HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Andrew_Tuline@mindlink.bc.ca (Andrew Tuline)
Subject: Re: FS wish list
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 23:14:12 GMT

> Robert Dorsett writes:
>
>
> Aaaah, so you want to open up the architecture for *PC* users, eh?  I'd
> like to see a device-independent architecture, which will allow full in-
> terchange of all files among all supported platforms, and this utterly
> myopic concentration on the PC platform and, indeed, on specific
> "packages."
>
> And let's get rid of these ridiculous DOS suffixes, while we're at it,
> and describe the files for what they are.
>


It would be great to have it available and 'open' for other architectures
as well.  I manage a network that includes UNIX and VAX'es and agree with
the poor suffixes.  Quite often, you just have to deal with the lowest
common denominator, both in technology and whatever sells the most.

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
From: Andrew_Tuline@mindlink.bc.ca (Andrew Tuline)
Subject: Re: Adventure Factory
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 01:44:59 GMT

The adventure section is very powerful, enough so that you could simulate
some of the functionality of ATP.  Robert McKay of Flight Planner fame
is writing a Pilot's Toolbox which should do a lot of this for us.

I have a theory that .ADV variables are located close to .SCN variables.
SEE4's strobes.sc0 uses variables, as do some other SEE objects.

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
From: mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (John P. Mechalas)
Subject: Adventure Factory
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 14:51:02 GMT

I am curious....has anyone experimented with the Adventure Factory half
of the AAF?  I must admit that, at first, I didn't think there would be
much use for it, but the Demo Adventure looked pretty impressive, and
the more I look through the (lousy) documentation, the more powerful the
program seems to be...
   Any thoughts?

-- 
John Mechalas                                          "I'm not an actor, but
mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu                                 I play one on TV."
Aero Engineering, Purdue University                     #include disclaimer.h
From: bobc@natinst.com (Bob Conyne)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
Subject: Re: What is Commanche?
Date: 14 Dec 92 23:32:14 GMT
Organization: National Instruments, Austin, TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: eagle.natinst.com


In article <1992Dec12.000109.26775@cc.tut.fi> k138836@cc.tut.fi (Korhonen Tommi) writes:
>
>Agreed that it is graphically _superior_, even 'the best'. But as a game...
>Sheehs. You rarely see a game to be played through in three hours.
>(I didn'n, one aquintace did) 
>And the simulation is POOR! As a great fan of Gunship and all 'realities' it
>can give, I say Comanche sucks as a simulation. (IMO) You can NOT affect 
>your height by dropping nose!! Unlikely... (As a GS fan I didn't buy the 
>game when I saw it's abilites)
>Face it: It is a GAME. 

Oh?  Gunship isn't a game?  I'm relieved to know that the U.S. Army is saving
so much money, by having new cadets learn to fly Apaches on a $50 PC program.

What constitutes 'poor' and 'sucks' is highly subjective, based on whatever
'realities' you deem most significant.  If one considers the realism of 
terrain rendering the most important determinant of a realistic simulation,
then Comanche beats Gunship by about a billion to one.

The significance of Comanche is that it pushes the state of the art to a whole
new level, to the benefit of us, the buying public.  In a couple of years,
nobody will even tolerate a simulation that doesn't have such graphics.  The
record will show that Comanche was the groundbreaking product that ushered
in this new era.
 
>
>Still... The graphics are wonderful... I'll be wating for Gunship 3000.
>

When it comes, be sure and thank the folks who wrote Comanche for creating a 
new standard in PC games.

--Bob
From: tpickett@auspex.com (Tom Pickett)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
Subject: Re: Winds at Santa Catalina Island in FS4
Date: 11 Dec 92 16:53:59 GMT
Reply-To: tpickett@auspex.com (Tom Pickett)
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.  Engineering

In article <1992Dec11.033041.4518@nmsu.edu>, bboswell@dante.NMSU.Edu 
(BOSWELL) writes:
> Then, go ahead and  
> brake and get the nosewheel down, also put your flaps up once safely on the  

> ground.  Also, with auto-coordination off, you SHOULD place your controls 
in  
> proper crosswind taxi position (a gust can come along and blow you over if 
you  
> don't).


Now come on!  It isn't a good idea in any real airplane to retract the
flaps while you are still on the runway! This has resulted in plenty of
gear up landings in the real world...:-)


Tom Pickett 
tpickett@auspex.com or 74616.2237@compuserve.com
SHO  GOZE
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
From: knutson@urbino.mcc.com (Jim Knutson)
Subject: Re: Falcon3
Organization: MCC
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 15:11:17 GMT

Falcon 3 archives can be found on onion.rain.com:/pub/falcon3.

-- 
Jim Knutson                                                | |
knutson@mcc.com                                         --=oOo=--
cs.utexas.edu!milano!knutson                               +
Wk: (512) 338-3362                                      Check Six!
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
From: hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong)
Subject: Re: Comanche - mini review and Voxel Space discussion
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 06:35:11 GMT

From article <1992Dec19.013617.26096@trl.oz.au>, by wallace@titan.trl.OZ.AU (Glenn Wallace):
>                    *******************************
>                    *                             *
>                    * Comanche : Maximum Overkill *
>                    *                             *
>                    *******************************

It supports FCS fully, WCS (set dip-switch to 1-turn-on, the-rest-off),
RCS, etc.  Sound requires 100% Sound Blaster compatible, music use
Adlib, Roland, or SB. 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
From: hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong)
Subject: Re: New products from Wesson
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 06:26:52 GMT

From article <1992Dec15.004219.17190@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, by barrk@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Keith Barr):
> I am not an employee of Wesson International, and I have no gain from you
> purchasing anything I mention here.  I just thought people would be interested.
> 
> I just received my new Wesson newsletter, and it seems as though they have
> a couple of new products that sound like fun.  They seem most proud of
> a voice recognition system that they have developed.  You will be able to
> speak into a mic and have the aircraft respond directly to your commands.
> Not a cheap item at $995, but maybe it is worth the investment if you
> are thinking of a carrer in ATC.  For that price you also get an
> upgraded version of Tracon or Tracon for Windows.

Yeah, I have heard of this before.  I think they did it for real FAA
training.  They use (at least in that case) a hardware sound recognition
card that cost about $600 if purchase direct from the card people.

You speak into the microphone instead of punching the keyboard or mving
the mouse.  The guy who saw it work said it is like the real thing.

Now $995 sounds like the right price since the card alone will cost $600
retail.

> They now have sector disks for the entire United States, Europe, Canada, 
> Australia, and the Pacific.  You can get the set of 3 US sectors for
> $20, and the four international disks for another $30.

Good.
> 
> The product I am most excited about is Tower.  This program will allow
> you to become the local controller at an airport.  The graphics look
> awesome.  Aircraft are overlaid on a GIF type image of an airport which
> looks like the view out of a tower.  You can change views for a 360 degree
> look around.  This product will be out in Summer of '93.  Here is a quote
> from their newsletter:
>   
>      "Using a digitized airport photograph, you can change views for
> 	a 360 degree look at what's going on around the field. Departing
> 	aircraft taxi out to await departure clearance, then takeoff
> 	will full visual and audio effects.  Arrivals request clearance
> 	to land, then taxi off the runway to the terminal.  And if you
> 	lose one, be prepared for a spectacular crash.  For added
> 	realism, connect to Flight Simulator and control a live pilot."

Can we make a 747 taxi "w/o delay" onto a 172... (he, he, he)
From: bobc@natinst.com (Bob Conyne)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
Subject: Re: FS: ATP Blue Box vs. Red Box
Date: 11 Dec 1992 17:48:55 -0600
Organization: National Instruments, Austin, TX
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: eagle.natinst.com

In article <exunmk.44.0@exu.ericsson.se> exunmk@exu.ericsson.se (Noel Kerns) writes:
>I have the old, old very first release of FS: ATP.  When I got it home I was 
>disappointed to see that the flight model simply didn't measure up to the 
>one in MS Flight Simulator 4.  So now that they've released a new version
>(blue box) have they improved the program significantly or is it just a re-
>packaging of the same product?  
>
>
>						Noel Kerns 
>						Ericsson Network Systems
>						
I don't have the original (maroon package) ATP, so I can't address the 
difference between the two.  However, I do have both FS4 and the new (blue)
ATP, so I can compare those two.

From a realism standpoint, ATP is significantly superior to FS4, particularly
for Soundblaster owners, who can get VERY realistic ATC speech effects.  The
flight model is every bit as good as that of FS4, and considering the attention
to detail in simulating the instrument behavior of real airliners, ATP is the
only game in town for learning about IFR flying.  Also, the airports and 
nav-aids in ATP are correctly positioned, unlike in FS4.

I still like and use both -- FS4 when I want a fun romp through downtown
San Francisco, or want to fly any of 15 or so different aircraft (I also like 
the 800 x 600 control panel with Mallard's upgrade), and ATP when I want a more 
serious, scholarly approach to the realities of modern commercial air travel.  
Both programs have their place.
--Bob
From: exunmk@exu.ericsson.se (Noel Kerns)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
Subject: FS: ATP Blue Box vs. Red Box
Date: 11 Dec 92 21:48:59 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.
X-Disclaimer: This article was posted by a user at Ericsson.
              Any opinions expressed are strictly those of the
              user and not necessarily those of Ericsson.

I have the old, old very first release of FS: ATP.  When I got it home I was 
disappointed to see that the flight model simply didn't measure up to the 
one in MS Flight Simulator 4.  So now that they've released a new version
(blue box) have they improved the program significantly or is it just a re-
packaging of the same product?  


						Noel Kerns 
						Ericsson Network Systems
						
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Noel Kerns
                                                Ericsson Network Systems, Inc
                                                              P.O. Box 833875
                                                    Richardson, TX 75083-3875
                                                       Voice - (214) 907-5954
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
From: hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong)
Subject: Re: A.T.P. ATC speech
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 16:44:03 GMT

From article <1992Dec11.204831.26814@gn.ecn.purdue.edu>, by mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (John P. Mechalas):
> In article <1gapj8INNgde@uwm.edu> bnk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Bob N Keenan) writes:
>>
>>   You know...
>>
>>   I bought the Blue Box version of ATP after hearing and reading
>>   about  it.  The back of the box describes "...the ROAR of the
>>   engines..." on your soundblaster.   I have a Soundblaster, and
>>   the ATC speech is GREAT, but all the "roar" i get is a high
>>   piched whiney sound for the engine.  Is this supposed to be 
>>   the sound as it is from inside the cockpit??  It is  far from 
>>   what a jet engine really sounds like.  Im comparing this to 
>>   the jet engine sound I got on FS4 with mallards upgrade thingy.
>>
>>   Is this what it sounds like to everyone else, or what???
> 
> From outside the plane, or inside the passenger cabin, yes, the engines
> do have a much louder roar.  But inside the crew cabin, the whine is
> about all you can hear.  In fact, in some jets, you can barely tell if
> the engines are running unless you are looking at the gages.  So yes,
> the ATP sound is accurate from the pilot's perspective.

Also, you have to understand that FS4 SGA uses digital voice channel for
engine sound, which means that if you want speech at the same time, the
engine sound will paused to make way for the speech.  I think ATP "blue box"
is a good compromise (running the FM Synthesizer for engine sound and
digital voice channel for speech).

On the other hand FS4 SGA does allow you to use the FM synthesizer to make
engine sound just like the new ATP, hence you can get the same compromise.
From: frank@whare.cavebbs.welly.gen.nz (Frank van der Hulst)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
Subject: Re: F16 for FS4F;
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 23:58:47 NZT
Organization: Tech-Soft Systems, Wellington, NZ

Marc Bernatchez wrote the following: 
> Hi everyone,
> 	I still have a hard time trying to unzip de file f16_1.zip. Like you
> can gess it, this time I can uudecode it (the newsreader do it automaticaly)
> and I download it using Zmodem. Until here, everything is fine. The pkunzip
> (ver.: 1.1 I think) tells me that my file f16_1.zip does not contain any > files.

Me too.

Here's what I think:

There's something wrong with the guy's (Steve's?? I forgot his name) UUENCODE program, or maybe his use thereof. I notice that the f16_1.zip file I get is *exactly* 16K long, which makes me think it's been truncated. It's not his posting program, since the f16_2.zip file later in the same message got through OK.

Frank.


--
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| The end of the world is ni                                  |
| *O(&%^#$%g) }:&(*                                           |
| NO CARRIER                                                  |
|                                                             |
| frank@whare.cavebbs.welly.gen.nz                            |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
From: larry@tsd.arlut.utexas.edu (Larry Maturo)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
Subject: Re: Stunt Island
Date: 14 Dec 92 19:05:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: titan.1992Dec14.190522.15661
Organization: Applied Research Labs, The University of Texas at Austin


Has anyone played Stunt Island?  It looks like fun, though probably not very
realistic.  I think it is made in conjuction with some Disney software company.
Any comments on it?

If you haven't seen it here is a quick description :

You are in control of a movie studio.  You can film yourself flying at low level
through streets or any of what looks like a large number of novel situations
using a number of different camera angles.  When you are done you can edit the
films to get the best looking playback.

+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------+
|                                   |                                        |
| Larry Maturo                      | Opinions expressed herein must be      |
| Tactical Simulation Division      | yours, neither I nor my employer have  |
| Applied Research Laboratories     | any.                                   |
| University of Texas at Austin     |                                        |
| P.O. Box 8029                     +----------------------------------------+
| Austin, Texas 78713-8029          |                                        |
|                                   | When you're as great as I am it's hard |
| larry@titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu  | to be modest, but I succeed where      |
|                                   | others fail.                           |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------+
From: bobc@natinst.com (Bob Conyne)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
Subject: Re: What is Commanche?
Date: 11 Dec 1992 17:31:41 -0600
Organization: National Instruments, Austin, TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: eagle.natinst.com

In article <Dec11.220412.76765@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> pricejoh@CS.ColoState.EDU (john russel price) writes:
>  Can someone tell me about this new commanche helicopter simulator?
> Is it available and how much does it cost would be nice also.
>
>Thanks.
>
>-- 
>John Price    email: pricejoh@handel.CS.Colostate.Edu
It is AWESOME!  I purchased it for $49.99 from Babbages.  Worth every penny.
Basically, the game involves destroying various strategic targets from your
helicopter (tanks, oil tanks, and enemy choppers), in the form of increasingly
challenging missions.  The graphics are absolutely unrivalled for a PC game.
--Bob


Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
From: lauusitalo@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi
Subject: FS 4.0 PRO? Is there any?
Organization: Nokia Telecommunications.
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 06:31:37 GMT

        Hi,

        Is there such thing as FS 4.0 PRO??? If there is then how
        it differs from normal FS 4.0?

        Thanks,

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Lauri Uusitalo                 I          "Life is hard,          
lauri.uusitalo@ntc.nokia.com   I                then you die..."
From: barrk@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Keith Barr)
Subject: New products from Wesson
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 00:42:19 GMT

I am not an employee of Wesson International, and I have no gain from you
purchasing anything I mention here.  I just thought people would be interested.

I just received my new Wesson newsletter, and it seems as though they have
a couple of new products that sound like fun.  They seem most proud of
a voice recognition system that they have developed.  You will be able to
speak into a mic and have the aircraft respond directly to your commands.
Not a cheap item at $995, but maybe it is worth the investment if you
are thinking of a carrer in ATC.  For that price you also get an
upgraded version of Tracon or Tracon for Windows.

They now have sector disks for the entire United States, Europe, Canada, 
Australia, and the Pacific.  You can get the set of 3 US sectors for
$20, and the four international disks for another $30.

The product I am most excited about is Tower.  This program will allow
you to become the local controller at an airport.  The graphics look
awesome.  Aircraft are overlaid on a GIF type image of an airport which
looks like the view out of a tower.  You can change views for a 360 degree
look around.  This product will be out in Summer of '93.  Here is a quote
from their newsletter:
  
     "Using a digitized airport photograph, you can change views for
	a 360 degree look at what's going on around the field. Departing
	aircraft taxi out to await departure clearance, then takeoff
	will full visual and audio effects.  Arrivals request clearance
	to land, then taxi off the runway to the terminal.  And if you
	lose one, be prepared for a spectacular crash.  For added
	realism, connect to Flight Simulator and control a live pilot."

I apologize if this posting was too commercial for some, but I though people
would like the news.
 _____________________________           _____
| Keith Barr                  \           \ K \__      _____                  
| barr@ncar.ucar.edu           \___________\   \/_______\___\_____________    
| Comm/AS&MEL/Inst/IGI         /           < /_/   .....................  `-.
|_____________________________/             `-----------,----,--------------'
When you think how well basic appliances work, it's   _/____/               
hard to believe anyone ever gets on an airplane.--Calvin
From: david@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (David Stack)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
Subject: Appreciate f-16 repost
Date: 18 Dec 1992 16:45:58 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: david@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

I too would appreciate a repost of the f-16, or would appreciate someone
mailing me a copy of part 1.  Thank you.

-- 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators
From: hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong)
Subject: Re: Winds at Santa Catalina Island in FS4
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 15:47:00 GMT

From article <15938@auspex-gw.auspex.com>, by tpickett@auspex.com (Tom Pickett):
> In article <1992Dec15.235451.28651@nmsu.edu>, bboswell@dante.NMSU.Edu 
> (BOSWELL) writes:
>> BTW if assuming you fly a retract and you did put the gear down at the  
>> appropriate time, how's putting the flaps up going to result in a gear-up  
>> landing?  Most retracts I've flown in (all have been Cessnas) Cessna has 
> gone  
>> to great efforts to distinguish the gear knob from the electric flap 
> switch...
> 
> 
> This is one of the more popular modes of inadvertant gear retractions
> in aviation.  In spite of all the efforts to make the gear switch
> different from the flap switch, like putting them on different sides of
> the cockpit, making them different shapes and sizes, people still 
> manage to do it occaisionally.  
> 
> Cessna is better than anyone (IMHO) at differentiating these controls.

With today's talking-car technology, they can probably put a small device 
there that will go "Gear Up, Gear Up", or would the pilot ignore that 
too? 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators