is used in FS for either reflective textures or for transparency. Bumpmapping would be very handy from a designers point of view...all those little things that are finicky to model but too big to ignore could be modelled as part of the texture (with all appropriate lighting effects) without nearly as much heartache. Note that bumpmapping is dynamic, things will be highlited or shadowed as appropriate for the available lightsources.

One note for all:

If you like a plane send an email to the creator. Many designers become discouraged because they drop a plane into the freeware pond and it sinks without a ripple, never to be heard from again. Worse, many only hear back from those who want to complain about some small detail that was overlooked or slightly incorrect.

The plane you are looking for might be number two or three on some designers "to do" list...but you'll never see it if he/she becomes discouraged and just stops publishing the newest pride and joy.

Aye, no worries Skorpion, it's amazing how much difference the word 'demand' made to that post, don't worry about it.

I'm always getting my words wrong - only the other day I meant ask my missus to pass me the milk for my breakfast but instead I said "You bl**dy cow, you've ruined my life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"  ;D

Cheers,

TSC.  ;)

I'm always getting my words wrong - only the other day I meant ask my missus to pass me the milk for my breakfast but instead I said "You bl**dy cow, you've ruined my life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"  ;D

There could just a bit of a misunderstanding there.

I've installed the basics of the two planes, but the Ruskie's got my attention for now.  It looks great, but for the life of me I can't fiure out how to just start the engines!  I'm reading the manual, but so far it's no use...

I also want to add I found an MD-11 on FlightSim the other day, it's not the iFDG one, but I think SMS?  Well, it's great as well, although there are some errors with the paint job.  A repaint, whether downloaded or made, should fix that methinks...  Hopefully.