Hornet FM
-
with the secret hope someone would make a SU33 cockpit and dedicated russian avionics some day
It’s maybe a difficult question to answer, but how would someone go about creating the avionics without any access to source code or an API?
I mean, say someone was interested in such a project… what would be step one? Pseudocode examples to get sourcecode access, or something else?
-
It’s maybe a difficult question to answer, but how would someone go about creating the avionics without any access to source code or an API?
I mean, say someone was interested in such a project… what would be step one? Pseudocode examples to get sourcecode access, or something else?
Exactly the reason why I brought I-Hawk’s idea to the table - it is just an amazing concept AND at the same time as potentially big and revolutionary feature as porting to DX9:
-
But please consider it as a wish, not a nonconformist bechaviour or not given value to the present work all of you are doing, we all are very happy with current BMS evolution, we have the feeling that it is still alive, and we love it. It is by far the best one. And maybe one day with its brother the Hornet.
+1
-
I mean, say someone was interested in such a project… what would be step one?
Step one: a VERY good functional 3D cockpit with all sources transferred. That is the very 1st step before considering anything else. Then … (?)
-
Just basic Mig29 a 9-12 and/or early Su-27 would do.
But we HAVE a basic MiG-29 cockpit and it’s even CLICKABLE! Just jump into a MiG-29 squadron in campaign. Su-27 has none and uses the F-16 cockpit.
-
I don’t want to derail the thread but pit is one thing and having radar/hud and other displays with proper modes/symbology is a bit different thing. But let’s end that here and focus on glorious Hornet :). Hell updated gfx/terrain and improved hornet could make at least some of folks move away from DCS to BMS. Because why fly half-baked a/c in empty environment when you can fly more complete one in rich/living world. Even if this aircraft is also not 100% complete.
-
I don’t want to derail the thread but pit is one thing and having radar/hud and other displays with proper modes/symbology is a bit different thing. But let’s end that here and focus on glorious Hornet :). Hell updated gfx/terrain and improved hornet could make at least some of folks move away from DCS to BMS. Because why fly half-baked a/c in empty environment when you can fly more complete one in rich/living world. Even if this aircraft is also not 100% complete.
totally agree
-
I wouldn’t even claim to want people to move from that sim to this sim. I love THAT sim. And I really love VR in THAT sim. BMS is the quiet corner of the library where I know I can study, learn and grow. That OTHER sim is the cookie jar at midnight. Sometimes growth be damned!—you just gotta have a cookie. In other words, one sim is my quick fix; a romp in the sandbox. The other is a longer term commitment which rewards me with a less ephemeral level of joy. I am too old to keep anticipating hoped-for improvements and “IFF”s. My commitment to the sim requires me to be satisfied with the bug in her current state and to be grateful for what I have.
-
I don’t want to derail the thread but pit is one thing and having radar/hud and other displays with proper modes/symbology is a bit different thing. But let’s end that here and focus on glorious Hornet :). Hell updated gfx/terrain and improved hornet could make at least some of folks move away from DCS to BMS. Because why fly half-baked a/c in empty environment when you can fly more complete one in rich/living world. Even if this aircraft is also not 100% complete.
Ill say just that,
They will figure out everything in the end, we just need to be patient. -
@Smokin:
I love THAT sim. And I really love VR in THAT sim. BMS is the quiet corner of the library where I know I can study, learn and grow. That OTHER sim is the cookie jar at midnight.
Here you can name DCS no prob. You won’t have penalties.
-
@Smokin:
I wouldn’t even claim to want people to move from that sim to this sim. I love THAT sim. And I really love VR in THAT sim. BMS is the quiet corner of the library where I know I can study, learn and grow. That OTHER sim is the cookie jar at midnight. Sometimes growth be damned!—you just gotta have a cookie. In other words, one sim is my quick fix; a romp in the sandbox. The other is a longer term commitment which rewards me with a less ephemeral level of joy. I am too old to keep anticipating hoped-for improvements and “IFF”s. My commitment to the sim requires me to be satisfied with the bug in her current state and to be grateful for what I have.
Let’s see what pans out once BMS will get updated GFX engine. It has a potential to unlock few new features, including VR headset support. At least this one was discussed. Future will tell which of those possibilities will ever come true.
@Dee-Jay, You’ve made me chuckle. Thanks man.
-
I´m quite sure the future will bring “gone” people back to their lovely mother BMS… even if they don´t mention it… because BMS future is bright… and there will be no way the would not try and die for it.
In the other hand, the Hornet has man-machine-interface really “nasty” if you compare it with the Viper one. Programming it would be a TITANIC quest… but Remodelling-rearranging existing Viper displays into some sort of Hornet logic, could be “something” doable…
If the Coder is not in such mood to make such an effort, due to bad or “bitter taste” experience in the past, that´s legit and understandable… but as said… maybe putting a new “motivation” to add an enhanced Hornet into that bright future, could be what we all are dreaming of.
I´ve seen wonders from the BMS team… sometimes after a lot of endless hours/years of work… sometimes, after waking up “bored”… you never know with these GENIUS…
Keep them up… cheer them… share your enthusiasm on BMS… love and share your feelings… to every single detail, not only the obvious ones… (there are so many awesome details in our loved BMS that we don´t notice in a daily basis, you will get shocked)
For sure BMS will evolve… people talks about getting VR… new terrains… a Dynamic campaign (…err… no!.. that was the other…;) )… so KEEP HOPE ALIVE… and keep the HORNET along!!!
Thanks BMS!
-
It’s fine as is. When the current Bug was released I was totally satisfied. The year or two of anticipation was well worth the wait. It feels correct, flies nicely and otherwise operates much like the F-16–even though it’s not really supposed to. I see that as a feature, not a bug. (You see wh… yeah, of course you did.) I mentioned VR a few posts up. That was not intended as a nudge. I actually like BMS in 2D. I can take notes and easily review them. And I hate a 3D GUI with a passion. Truly it is the worst part about DCS’s VR implementation. If I want to use the editor I have to revert to 2d and wait 10 minutes for the sim to reboot. So, from my perspective, if VR comes to BMS, great! But if not, equally great.
-
i just discovered that it’s possible to make run engines separately in the Hornet, that’s beautiful
-
Step one: a VERY good functional 3D cockpit with all sources transferred. That is the very 1st step before considering anything else. Then … (?)
If that step is covered what next? How can someone start working on avionics once we have a nice cockpit model?
I think model developers can start with an exterior model and keep the F-16 cockpit, and eventually build the cockpit once they are ready - but seems an avionics/systems developer can’t really start with anything like that. Any reference someone could use to begin architecting the code for a different avionics system, or something similar?
-
If that step is covered what next? How can someone start working on avionics once we have a nice cockpit model?
I think model developers can start with an exterior model and keep the F-16 cockpit, and eventually build the cockpit once they are ready - but seems an avionics/systems developer can’t really start with anything like that. Any reference someone could use to begin architecting the code for a different avionics system, or something similar?
Orrfen,
this is just retexture pack, not a brand new 3D cockpit… DJ didn’t say that someone out of BMS team would be able to work on avionics. DJ said that if someone out of BMS will prepare brand new high quality cockpit then it will be a good base and incentive for BMS coder(s). -
Sunrrise, cataloging the current Hornet as a re-textured pack of the F-16, I think is not the reality, and for people who have left time and resources in its development, it can be even offensive.
The specific flight model, functions like the auto throttle, braking hooks and catapult bar, folding wings, etc., go far beyond the F-16.
What could be integrated specific avionics for the F-18? Sure, it would be perfect. When we flew 4.33 we wondered what it would be like to have the IFF integrated, and two years later we already have it. It’s just a matter of the team spending some resources on the plane.
However, in my opinion, before that, it might be worth making the 3D cockpit we already have fully operational, such as linking the IFF button to the IFF menu, enabling the IFF mode 4 knob, linking the auto trim knob to the simulator function, and link the autopilot modes in the ICP of the Hornet.
Then, having a screen where you can see the state of the control surfaces, and things like that, since they honestly don’t tell me anything, IMHO.Fresco
-
Sunrrise, cataloging the current Hornet as a re-textured pack of the F-16, I think is not the reality, and for people who have left time and resources in its development, it can be even offensive.
The specific flight model, functions like the auto throttle, braking hooks and catapult bar, folding wings, etc., go far beyond the F-16.
What could be integrated specific avionics for the F-18? Sure, it would be perfect. When we flew 4.33 we wondered what it would be like to have the IFF integrated, and two years later we already have it. It’s just a matter of the team spending some resources on the plane.
However, in my opinion, before that, it might be worth making the 3D cockpit we already have fully operational, such as linking the IFF button to the IFF menu, enabling the IFF mode 4 knob, linking the auto trim knob to the simulator function, and link the autopilot modes in the ICP of the Hornet.
Then, having a screen where you can see the state of the control surfaces, and things like that, since they honestly don’t tell me anything, IMHO.Fresco
Please read what I wrote again. Orffen was refering to buraktunahan’s work which is a retexture pack, nothing more.
-
If that step is covered what next? How can someone start working on avionics once we have a nice cockpit model?
I think model developers can start with an exterior model and keep the F-16 cockpit, and eventually build the cockpit once they are ready - but seems an avionics/systems developer can’t really start with anything like that. Any reference someone could use to begin architecting the code for a different avionics system, or something similar?
There are no real wish to start such project for now. Busy on many different things. But IF something has to be made about avionics on another a/c someday , it better already have a quite descent 3D cockpit.
-
Ok Sunrrise, you are right, sorry.
In any case, what I indicate in the post is what I think. With just a little push from the developers, the F-18 would be at a high level, IMHO.
Fresco