Jump to content

Would love a physical GPU unit


Hardik Ramnani

Recommended Posts

Hardik Ramnani

It sometimes really ruins it having GPU connected but not actually having a physical one connected in the exterior view lol, If you guys could model it please it would really be amazing! I mean modelling a small unit shouldn't really be that difficult though again idk might be hard as well lol

 

  • Like 8
Link to post
Lefteris Kalamaras

Hi Hardik,

I love your suggestion, but it is more suitable for something like GSX to add, I think! Have you posted that request over to their forum?

Link to post
Dmitrij Nazarenko

Other addons (i.e. NGX, Q400) usually add GPU/ASU/etc. themselves. Don't see why you can't implement this feature yourself, instead of asking us to request this feature from a 3rd party...

Small visual detail, but it adds a lot to the immersion.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Josh Akehurst

GSX don't even have GPU implementation so that wouldn't happen, especially for people that don't own GSX. Is it really that difficult to texture a cube? PMDG, Majestic, Aerosoft all do it, so why can FSL?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Teddy Rudin

Plus we pay a premium for your product and this is the response. Go ask another company for a feature for our aircraft. Really doesn't make FSL sound very connected too its fanbase/community. If pretty much every other mainstream aircraft developer can implement one I don't see what's so difficult about doing one.

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Hardik Ramnani
On 9/3/2018 at 2:51 PM, Lefteris Kalamaras said:

Hi Hardik,

I love your suggestion, but it is more suitable for something like GSX to add, I think! Have you posted that request over to their forum?

GSX does not have any sort of GPU implementation feature, GPU's are modeled and implemented by most of the other a/c developers, would really love to have one with the fslabs a320/319, It's just a simple feature please if you could acknowledge :)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Hardik Ramnani
41 minutes ago, Teddy Rudin said:

Plus we pay a premium for your product and this is the response. Go ask another company for a feature for our aircraft. Really doesn't make FSL sound very connected too its fanbase/community. If pretty much every other mainstream aircraft developer can implement one I don't see what's so difficult about doing one.

 

100% Agree, for the amount we pay I think it is obvious that we get such simple features..

  • Like 1
Link to post
Lefteris Kalamaras
37 minutes ago, Teddy Rudin said:

Plus we pay a premium for your product and this is the response. Go ask another company for a feature for our aircraft. Really doesn't make FSL sound very connected too its fanbase/community. If pretty much every other mainstream aircraft developer can implement one I don't see what's so difficult about doing one.

 

I would not disagree with you, should a GPU unit actually be "a feature of the aircraft" - i.e. if one would be carried around in the cargo bay, or some other equally unrealistic solution (like these other developers add). Instead, ground powering is a feature of the airport provisions. The aircraft itself carries an auxiliary power unit, it's the APU, which we modeled.

I suggested GSX because at one point or another, I recall some such conversations taking place with Umberto where a GPU unit was in the works or in thought or something similar.

Now- I would *really* appreciate it if we kept the discussion tone down, rather than be ready to point fingers or throw accusations about how connected we want to be to our community or fan base. We are all equally happy simmers here.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Hardik Ramnani
Just now, Lefteris Kalamaras said:

I would not disagree with you, should a GPU unit actually be "a feature of the aircraft" - i.e. if one would be carried around in the cargo bay, or some other equally unrealistic solution (like these other developers add). Instead, ground powering is a feature of the airport provisions. The aircraft itself carries an auxiliary power unit, it's the APU, which we modeled.

I suggested GSX because at one point or another, I recall some such conversations taking place with Umberto where a GPU unit was in the works or in thought or something similar.

Now- I would *really* appreciate it if we kept the discussion tone down, rather than be ready to point fingers or throw accusations about how connected we want to be to our community or fan base. We are all equally happy simmers here.

Totally understandable, but what if GSX do not come out with any physical GPU in the future? what if GSX v2 is with 0 existence of an airport GPU? Will you then implement this feature? because we cannot be stuck our entire lives with an imaginary GPU being connected to the aircraft right?

Link to post
Lefteris Kalamaras
Just now, Hardik Ramnani said:

100% Agree, for the amount we pay I think it is obvious that we get such simple features..

I agree it would be a simple feature to add a GPU unit, hidden until necessary, but each airport carries its own type and solution.

To suggest that we carry a single GPU unit to be modeled and used world-wide would be akin to having a single fuel truck that would be responsible for refueling, which I claim would be unrealistic. Instead, I feel this would really be much better done by an add-on such as GSX with appropriately and accurately modeled units as per the geographic location and airport configuration.

Link to post
Hardik Ramnani
1 minute ago, Lefteris Kalamaras said:

I agree it would be a simple feature to add a GPU unit, hidden until necessary, but each airport carries its own type and solution.

To suggest that we carry a single GPU unit to be modeled and used world-wide would be akin to having a single fuel truck that would be responsible for refueling, which I claim would be unrealistic. Instead, I feel this would really be much better done by an add-on such as GSX with appropriately and accurately modeled units as per the geographic location and airport configuration.

Totally agree but my post above if you have any thoughts on that as well please :) 

Link to post
Lefteris Kalamaras
Just now, Hardik Ramnani said:

Totally agree but my post above if you have any thoughts on that as well please :) 

I still feel that pressure should be placed towards GSX - what if they didn't have moving jetways? Should we carry those too? What about the new features that GSX are adding?

What belongs to an aircraft, we will model (within reason). What belongs to an airport should be done by the airport and/or utilities developers.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Hardik Ramnani
6 minutes ago, Lefteris Kalamaras said:

I would not disagree with you, should a GPU unit actually be "a feature of the aircraft" - i.e. if one would be carried around in the cargo bay, or some other equally unrealistic solution (like these other developers add). Instead, ground powering is a feature of the airport provisions. The aircraft itself carries an auxiliary power unit, it's the APU, which we modeled.

I suggested GSX because at one point or another, I recall some such conversations taking place with Umberto where a GPU unit was in the works or in thought or something similar.

Now- I would *really* appreciate it if we kept the discussion tone down, rather than be ready to point fingers or throw accusations about how connected we want to be to our community or fan base. We are all equally happy simmers here.

They have mentioned a GSX GPU unit to be implemented, but that was said in 2016, so you can already imagine how long the wait has been and we still don't know if it will be a part of GSX v2 or not..

ScreenShot8.thumb.png.e4a23d2e6dc99d5e132b90a6f5868093.png

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Hardik Ramnani
1 minute ago, Lefteris Kalamaras said:

I still feel that pressure should be placed towards GSX - what if they didn't have moving jetways? Should we carry those too? What about the new features that GSX are adding?

What belongs to an aircraft, we will model (within reason). What belongs to an airport should be done by the airport and/or utilities developers.

Agree with you sir totally support your opinions let us hope that GSX comes out with GPUs in this version..btw you guys have done an immense job with the aircraft totally appreciated it :)

Link to post
Dmitrij Nazarenko
57 minutes ago, Lefteris Kalamaras said:

I would not disagree with you, should a GPU unit actually be "a feature of the aircraft" - i.e. if one would be carried around in the cargo bay, or some other equally unrealistic solution (like these other developers add). Instead, ground powering is a feature of the airport provisions. The aircraft itself carries an auxiliary power unit, it's the APU, which we modeled.

I suggested GSX because at one point or another, I recall some such conversations taking place with Umberto where a GPU unit was in the works or in thought or something similar.

Now- I would *really* appreciate it if we kept the discussion tone down, rather than be ready to point fingers or throw accusations about how connected we want to be to our community or fan base. We are all equally happy simmers here.

 

54 minutes ago, Lefteris Kalamaras said:

I agree it would be a simple feature to add a GPU unit, hidden until necessary, but each airport carries its own type and solution.

To suggest that we carry a single GPU unit to be modeled and used world-wide would be akin to having a single fuel truck that would be responsible for refueling, which I claim would be unrealistic. Instead, I feel this would really be much better done by an add-on such as GSX with appropriately and accurately modeled units as per the geographic location and airport configuration.

Those are not very good points, in my opinion. In this case, why did you model A/C power from GPU? After all, it's not part of the A/C.

Also you modeled wheel chocks. Those are not a part of A/C either, and different airports might carry different chocks. I don't think any of us care which model of GPU you would add. Simply having one would boost the immersion of A/C for, I think, many of us.

Moreover I think the "tone" came from the fact you suggesting users to request features from a 3rd party addon for your product. This is not very... polite either. And like mentioned before, not all people have GSX. Will you provide them that product? Will you offer a discount to people who already own it?

Alternatively you can make a GPU addon and charge for that :D

  • Like 1
Link to post
Pedro_Carvalho

I'll add my opinion to this topic.

I understand both arguments here. Ideally the GPU would belong to the airport modeller or GSX and it would be more detailed (FSLabs opinion). However the users prefer a simpler unit designed by FSLabs that could be deployed on default airports and be independent from GSX at the expense of less realism.

Bottom line is that the easiest way to get a GPU represented would be by having FSLabs modelling a simple cart and displaying it when connected. It would be far from ideal but it would solve the problem instantly for everyone. If GSX implements this feature (and Umberto already talked about a rope simulation on the SDK that would lead to a power cable simulation connecting to the bridge) we could simply exclude the FSLabs GPU and use GSX's. Until then, with a few polygons for the cart representation, FSLabs could provide us with a temporary solution that would increase the realism (since we have no GPU displayed). I vote for that.

Edited by Pedro_Carvalho
typo
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Tim Vancauwenbergh

A while ago I have already suggested GSX to have a kind of software kit which enables scenery developers to assign ground power pits. If a ground power cable is abcent a physical GPU would show up. Wonder if they did listen...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Daniele Pistollato
100% Agree, for the amount we pay I think it is obvious that we get such simple features..
Or a simple pushback feature without chat and similar things... I was forced to buy gsx for a simple pushback module (start stop right left without chat and procedures would have had all my appreciation)
Link to post
Philippe Dosne

I totally agree with Lefteris on this one. If GSX are in the business of providing Airport utilities then its their job to implement GPU. There is no argument there in my opinion.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Hardik Ramnani
1 hour ago, koen meier said:

Level 2 has jetway gpu units which work. So first connect up the jetway then you have power.

You don't get jetways at all the airports, and also the jetway does not physically connect a wire to the aircraft in GSX v2

  • Like 1
Link to post
Koen Meier
7 hours ago, Hardik Ramnani said:

You don't get jetways at all the airports, and also the jetway does not physically connect a wire to the aircraft in GSX v2

i know but now the GPU state is not really handy if the GPU is on the jetway.

Link to post
  • 2 weeks later...
Mahmoud Fadli

My two cents: I don't think it matters whether a physical GPU is there or not. In my view at least, I didn't pay a premium for an outside GPU unit. It was for accurate modeling of FDE and systems. I agree with Lefteris: the airplane should model what happens when the GPU is plugged in, but not the actual GPU. I think it's a small, inconsequential issue. GSX, at least level 2, already models GPUs being plugged in to the aircraft via jetways, and if they're already working on modeling a physical GPU unit, all the better.

If anything, the only feature I'd like to see (and I know I'm sounding like a baby now lol) is the ability to manually turn on or off the cabin lights :).

  • Like 1
Link to post
On 9/6/2018 at 2:25 PM, Lefteris Kalamaras said:

I still feel that pressure should be placed towards GSX - what if they didn't have moving jetways? Should we carry those too? What about the new features that GSX are adding?

What belongs to an aircraft, we will model (within reason). What belongs to an airport should be done by the airport and/or utilities developers.

With all due respect, I think it is more "unrealistic" to have no GPU rather then to have no GPU in order to avoid having an unrealistic livery/model around the world........ Many other addons have included GPUs for many years now :) 

Link to post
Alejandro Lopez
On 9/6/2018 at 3:25 PM, Lefteris Kalamaras said:

I still feel that pressure should be placed towards GSX - what if they didn't have moving jetways? Should we carry those too? What about the new features that GSX are adding?

What belongs to an aircraft, we will model (within reason). What belongs to an airport should be done by the airport and/or utilities developers. 

The difference is that jetways are connected externally (GSX, SODE) and the GPU, ASU and air condition is connected via the MCDU of the own aircraft. So by the same rule, FSLabs would need to have a physycal device of this.

Link to post
Hardik Ramnani
4 minutes ago, alejandro97 said:

The difference is that jetways are connected externally (GSX, SODE) and the GPU, ASU and air condition is connected via the MCDU of the own aircraft. So by the same rule, FSLabs would need to have a physycal device of this.

We never asked for jetways -_- that's a scenery related thing which has nothing to do with the aircraft, GSX won't implement GPUs anytime soon, other a/c developers have added a physical gpu unit so idk what they thought there which we cant think of..having a physical gpu adds into a bit, we are just asking for a simple model which is pretty easy to make nothing fancy, fsalsb could make a temporary one until gsx comes out with gpu integration, cause if you see with gsx lvl 2 they do have gpu integration but without having any physical cable connections from the jetway to the a/c which makes me wonder where is the power being transferred from looks like wireless gpu tbh lol

Link to post
Andrew Wilson
12 minutes ago, Hardik Ramnani said:

GSX won't implement GPUs anytime soon

That's only speculation. We work with the GSX team every week. Sit tight - more features are coming.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Hardik Ramnani
3 minutes ago, Andrew Wilson said:

That's only speculation. We work with the GSX team every week. Sit tight - more features are coming.

Yeah I mean according to the utter disgrace gsx level 2 is I based my comments, i'll wait for the GPU then let's see hope it comes out before I get married Kappa

Link to post
  • 6 months later...
Steve Sumner
On 9/6/2018 at 8:25 AM, Lefteris Kalamaras said:

I still feel that pressure should be placed towards GSX - what if they didn't have moving jetways? Should we carry those too? What about the new features that GSX are adding?

What belongs to an aircraft, we will model (within reason). What belongs to an airport should be done by the airport and/or utilities developers.

I just spent 150.00 for your product, and this is the attitude we get. Buyers remorse.

Link to post
Ramon De Valencia
58 minutes ago, Steve Sumner said:

I just spent 150.00 for your product, and this is the attitude we get. Buyers remorse.

if you read again the features of the aircraft it doesn't have anything related to "external gpu", why are complaining about paying 150 for it?

come on guys, we have the best piece of aircraft simulation and you are worried about not having an object attached to it, really?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Bill McLauchlan
On 9/6/2018 at 1:28 PM, Josh Akehurst said:

GSX don't even have GPU implementation so that wouldn't happen, especially for people that don't own GSX. Is it really that difficult to texture a cube? PMDG, Majestic, Aerosoft all do it, so why can FSL?

They do in the latest GSX Built into the Airbridges.

Link to post
  • 2 months later...
  • 5 weeks later...
Hardik Ramnani
On 9/6/2018 at 6:51 PM, Hardik Ramnani said:

Totally understandable, but what if GSX do not come out with any physical GPU in the future? what if GSX v2 is with 0 existence of an airport GPU? Will you then implement this feature? because we cannot be stuck our entire lives with an imaginary GPU being connected to the aircraft right?

looks like GSX hasnt yet implemented any sort of GPU except on the jetway..still hoping..

Link to post
  • 3 months later...
Ralf Goertz
On 9/28/2018 at 2:19 PM, Hardik Ramnani said:

GSX won't implement GPUs anytime soon

 

On 9/28/2018 at 2:33 PM, Andrew Wilson said:

That's only speculation. We work with the GSX team every week. Sit tight - more features are coming.

Over a year later!

FSL A320 and GSX 2 look amazing in outside view, only one thing is missing... THE GPU

  • Like 1
Link to post
  • 1 year later...
Ryjan Alabed

Living in 2021 and reading these comments and realising that no GPU was added yet.. . Is it GSX that doesnt add one or what is going on? It is really ugly to see a Plane from the outside without a GPU as already mentioned in this thread many times lol

Link to post
Norman Blackburn
57 minutes ago, Ryjan Alabed said:

Living in 2021 and reading these comments and realising that no GPU was added yet.. . Is it GSX that doesnt add one or what is going on? It is really ugly to see a Plane from the outside without a GPU as already mentioned in this thread many times lol

GSX has had one for quite a while and we have integrated it @Ryjan Alabed from before it was available.

Link to post
stephen speak
5 minutes ago, Norman Blackburn said:

GSX has had one for quite a while and we have integrated it @Ryjan Alabed from before it was available.

I was at Geneva yesterday and had a physical one connected..was on stand not gate 

Link to post
×
×
  • Create New...