Who else is excited about the new Dovetail Sim?

[Gollum]

Its great to read every body talking about something new is Flight Sim, its been a long while coming. 

[daladna]

if everything will exist as it promised, the universe will become a paradise

[Ken Terry]

I heard an interview with one of the DTG guys and from what he said I gather when the DTFS full blown job comes out late this year, you may not be able to fly a big jet airliner until you have passed flight training for the big beast.  If true, this will be frustrating for those of us who have been for some time flying 737s and 777s etc.

Does anybody have any news on this possible scenario?

Regards

Ken

[Jordan King]

2 hours ago, Ken Terry said:

I heard an interview with one of the DTG guys and from what he said I gather when the DTFS full blown job comes out late this year, you may not be able to fly a big jet airliner until you have passed flight training for the big beast.  If true, this will be frustrating for those of us who have been for some time flying 737s and 777s etc.

Does anybody have any news on this possible scenario?

Regards

Ken

 

The training and certification portion of the simulator is not a means to lock you out of enjoying your favorite aircraft. It is simply there as an accolade and tool if you so choose to use it. If you want to jump into any available plane in your liking on day one, you can. 

[Ken Terry]

Thanks Jordan

Cheers

Ken

[Rimshot]

Removed

[Rimshot]

20 hours ago, AnkH said:

 

I am aware of this fact. But for me, it is almost certain that "Flight School" will have and offer the identical basis as the "Dovetail Flight Simulator" being released later this year. There is little to no chance that those two products will use different engines etc. So, the limitations "Flight School" will show regarding engine, clouds, physics simulation, scenery and all this stuff will be found in the full flight sim as well, I bet on this.

 

I hear you. But they still have a couple of months to further develop the full flight simulator. I keep my hopes up!

[AnkH]

3 hours ago, Rimshot said:

 

I hear you. But they still have a couple of months to further develop the full flight simulator. I keep my hopes up!

 

Hopes, that's all it is ;-) Due to the fact that this sim also needs alpha and beta testing, I guess it is almost done and only details will be adjusted now until release. And as someone else stated correctly: if Dovetail would have had something really new to show, they would have done it already to properly advertise their product. It is kind of a confession of failure that the first trailer from "Flight School" contains mostly pre-rendered images and no in-game footage which simply tells me: it is not going to be such a leap forward as we all hoped...

[spirit_66]

Only old wine in new bottles, maybe?

Spirit

[Finni Hansen]

It might not be packed with new eyecandy yet, but at least they have taken the leap into 64 bit!! That cannot have been an easy job, considering how MS and LM have stayed away from it all this time.

The future looks bright, with a big company bringing the Flightsim series further. Let the kids play arcade with flight school, and maybe they will get hooked and become hardcore simmers like many of us :-D

I'm looking forward to working with 4096 textures and no more OOM problems!

My 2c

Finn

[Rimshot]

Thanks for the positive note Finn!

[Gollum]

There are lots of posts about Flight school . I plan to buy it because I have struggled to fly anything other than the simpler planes because I don`t find learning from a manual (If one exists) very easy so I am hoping that I can learn something to bring back to FSX . However I cannot find an answer to ` Will I be able to use Tracker IR in flight school ?

[bonchie]

The thing that worries me is them being non-committal on even basic features that P3D has had for years.

Martin wouldn't even confirm that they'll have cloud shadows in the new full simulator (not flight school). That should be automatic at this point. I hope they start to give more concrete details on what's coming soon.

[FalconAF]

On 3/27/2016 at 0:12 PM, TimC340 said:

Incidentally, I also have been flying for around 40 years. And the aircraft I fly for my day job (A340-600) does indeed have cameras at various places around the outside of the aircraft which give me views not unlike those available in FSX/P3D. Some operators even make those views available to the passenger IFE system. So they are a perfectly valid aspect of the simulation experience.

 

I agree.  You missed my point though.  If in the real use of your A340-600 aircraft, when you use those camera views it caused stuttering, pausing, slow operation, or a "crash" of the environment of the real aircraft, would you continue to still use them?

 

I have also done computer IT for over 35 years now.  There isn't a home computer available that can do ALL of the things ALL of the time needed to simulate "real world flying" at the level both you and I would want.  With the plethora of options available to a computer flight enthusiast, compromises still have to be made.  And the "older" the computer, the more compromises.

 

My point was even if a company DOES produce a flight simulator that can "do it all", NO home computer flight sim enthusiast WILL be able to do it all, all at the same time.   Heck, most home computer users can't do everything CURRENT flight simulators and addons offer (but that won't stop them from trying, then complaining about the poor performance).  Most times, you have to decide to NOT use some or even many of the options available to prevent "poor performance" of the simulator.  

 

You wouldn't intentionally ask your real-world A340-600 to do things it wasn't capable of doing, would you?  Of course not...you know the operating limitations of the aircraft, and you respect them.  The home computer flight simulator enthusiast has to know the limitations of their computer and not exceed those limitations either, by making choices in the simulator settings and/or not trying to use the simulator in scenarios that exceed the computer's limitations.

 

Yes, some users CAN create "simpits" that come very close to "doing it all".  But they have spent tons of money building a "simpit" that uses multiple "home computers" in networked server configurations, etc.  But even THEY have limitations in the end too.  

[Griphos]

7 hours ago, AnkH said:

 

Hopes, that's all it is ;-) Due to the fact that this sim also needs alpha and beta testing, I guess it is almost done and only details will be adjusted now until release. And as someone else stated correctly: if Dovetail would have had something really new to show, they would have done it already to properly advertise their product. It is kind of a confession of failure that the first trailer from "Flight School" contains mostly pre-rendered images and no in-game footage which simply tells me: it is not going to be such a leap forward as we all hoped...

 

This kind of speculation based on little if any actual information ahead of any release always cracks me up.  Chicken Little is a Jungian archetype, I guess.  

[TimC340]

On 01/04/2016 at 8:17 PM, FalconAF said:

 

I agree.  You missed my point though.  If in the real use of your A340-600 aircraft, when you use those camera views it caused stuttering, pausing, slow operation, or a "crash" of the environment of the real aircraft, would you continue to still use them?

 

I have also done computer IT for over 35 years now.  There isn't a home computer available that can do ALL of the things ALL of the time needed to simulate "real world flying" at the level both you and I would want.  With the plethora of options available to a computer flight enthusiast, compromises still have to be made.  And the "older" the computer, the more compromises.

 

My point was even if a company DOES produce a flight simulator that can "do it all", NO home computer flight sim enthusiast WILL be able to do it all, all at the same time.   Heck, most home computer users can't do everything CURRENT flight simulators and addons offer (but that won't stop them from trying, then complaining about the poor performance).  Most times, you have to decide to NOT use some or even many of the options available to prevent "poor performance" of the simulator.  

 

You wouldn't intentionally ask your real-world A340-600 to do things it wasn't capable of doing, would you?  Of course not...you know the operating limitations of the aircraft, and you respect them.  The home computer flight simulator enthusiast has to know the limitations of their computer and not exceed those limitations either, by making choices in the simulator settings and/or not trying to use the simulator in scenarios that exceed the computer's limitations.

 

Yes, some users CAN create "simpits" that come very close to "doing it all".  But they have spent tons of money building a "simpit" that uses multiple "home computers" in networked server configurations, etc.  But even THEY have limitations in the end too.  

 

It's true that using FSX or P3D completely maxxed-out with add-on software can overstretch even the most powerful PCs. So therefore , as you say, the user has to make compromises to achieve a usability that they find acceptable for their particular purposes. For you, it's about a more-or-less realistic in-flight experience of controlling an aircraft. For others, it's about watching the world go by from an airborne viewpoint, or watching arrivals and departures at their favourite airport, or sharing the FS experience online with others through the various multipayer options available.

 

The limitations of my A340 are hard limits, and have real-world - and potentially fatal - consequences if I exceed them. The limits of my computer aren't hard, and can be experimented with to find an optimal compromise for my purposes with no risk except to my temper! Simulation will always stretch computing power, whether we're talking about FSX or the CAE monsters I use as part of my job. I'm delighted that some can spend enough money and time to get the best possible experience, and I'm equally delighted that it's possible to do so using software that's essentially a decade old (though the addons that stretch those computers are probably much younger!).

 

The point is, there's no 'right' way of doing flight simulation for pleasure. They're all good, and they're all interesting. I love to read about what others are achieving with their home setups, however modest, and what tips and tricks maximise the performance of the hardware so you can get the best experience. It's also good news that the new Flight School software won't need a ninja computer, so that more people can experience a working home flight simulator that doesn't cost a fortune. I'm curious and excited to learn what may be achievable with the full Dovetail Flight Simulator, and how it will exploit 64-bit and DX11 to improve the experience. I've no doubt that I'll need ever more hardware upgrades to get the best from it!

 

[Jon Clarke]

I think all this depends on how you want to use your sim. I believe that most PCs can cope with being used as a flight trainer as long as you disable/reduce all the ancillary eye candy outside the aircraft and concentrate on the flying aspects only. VFR flying in simple planes is a different set up because you want to fly low and slow and actually spend most of the time looking at the scenery below and all it offers, from animated windmills, road traffic et al.

To fly a Heavy again is a different matter. You probably want a detailed airport for departure, some additional traffic movements via AI, but detailed scenery is not necessary as you will very shortly be at 20000 ft + cloud will be covering most of the scenery below. You are then concentrating on all the activities within the plane and not sight seeing, so you don't need all the eye candy below, nor do you need masses of AI etc.

The problems arise as far as system performance and current PC capabilities are concerned is when you want to fly a Heavy from e.g Heathrow with lots of airport movements of AI, within a radius of a huge metropolitan area saturated with autogen, heavy weather conditions, in a complex aircraft. If you want to do the same flight with everything maxed out then your PC will not cope.Stutters, OOMs etc all then come in to play.

My point is that you cut your cloth according to what you want achieve for a particular flight. Heavies, little or no ground details but use a good addon airport giving you all the real feel of being in a very active and detailed environment at the start of you flight, then get to your cruising altitude and concentrate on flying the plane. VFR, choose a simple low demand plane max out your sceneries and go sight seeing.

I VFR 99% of the time because I just love the scenery and having spent a fortune on FTX products i want to enjoy the product  from close up so I can see what I have bought. If i fly a heavy on a short or long haul, I forego the scenery and enjoy the plane I have spent money on purchasing. 

Hopefully the 64 bit Dovetail sim will allow just a little more leeway on being allowed to increase "some" of the eye candy that FTX supplies.

We will have to wait and see, but I will not be able to judge until the Dovetail Sim is loaded to the same extent as my current P3D. After all the actual sim programme is only about 16GB, the rest of my 330GB is addon scenery. Out of the box the new 64 bit sim will perform like a Ferrari, but then again so does P3D without any addons.