20,741
edits
Status of AI in FlightGear: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{FGCquote | |||
| | |||
# the built-in AI is extremely simple, and there's no FDM used, and aircraft systems (AP etc) are also not simulated used, the hard-coded AI is agnostic to weather/turbulence<br/> | |||
# [[bombable]] is bit more advanced, but works around these limitations in scripting space through scripted FDMs and pilots - it would be possible to create a script "bot" (pilot) that actually flies the thing, and that deals with failures.<br/> | |||
# weather/gusts and wind shear should be possible to simulate through "advanced weather" (also scripted)<br/> | |||
# failure management is meanwhile also scripted through galvedro's work: [[A_Failure_Management_Framework_for_FlightGear]]<br/> | |||
# bombable is pretty sophisticated, and could also be extended with NN for better AI | |||
|{{cite web |url=http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=213439#p213439 | |||
|title=<nowiki>Re: How advanced is FlightGear's AI?</nowiki> | |||
|author=<nowiki>Hooray</nowiki> | |||
|date=<nowiki>Wed Jun 25</nowiki> | |||
}} | |||
}} | |||
== AI Scenarios vs. Scripting == | == AI Scenarios vs. Scripting == | ||