Musart

That's what i was thinking also. I did a first try and said: Nah! it's not good. But I've keep trying and found out it's not that bad and now i'm find myself using it more and more. As JRcomm mentioned: It doesn't have the bells and whistles of a FS or an X-Plane in term of graphical entertainment, but the realism is there, especially the weather and sky rendition and that's the reason I appreciate it. This is not for the casual simmers who wants a "world and life and everything spectacular" simulator

Great video, indeed

I've downloaded it "again". I've tried it last year (3.0 I think) and I was not conformtable with it. But this time, I told myself "Plz try it more than one shot" and I listened to myself! I admit that more I use it, more I like (Love?) it and what a nice weather engine !!!! This is IMHO, the most realistic (stock) sky / fog ambiance i've ever experienced. This FG beast will stay on my hard drive

According to the clouds, it should be XP9 Great links thx!

I finally install it. A little bit disoriented surfing in the menu and keybding but that's the learning curve. I didn't expect to have an eye candy sim but so far, FDM is really good and especially, I like the dynamic head movement. I run at 60 fps (seems to be locked at) with stock rendering system but i'm disappointed with Rembrandt which runs between 15-19 fps. I'll experiement different settings next time i'll fire it up.

I've never dig into MSFlight but I heard good things about it. My perfect mix would XP Dynamics & Turbulence and FSX beautiful scenery / Visibility & Haze. Nevertheless, FG looks very promising. Downloading now.

Also, the scenery looks better too! I'm now considering installing v2.10 for experimenting. I hear good thing about it. I'm always bouncing from FSX to XP10 (back and forth) but i'm really getting bored of XP (Visibility distance and clouds, do not meet my requirements, yet)

Look at the end of the page: http://www.alpilotx.net/downloads/x-plane-10-hd-scenery-mesh/

Same thing here!

...to this, my response is always: better doing this than sit in front of the TV with no interaction. A hobby is a hobby: Golf, collecting coins, playing a musical intrument, flying a real aircraft or playing MMORPG is the same to me. As long as you spend your time having fun, spending on what doesn't matter.

To the OP: It's called the Fresnel effect. Fresnel effect is, roughly, the amount of reflection based on the viewing angle. If you look at a surface at 90 deg angle (perpendicular) you will have the minimum reflection. If you look at the same surface with less angle (ie: toward 0 deg) you will have the maximum reflection. So I think it's the formula used in the code. Do a google search to have more info on the physic formulas. It's commonly used in 3D software like Lightwave, Blender, Maya, etc to emulate realistic surface. Cheers.

Sorry to hear that. I don't understand, really. I've tried to change these lines back to original and forth and still works great...weird. No other add-ons that might interfere? I'm just thinking: Did you try these with default aircraft or 3rd party ones? If it's with 3rd party AC, maybe they have internal head movement that can not be altered in anyway.

You must be right, I was only annoyed by your comment. But stating that it is stupid does not means that is stupid for all the rest of the users who enjoy it. The idea is to make things more realistic and that's why it was implemented and that's why 2D panel is still an option. Why not say: "This feature do not fullfill my needs, the programmers should have thougt to make it toggle" instead By the way, that works for me, just tried it: [DynamicHeadMovement] LonAccelOnHeadLon=-0.000000 LonAccelOnHeadPitch=-0.000000 RollAccelOnHeadLat=0.000000 YawAccelOnHeadLat=-0.000000 RollAccelOnHeadRoll=0.000000 MaxHeadAngle=0.000000 MaxHeadOffset=0.000000 HeadMoveTimeConstant=0.000000 Glad to help. Regards,

Not stupid at all.

Now, the 'Final' one is very realistic! Thanks