More Thoughts on the RNZAF CT4

[Charl]

Had a little play, and thought I'd add some thoughts to the heap...a new plane in flightsim is news indeed.
Congratulations to Nigel and the RNZAF for getting this act together.

Model is a hoot to fly, very responsive, last time I did this would've been using a Christen Eagle.
Best do this in a bunch, fling them around the sky.



The best view of the model is spot view, close up.
The cockpit from there is a work of art, good pilot animations.
And the million-dollar smile on the dial of every pilot...



Great model to play with.
But.
Every time you look past the plane at the wasteland that is NZ FSX, you have to ask: why not an FS9 model?
Nothing in this edition could not have been realised in FS9.
Given this is an Air Force recruitment tool, I'd reckon the target audience would be sub-eighteen years old.
How big a slice of that market has been missed?

Would've been great to get an Airtrainer into Ohakea, say, where there's already some decent scenery and real world AI, for better immersion.



Hope someone does this, still (and loses that klingwrap FSX shine).

[Timmo]

QUOTE

Every time you look past the plane at the wasteland that is NZ FSX, you have to ask: why not an FS9 model?
Nothing in this edition could not have been realised in FS9.[/quote]
That waste land in fsx on your machine is waste land ,some of us FSXers dont have wastelands "brown" we have addons like FS9 to make it even better than the wastelands fs9 has ,its only addons that would change this just like in fs9,
try also setting summer seasonal textures, things turn green and put some addons in there like you have in fs9 before making great knowledgeable assumptions on the never ending bad things about FSX ,,
If i was to make aircraft now why would ya support a old platform when there are dds textures/ missions/ high res/ and the naming of parts can be whatever you like ,if you seen how many things you have to do to get a fs9 aircraft working "modelling "and how many to get a fsx one done you would understand that its more of a brezze building for FSX ..

I think its hit the mark and will do great without the support of the fs9 users and will go the distance ,well into the future of fs11 ,and it gives you guys something to look forward to and maybe a reason in some cases to try the platform again ..
the main reason ive heard about people moving on is computer specs/money ,i have very low specs and i run it sweet ,, we cant all have money to buy this and that ,so most complaints are made on those reasons outside of the
performance issues..

if most of our really good Nz designers are designing for FSX now and are not supporting fs9 anymore or are trying to get away from it ,this means something to you that are still on FS2004

This aircraft is fun very nice to fly and can it move out when it needs too 10/10

[Timmo]

Lets not descend into another Fs9-FSX debate please- All you need to do is install the FS9 landclass file and dont fly in winter = no desert. No brown. In fact, all it would take is a simple batch file to rename the winter files to the summer files and vice versa.


I do agree about the shinyness of the model (It isnt a FSX problem- this is an issue with the model/textures) I had a look at the texture sheet to see if it was possible to update the alpha channel for different reflection (i.e. matt tyres and black bits, shiney yellow) but it appears the alpha channel has been used as an actual alpha for the canopy glass. Maybe the RNZAF aircraft polishing guy has been a bit over zealous

I think it could have been a but less frugal on polygons and texture sizes (a 4mb download!.....I couldnt believe it could be that small!)

Overall, it is a great aeroplane and a fantastic freeware addition to the NZ flightsim community!

[waka172rg]

how do you get to fly around in formation??

[Charl]

QUOTE (Timmo @ Aug 21 2008, 10:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Lets not descend into another Fs9-FSX debate ...I do agree about the shinyness of the model

I had a go at reducing model shinyness with mk_MDLC but conversion failed, maybe there's a better tool?
Yeah my aim was not to argue the merits of the sims - just surprise that FS9 was ignored.
This model could with no effort have been built for FSX and ported to FS9, to the same standard.
Deane Baunton's Fletcher is a good example of this.
Given this poll and feedback from many other forums , I would not have thought it prudent to ignore FS9.
Especially if the aim is to reach the widest possible audience.

QUOTE

how do you get to fly around in formation??[/quote]
Recorder Module

Last edited by Charl on Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Charl]

QUOTE

Recorder Module[/quote]


im not to sure what that is can you elabarate cheers Blake

Last edited by waka172rg on Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Charl]

From Charl's link waka:

QUOTE

About FS Recorder

FS Recorder is an add-on module for Microsoft Flight Simulator available for FS2004 and FSX. It allows recording and playback of flights, similar as the instant replay and video recorder built into FS, but with a lot more features. The recorded flights can be played back either using the user's aircraft or as AI traffic, which allows you to fly formations with yourself. A number of settings allows to customize FS Recorder to your needs. For a detailed list of features visit the features page.

The recorded flights are saved in a binary file format containing flight data and can thus only be played back inside FS. These files are no video files, so it is not possible to play them with a video or media player, or to convert them into video files.

The FS2004 version of FS Recorder additionally includes advanced view options, which give you more freedom when watching your flights.

FS Recorder is distributed as freeware. It may be freely distributed, as long as none of the included files is removed or modified. If you like it and want to support it's further development, a small donation is always welcome.[/quote]
Do a search of the forums for 'FSRecorder' there have been a few how-to threads around.

Alex

[Njbb1995]

QUOTE (Charl @ Aug 21 2008, 08:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But.
Every time you look past the plane at the wasteland that is NZ FSX, you have to ask: why not an FS9 model?
Nothing in this edition could not have been realised in FS9.
Given this is an Air Force recruitment tool, I'd reckon the target audience would be sub-eighteen years old.
How big a slice of that market has been missed?

Would've been great to get an Airtrainer into Ohakea, say, where there's already some decent scenery and real world AI, for better immersion.

Hope someone does this, still (and loses that klingwrap FSX shine).

Here here Charl!!!

[Anthony]

Wow that looks really good
Cool shots Charl.
Pity it's not FS9 compatible , although it sounds like that's a good thing.

[deaneb]

QUOTE (Charl @ Aug 21 2008, 01:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I had a go at reducing model shinyness with mk_MDLC but conversion failed, maybe there's a better tool?
Yeah my aim was not to argue the merits of the sims - just surprise that FS9 was ignored.
This model could with no effort have been built for FSX and ported to FS9, to the same standard.
Deane Baunton's Fletcher is a good example of this.
Given this poll and feedback from many other forums , I would not have thought it prudent to ignore FS9.
Especially if the aim is to reach the widest possible audience.

Recorder Module

Well I've got to say that making my Fletcher model backwards compatible with FS9 was a complete pain in the ass and probably took another two months of work to achieve, so your "no effort" comment is not quite correct. Textures, gauges, material types and methods used now differ betwen FSX SP2 and FS9. My next models will be FSX only.

Deane

[Charl]

QUOTE (deaneb @ Aug 23 2008, 03:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well I've got to say that making my Fletcher model backwards compatible with FS9 was a complete pain in the ass and probably took another two months of work to achieve, so your "no effort" comment is not quite correct. Textures, gauges, material types and methods used now differ betwen FSX SP2 and FS9. My next models will be FSX only.Deane

My original post had it built for FS9 and ported to FSX, which may or may not have been easier.
"No effort" regarding anything in model production, is bound to be totally inaccurate, and was a poor choice of words.
My point stands, that a sizable chunk of the audience got left out.
Of course it's a choice every designer will have to make, as the market is, and will remain for some time yet, fragmented.
My next flight sim will be X-Plane, and I expect an even smaller amount of attention to be paid to that one...

[2fst4u]

hey charl. where'd you get all that awesome RNZAF AI?

[victor_alpha_charlie]

I think the fact that it's FSX only is stupid, although I'm not going out to spend thousands of dollars on a computer just so I can fly different aircraft- I have real things to spend my hard-earned money on.
Looks nice for those of you with a big PC budget

[Alex]

It's the developer's prerogative as to what platform they want to create a product for (if/when they want to do that at all!). Given that this is a top-notch freeware project, I can't really think of a good reason to complain. I think it is definitely not stupid that people put a lot of hard work (for little or no physical reward) and enable us to have a great addition to our simulator.

So, what are you really complaining about? It's a good freeware product, costs you nothing to have (or not have) it, and obviously a lot of hard work was put in. If this is indicative of the reception that we give our freeware designers, no wonder we don't have very many.

I can understand that some might be disappointed with the fact that this is an FSX-only aircraft, but angry? There was never any crossed wires, or conflicting statements, this project was always going to be FSX-only. I can't understand why people are annoyed at Nigel for this; he clearly said what he was going to do well ahead of time and he carried it out. So good on him, and I would like to thank him for the effort he has put into this project.

Cheers Nigel.

Alex

[creator2003]

Dont you just love the energy around here sometimes ,its amazing how text gets all twisted ,there are plenty of ac out there at the moment we have our pickings but for the future this will be far less at the moment ,i say this because its already been mentioned in the next version of sim you will have no FS9 aircraft ported ,this CT4 should still be there with the likes of the strike master ,kaman ,and Deanes FU24 models and many more that will come out over the next 2years or so ,these models are the future so be happy they will be there for you then ..
Computers / budget well i wish i had a new one, guess ill save up and spend money on something i love

[Naki]

Yes it would be nice to have the rather nice looking CT-4E in FS9 but hey there are alternatives if you are stuck with FS9 (like me) - buy Realair's excellent SF-260 (lot cheaper then FSX or a new PC) or download the excellent freeware Samdim CAP-10 (which the French Air Force use). The SF-260 is Italy's answer (a lot more common around the world) to the CT-4E or should I say the CT-4E is NZs answer to the SF-260.

[victor_alpha_charlie]

I never said I was angry, I meant I think it was a bad idea to make a recruitment tool for the RNZAF FSX only, when their target audience will be nearly all FS9 users- Not many younger people can afford to run an FSX computer.

Sorry for assuming a forum was a place where you are able to voice your opinion.

[toprob]

Watch this space FSX will be the sim of choise by next year ,as with people replacing there computers that will happen even at your home at some stage ,Mums and Dads always come around or you get money and put it into something you love ,be it you get a bike a PS3 xbox whatever the poison ,
like i said before think of the future will there be FS9 ? or will there be FSX with a great CT4 e ,hey you mite of moved on by then and dont even fly flightsim anymore? you wouldnt be the first to lose interest

QUOTE

recruitment tool for the RNZAF FSX only[/quote]yup thats right fs9 have c130 and many others that work and are sweet ,does FS9 have a strike master with NZ colours and markings ? not that i know off but i never seen such a stink up over that one just happy people with a strike master..
Well whatever designers at the end of the day design for themselfs ,you guys get the benefit in most cases "freeware"
id love to see you push your point at a table of designers and RNZAF heads and see where you would get with that point of view Im sure they would tell you to why /how /and you and others would have to get use to it if you would want to join the RNZAF , they change stuff all the time /orders/placement /skyhawks /helicopters /you name it ...

Hopefully some of these new freeware addons mite push you one day to make a step forward ,if you have to wait because of budget or personal opinion there will be the good guys out there building for your and everyones future of flightsim and you will be over the moon and full of praise that they moved forward when others stand still ..

another idea from Guru mike you could always make one for FS9 yourselfs ? then id get the i dont know how, then id say learn how

Far to many simmers sit wait and expect others to do them things and then have a strong opinion on there free projects ,you guys gotta see thats wrong you should try 1% of what these guys have to learn to give you something in flightsim ,and give them the biggest pat on the back for all there efforts be it for old or new ..

opinions are good VAC and yes this is what this forum is about and always has been ,we share read and sometime we change our opinions when we see theres more to it or we just keep the ones we started with ..

[toprob]

FS2004 is coming up on five years old (it was released late 2003) which is really too old and way behind today's technology, so it will gradually fade away. Sure, there will be people still using it, the same way that people still use FS2000, but developers are not going to get excited about using 5-year-old techniques to keep a handful of luddites happy:)

Any popular gaming franchise is geared towards cutting-edge technology, and FS isn't much different -- the only real difference is that I can enjoy it on my five year old machine, whereas it won't run ANY other major release game from the last 12 months.

The fact that I can run FSX on my 5 year old machine astounds me, but I am aware that if I am serious about FS then I should upgrade reasonably often -- I'm well overdue, and looking at a new system at the moment. If you are not able to do this, then it's no good asking developers to take some sort of time-warp technologically speaking, and develop for an obsolete platform.

From a payware point of view it would be suicide to stick with FS2004 now -- those who won't or can't afford to run a reasonably modern FS system won't spend the money on payware anyway.

MS have sold more copies of FSX than FS2004, so you can't say that people are sticking with FS2004.

If people want to have their own little retro-FS community good on them, but unless you develop your own stuff you are going to have to come to terms with less and less compatibility.

(I acknowledge the irony of advertising my FS2004 collection here, but hey, this seems to be one of the last FS2004 holdouts:)

[Zöltuger]

well said Robin