Talk:Table of models
Included in latest release?
I'm thinking that it might be a good idea to have a column indicating that whether the aircraft is included in the latest release or not. I have not checked this list carefully yet but I suspect there is quite a number of aircraft in it that were not included in the 1.0.0 release. I do think it makes good sense to list and describe new aircraft that have not yet been included in a FlightGear release here (preferably they should be in FlightGear/CVS, though) but not indicating which are in the latest release and which are newer might confuse users and increase the support burden. It shouldn't be too difficult to fill all empty slots in the column with the new version number (or a "Yes") when the next release occurs.
Cheers, AndersG 18:57, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
- Yes, this a good idea. I will add such a column to the list. Fg 20:13, 17 September 2008 (EDT)
Fresh list?
After 6 years I think this list format has run its course. With the next version it would be nice to start a fresh list. Thoughts? Fg (talk) 17:56, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
- Not sure what you'd like to do, but one thing to consider would be to merge all the version cells into a "first available in release.." field. 99.9% of the aircraft are introduced and never withdrawn, so it makes little sense to mention every single FlightGear version.
- Gijs (talk) 19:26, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
- There is some very old aircraft that have exactly this problem, they work only with an old version only. However, I still like this idea for a new page. I am not sure what is best but its nice to hear some different ideas. It may be that I start another table in the same format, but at version 3 not 1. Fg (talk) 13:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
- I have some thoughts from earlier in User:Johan G/Adding information to the table of models though it would make it nearly unmaintainable without some kind of tool(s).
- —Johan G (Talk | contribs) 12:28, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
- There is some very old aircraft that have exactly this problem, they work only with an old version only. However, I still like this idea for a new page. I am not sure what is best but its nice to hear some different ideas. It may be that I start another table in the same format, but at version 3 not 1. Fg (talk) 13:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Merge and redesign
As well as merging the article List of models for FlightGear 3.4, I would suggest a redesign of this table so that it is much easier to maintain. Listing all FlightGear versions is a waste of time - we only need to list the first FG version added. I suggest something like:
| Craft type | Model(s) | Manufacturer | First FG version supported | FDM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aircraft | A-6E Intruder | Grumman, Northrop Grumman | 1.0 | YASim |
The "Model(s)" column could then include the versions in different hangars. All the tables could also be merged into one, and info such as "Retired or deprecated" added to the "Note" column.
Bugman (talk) 05:39, 21 November 2017 (EST)
Actually, thinking about it, it would be better to have one row per aircraft, rather than mixing different versions from different hangars on one line.
Bugman (talk) 05:50, 21 November 2017 (EST)
Then the table could look like:
| Craft type | Model | Hangar | Manufacturer | First FG version supported | FDM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aircraft | A-6E Intruder | FGAddon | Grumman, Northrop Grumman | 1.0 | YASim |
The {{for}} template can then be used in the "Note" column to cross-link to the other versions of the craft, for easier reader navigation of the table.