A user recently reported that the associated lights were not positioned properly when using custom models formatted for FSX. We have confirmed that a similar problem exists using AFLT stock FSX models.
After exhaustive testing, I can only conclude that the underlying problem is how FSX computes the location of objects attached to FSX-formatted models.
There is no such issue when using FS9 .mdls - with either FS9 or FSX. The formats of FS9 and FSX .mdl files differs greatly. Consequently, FSX uses different positioning algorithms when interpreting FSX .mdls than it does with FS9 .mdls. That being said, the format of the attachpoint-related content of both FS9 and FSX .mdl file generated by AFLT, (i.e., the ATTO block) is identical - and does not contain any positioning data. Nothing that AFLT does affects position; the .mdl file specifies the position of any attachpoints. If a light displays at all, AFLT has done its job. The model data and the associated processing in FSX control the positioning of the attached object, i.e., the light(s).
When I initially developed AFLT, I had hopes it could become compatible with P3Dv2. That's why AFLT permits use of FSX .mdl files. However, that hope has now been dashed. Based on its recent announcement, Lockheed Martin will remove compatibility with legacy (FS8/9) technology from its next release, so AFLT cannot be made compatible with P3D using current technology - and LM has not announced any replacement technology. So, the only pressing reason to use FSX .mdls is gone.
I know of nothing that can be accomplished in AFLT using FSX models that can't be accomplished with FS9 .mdls. Accordingly, users who experience light positioning problems when using FSX .mdls should replace them with FS9 counterparts.
Don
After exhaustive testing, I can only conclude that the underlying problem is how FSX computes the location of objects attached to FSX-formatted models.
There is no such issue when using FS9 .mdls - with either FS9 or FSX. The formats of FS9 and FSX .mdl files differs greatly. Consequently, FSX uses different positioning algorithms when interpreting FSX .mdls than it does with FS9 .mdls. That being said, the format of the attachpoint-related content of both FS9 and FSX .mdl file generated by AFLT, (i.e., the ATTO block) is identical - and does not contain any positioning data. Nothing that AFLT does affects position; the .mdl file specifies the position of any attachpoints. If a light displays at all, AFLT has done its job. The model data and the associated processing in FSX control the positioning of the attached object, i.e., the light(s).
When I initially developed AFLT, I had hopes it could become compatible with P3Dv2. That's why AFLT permits use of FSX .mdl files. However, that hope has now been dashed. Based on its recent announcement, Lockheed Martin will remove compatibility with legacy (FS8/9) technology from its next release, so AFLT cannot be made compatible with P3D using current technology - and LM has not announced any replacement technology. So, the only pressing reason to use FSX .mdls is gone.
I know of nothing that can be accomplished in AFLT using FSX models that can't be accomplished with FS9 .mdls. Accordingly, users who experience light positioning problems when using FSX .mdls should replace them with FS9 counterparts.
Don
