Ff you could have one thing in the next update it would be…
-
Is this a thread for dreams and wishes or an ambush?
-
so in general; “don’t mess with it too much, it’s old and dying.”
got it.
Redshift wrote a very corporate email and in it, he didn’t have a tone with me, more of a philosophical overview, I don’t agree with him.
it wasn’t disrespectful, I was just responding, again as one man. Re-read the post chain and you’ll see my use of polemic is not greater than, it is actually equal to his, what I would call, SPIN.
this is enlightening.
-
Independent left and right engine start-up and shutdown!
-
And -Vandal- if you have the knowledge to code new avionics and systems without breaking the F-16 (which is the problem if you do too much because of the unusual structure of Falcon code) let’s see your best shot. My first step, if I were you, would to get into that “mods/addon” section and start PMing all the quality developers you can find in the subjects you’re interested in and seeing what they say. They may have old references that you can’t even find online anymore. I think that would be a good start.
I most emphatically, do not have such knowledge or skills. If I did I’d probably be like most with that skillset, making some money with it. So even if I did, I would not waste my time on it unless, as I suggest, I had some reasonable support and expectation that it would see the light of day. This would be even more important to me if I had a skillset that could command a six figure salary. If I was that person I would not be willing to volunteer my -arguably more valuable - time into the void. I am not saying people want a guarantee but I think most reasonable folks would want volunteer time to not consume their every waking moment and alsooto have the odds to be in favor of the volunteer time resulting in cockpits getting included.
Also, I am not suggesting developing alternate avionics. That would be cool, but I don’t think the sort of volunteer stuff that I am suggesting could be fruitful towards that. That’s a mess that I would think would take extraordinary effort, coordination, and skills to pull off. So, I think that pretty much has to be done all by experts. When I say modeling I mean drawing a 3D cockpit shell, populating the shell with 3D components that already exist in the various pits to approximate the instruments of the aircraft as best you can from the selections available. Hook the new pit up to use existing avionics and call the thing Version 1 Work In Progress. Then go back as a team and see if you can develop components that get you a bit closer to the aircraft and release that as Version 2. It’s the idea that don’t let perfection be the enemy of the good. Why not advance this in an organized way?
At any rate, I don’t see any any reason to make this about what I can or cannot do. The question is whether or not BMS should attempt to organize new outside volunteers towards a project like this.
-
there is a trend of making this about the person who made suggestions, and not just taking suggestions.
thanks for the suggestion. Have you ever written a suggestion and put it into a suggestion box and then been met with “do you think you deserve to suggest anything hmmm?”
oh harumph, my word.
-
Hey man, no big deal, I think you’re seeing something that isn’t there. For example with the dev team, it’s closed, meaning only they develop the official release and at their choosing, they may from time to time reach out to someone on their own accord who has shown the ability to mod to the standards they set forth. A typical time this occurs is when someone is consistently producing high quality work and sharing it with the community. If you want to get on that level, start modding and creating stuff so the team can see what you’re made of, until then it’s all hot air.
For the most part I’ve noticed the trend really is, I don’t like the answer I am given about adding other Generation 4.5/5.0 fighters so I will insult the simulator and those who fly it or develop it. That’s really funny man. The major barrier to building these additions to the sims is the lack of documentation. Most fighter and attack aircraft tactics, techniques, procedures and flight manuals are classified or export controlled. The F-16 is special because it is a world wide export model and was also studied in some semi-commercial spaces like NASA, so the data isn’t classified and you can get your hands on it to build a sim from. Fighters like the EF2000, F-35, ect are most definitely classified, you will NEVER get your hands on this data until they are so far away from flying those jets into Generation 6.0. DeeJay was very right, check back in 2030 when the F-35/F-22 are as old as the F-16 is today. We can’t even begin to simulate these platforms without this data, that’s really all there is to it.
This is a great suggestion box, but it also has to be kept in check with what reality is, a Generation 5.0 realistic sim ain’t coming for a long time to come, not anywhere.
-
My humble input: BMS team is working on stuff and adding them for the sake of working and adding. When I read a “Feel free to…”, I read it as a “If you enjoy working on… for the sake of it while not hoping anything else than enjoying your time, do it”. If, in addition, it’s a benefit for the community, then great.
It first has to be a benefit for who does it, simply because most of the time spent working and adding is not well rewarded beside self-enjoyment. Not because of what the BMS team is, but because of the nature of things.
That’s all I had to say. If, in 4.34, there is already 4.33u3, I’m already happy.
-
If you want to get on that level, start modding and creating stuff so the team can see what you’re made of, until then it’s all hot air.
you’re simple, everything you do is a poorly veiled call out. I never said " i’m going to do this or that because this is what I want in YOUR SIM". The movie in your head must be entertaining.
-
Thereisnotime for this nonsense, have a good day!
Build us an F-35 please and I’ll take an F-22 with it on the side :rolleyes:
-
you’re simple, everything you do is a poorly veiled call out. I never said " i’m going to do this or that because this is what I want in YOUR SIM". The movie in your head must be entertaining.
This will be your only warning as i m getting a bit annoyed with your posts as well, next personal attack you ll be taking a vacation.
This is the ‘if you could have one thing’ thread not the ‘whine and complain’ thread back on topic folks or it will just get shut down.
Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
-
edited
-
enjoy the vacation
-
Redshift wrote a very corporate email and in it, he didn’t have a tone with me, more of a philosophical overview, I don’t agree with him.
it wasn’t disrespectful, I was just responding, again as one man. Re-read the post chain and you’ll see my use of polemic is not greater than, it is actually equal to his, what I would call, SPIN.
this is enlightening.
Is this a thread for dreams and wishes or an ambush?
edited
ambush confirmed. logging out.
-
Dee-Jay:
You said “FF6 is still available with its own philosophy of multiples a/c with dedicated cockpits. BMS has also his own philosophy and, so to say, its own specialities.”
Are you saying that BMS does not have the technical expertise to build 3D cockpits? Or that none of the present BMS volunteers wants to work on any of these other 3D pits? And-or that BMS is not going to take on any new talent if that talent wants to work on other 3D pits?
Anyway, as I have suggested, there may be no need to detract from the main focus of BMS or the -presently in place- volunteers.
I said I don’t know why for the life of me BMS doesn’t organize a 3D pit building class, and put each aircraft upgrade project under the direction of new volunteers (I should have mentioned that this would be for pits that aren’t already being worked on by present BMS volunteers) and you respond with well maybe the don’t want to spend their free time on something that can be done by anybody here.
Actually, that’s not true. No one here except BMS can speak for BMS and organize BMS. So, if BMS says something like “We’re going to do these classes. It’s going to be led by John (outside talent) overall and team leaders will be selected for the development of the following pits A, B, C, and D under John’s direction. BMS intends to use the 3D pits as soon as they are reviewed and approved. Keep in mind that these cockpits are works in progress and will F16 avionics underneath so version 1 of the Intruder pit may look a lot like an F16 pit with the instruments relocated, but hopefully you will at least have a windscreen of the Intruder. Also, to be a part of this you’ll have to sign an IP release allowing BMS to use what you develop as part of this program. Sign up by PMing John.”
Now you got BMS organizing this thing and the new volunteers have a reasonable assurance that they will get training and the best work being done by the student/volunteers will make it into BMS as part of the full install or a unified BMS cockpit installer. BMS is the most obvious entity to lead the effort given that they are in control of the code yet to come and most likely to have the ability to influence people to get excited about a project like this.
The idea that volunteers, just out of the blue, are welcome to develop and share their work here is not a new idea. This is the old idea and it has worked more or less to some degree, but what I am suggesting may work better – maybe a lot better.
When I say I would be willing to take a course offered by BMS. You say “Go! You are more than welcome!” but then “Do not wait for BMS.” Sorry but No. I will wait for BMS. I am not going to spend months working on something only to find out there is a technical hurdle that I cannot overcome without help just to do a cockpit that I don’t even fly. I am willing to work on a cockpit that I don’t fly so long as there is another team working on the cockpit that I do want to fly. The whole community benefits from it. Also, I want to know that competent people are teaching this and will be there – as time permits – people there to make sure that the teams working on these pits get over all the hurdles. FWIW a couple years back I did some 3D modeling tutorials and successfully completed some projects, the most intricate being a 3D game character. If I could be taken through the same sort of tutorial and modeling a pit, I am confident that I could take that information to create the mesh but there’s a lot more to making 3D pits work in BMS than just a mesh. With a refresher course specifically tailored to objects within the pit, I could create or modify sub-components as directed by the lead volunteer for the aircraft I was assigned to.
…
So the core of my argument is that BMS should organize something like this. Please address that argument. If you want, you can chastise me for not having years of free time to learn all of this and do all of this on my own. But also please explain why, in your view, BMS should not organize something like this.
Well, you remind me a good old friend named Tagman/Skyknight/Indian/General/Singularity/ … etc … etc …
Why BMS should not organize something like this? Because BMS’s projects are not what you propose. However, if someone can provide some materials to add in the stock install , why not. But since BMS is not a comertial enterprise, BMS just do what BMS like to do … if I work on sounds, UI or data, it is because I spent time learning it because I whished to do something about it … I won’t spend my time on something I am not interesting in … I think it would be the same for you.
If tomorrow I ask you to learn C++ to code a new HTS, you will probably tell me: “Mate, I do not care about your untra realistic HTS, if I spend time learning something it will be to create new 3D cockpits … , so do not count on me for this sorry.” … This is true for any BMS members and/or any other 3rd party dev as well.BMS team is just a group of friends working together … You can do the same on you side to create and manage a group of peoples with knowledges to learn and create 3D cockpits in order to share them as add-on and/or to porpose them to the team … This is not BMS’s exclusive prerogatives.
I mainly see a lot of blahblah … but what is needed is fact. Creative juice is not enough. You want to see more 3D pit, stop writing posts here, and start learning Sketchup, Blender and or 3DS Max … This will be a fist step to see your wishes maybe coming true one day.
I respectfully decline to spend all that time developing on a pit in an unorganized manner. A pit that someone else may already be working on and their’s turns out better, or I get stuck and can’t get help, and the darn thing never sees the light of day. As things stand now, at worst, all the effort I put into it is most likely going to be wasted if this is unorganized. At best, this would take me years to do without good leadership and help. Again, no thanks. I am willing to pitch in but I am not interested in charging at windmills.
You do not want to spend time and efforts? So why asking other ppl to spend that time and efforts?
“Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country.”
J.F. KENNEDYYep we have one guy probably able to create a 3D pit , but he is busy working on a better F-16 3D pit … since at least two years, and it is far from being finished. Yes, he has also a real life , a job to earn real money and he also need to sleep sometimes. Know what … It is even not guarantied that he will finish what he has started before the end of the decade.
We had another one … but he is no more active for a long time now (I am talking about Kawa) … on the other side, we are waiting for years someone in the team able to make that funking INTERCOM, AIR COND and IFF knobs to rotate! … And you are talking about multiple cockpits … ! So please forgive me if I am smiling (or crying) at your “BMS should” statement.Lets be serious one minute … You are making suggestions here or it is just to dream loud … ? If it is just to dream loud, tell us, we will stop any communication and will stop to give you informative replies about what you can excpect and what you shouldn’t excpect from BMS organisation … Or, if you prefer, we can tell you “YES , YES , YES in three four weeks”, and let you dream forever about something which will never come.
Creative juice …
It is a good start … But it won’t be enough … we have enough juice on our side already thank you
-
A last point whish deserve to be said : “Many” of BMS members has been discovered here on the ppl forum including one of our most active coder … because they showed what they can do, not just by having good ideas.
However, working a lot and fine is not the necessarily most important factor … -
INTERCOM, AIR COND and IFF knobs to rotate!
+1 +1 +1
Tandem seat bro??? Training students in the same jet as THEM! Now THAT is something to wish for with all my heart and hope to die. Put that on my wishlist
Air cond would be awesome too just cause, and we also need a working anti-ice test switch
-
Tandem seat bro??? Training students in the same jet as THEM! Now THAT is something to wish for with all my heart and hope to die. Put that on my wishlist
Already said that this is something we will probably never try to do … At least, not before 98% of the ppl in the world has a 50Mo/s internet flow via optical fibre allowing less than 5ms ping anytime.
-
Already said that this is something we will probably never try to do … At least, not before 98% of the ppl in the world has a 50Mo/s internet flow via optical fibre allowing less than 5ms ping anytime.
Let’s take step by step. At least falcon 4 has come this far in a step by step improvement mode. Grand add-ons are sure goods and welcome but nothing to break developmental work on present bms f4.
I am amazed that with what we presently have in bms, the f-16 is still way off being completely implemented. That leaves much to be excited about its future. Patience will take us there fellows.
BMS Falcon 4 isn’t dying just yet. No no no.Sent from my F3213 using Tapatalk
-
Tandem seat bro??? Training students in the same jet as THEM! Now THAT is something to wish for with all my heart and hope to die. Put that on my wishlist
have a look at yame suite manual
my eyes went boom. yours will go as well
untried but there is an open door -
@Red:
have a look at yame suite manual
my eyes went boom. yours will go as well
untried but there is an open doorDude I am going to try this! You weren’t kidding, I think my heart fluttered a little bit. I can’t wait to tell the rookies, “O. F. F., turn the flubbing heat OFF!”
Warning: slight language here and there…