MSFS24 Ever seen this with your custom model?

[gouaill]

Hi,

I just finished a bridge for a scenery in FS2024 but for the first time since many years and many dozens of custom models I created, I encounter this result : a lot of line and shapes around the bridge that were not there in the design tool and Model convertor X tool. Same routine as always and after a lot of attempts, same bizare shapes that differ from an attempt to another.
Any ideas of what could be done ?
Thanks!

Result:

In Model converter tool:

Final product in Sketchup:

 

[Christian Bahr]

Interesting image!

Do you perhaps have an optimization modifier in your model? I know something like this from my experience with mesh optimizations. When optimizing characters, very similar images emerge. For me, however, this only occurs in the 3-D software, later in the sim everything is fine.

 

[gouaill]

Hi, no such thing on this model. The only thing I added are LODs after the first try to see if it would change something. I got a flash this morning, may it be related to the nearby model you see on the right? So this is the bridge far alone, a close view and a father view:

 

[Christian Bahr]

I would have guessed a modifier. Does the bridge interfere? I don't know. Nothing is out of the question, but it's rather unlikely. Can you exclude the bridge with a rectangle?

 

[gouaill]

Hi Christian,
Thanks for the suggestion. There is no bridge in the default FS scenery, so nothing to exclude (if this is what you meant). And tested elsewhere in the woods change nothing.
I removed the cabin on one side expecting that it would be source of the problem (spikes come from there) as it is more complex with a few images inside, as the real one is sort of a museum (see pics). But this is not helping.
About a modifier, my understanding of what it is tells me it is a tool from Blender, not Sketchup. If I put one, it was unintentionnaly.
Thanks again

Inside the cabin:

A test without this cabin:

 

[V-Pilot]

I had something similar happened to me a couple year ago. The "apply modifiers" option was not ON in the MSFS exporter. I see you are modeling with SketchUp which might have a similar option.

 

[GaryGB]

Hello:

IIUC, this is Parc national des Hautes‑Gorges-de-la-Rivière‑Malbaie ...bridge and dam.

That is a beautiful area to see in MSFS when this project is finished.

The bridge span is 77 Meters / 253 Feet according to Google Earth Desktop Edition, but I do not think the Blender MSFS Exporter, or the MSFS SDK Compiler should have difficulty processing that into single / multiple LODs for either 2020 or 2024.


The spikes suggest that the source object 3D geometry has been skewed and is being misinterpreted by Blender, as you stated it previously appears normal in Sketchup and MCX, prior to import / processing via Blender.

Although I am neither a fan or user of Blender other than occasional tests, IIRC, there are very few reports of skewed geometry.


AFAIK, MCX continues to use the "ASSIMP" Open Asset Import Library for exports, which may cause distorted Collada DAE files.


Personally, I would first make a copy of the Sketchup project, and explode all Components and Groups before Making Unique Textures, then doing a Purge Unused ...prior to export to MCX.


I would export from Sketchup and/or MCX in another file format, preferably glTF ...prior to import for processing via Blender.


I recommend use of Samuel Tallet's Sketchup plugin Ruby scripts (aka "Extensions") for working with glTF files:

https://github.com/SamuelTallet/SketchUp-PBR-Plugin/blob/master/docs/README.md

https://sketchucation.com/plugin/2101-pbr

https://extensions.sketchup.com/extension/052071e5-6c19-4f02-a7e8-fcfcc28a2fd8/gltf-exporter


I prefer processing via MCX rather than via Blender, as it does output not only glTF but an entire MSFS project structure.


I shall be interested in seeing how this works out for you with a simple change of MCX' export file format.

GaryGB

 

[gouaill]

I had something similar happened to me a couple year ago. The "apply modifiers" option was not ON in the MSFS exporter. I see you are modeling with SketchUp which might have a similar option.

Hi, thanks for the hint. I have not found any similar option in Sketchup or in MCX. I have not used modifier so is it still a possibility? I don't know. Will continue to dig for this solution.

 

[gouaill]

Hello:

IIUC, this is Parc national des Hautes‑Gorges-de-la-Rivière‑Malbaie ...bridge and dam.

That is a beautiful area to see in MSFS when this project is finished.

The bridge span is 77 Meters / 253 Feet according to Google Earth Desktop Edition, but I do not think the Blender MSFS Exporter, or the MSFS SDK Compiler should have difficulty processing that into single / multiple LODs for either 2020 or 2024.


The spikes suggest that the source object 3D geometry has been skewed and is being misinterpreted by Blender, as you stated it previously appears normal in Sketchup and MCX, prior to import / processing via Blender.

Although I am neither a fan or user of Blender other than occasional tests, IIRC, there are very few reports of skewed geometry.


AFAIK, MCX continues to use the "ASSIMP" Open Asset Import Library for exports, which may cause distorted Collada DAE files.


Personally, I would first make a copy of the Sketchup project, and explode all Components and Groups before Making Unique Textures, then doing a Purge Unused ...prior to export to MCX.


I would export from Sketchup and/or MCX in another file format, preferably glTF ...prior to import for processing via Blender.


I recommend use of Samuel Tallet's Sketchup plugin Ruby scripts (aka "Extensions") for working with glTF files:

https://github.com/SamuelTallet/SketchUp-PBR-Plugin/blob/master/docs/README.md

https://sketchucation.com/plugin/2101-pbr

https://extensions.sketchup.com/extension/052071e5-6c19-4f02-a7e8-fcfcc28a2fd8/gltf-exporter


I prefer processing via MCX rather than via Blender, as it does output not only glTF but an entire MSFS project structure.


I shall be interested in seeing how this works out for you with a simple change of MCX' export file format.

GaryGB

Hi Gary,
Yes, this is the Hautes-Gorge-de-la-Rivière-Malbaie NP and will be included the Grand-Jardins N Park too. A few other custom buildings are ready now.

A lot to understand from your advises. This is my simple work flow to clarify the potential location of the issue:
1- Draw a model in Sketchup. Very simple model. No component. Imported textures. No unique texture however. I may check if this could help. I just applyed Purge unused and Fix problem options (no issue found) and will test in FS2024.
2- Export in Collada file
3- Import in MCX
4- Export object in gltf format. In FS2020 I was doing LODs before exporting. In FS2024 with the LOD issue, I don't do it. This model ahs about 38 000 triangles, so it is no a so big model.
5- Rescale all textures in power of two with Paint. MCX is supposed to do it but I never been able to make it work.
6- Put gltf and textures in two separate files and put them in the PackageSources file of the scenery. Now int FS2024, I create texturename.XML files for each texture. Manually, this is a pain.
7- Add the model as a Modelib format in the scenery, Build the scenery and add it to the scenery.

No use of Blender even if I installed it to try.
I'll check Samuel Tallet's Sketchup plugin Ruby scripts

 

[rhumbaflappy]

Without the actual model, this is just a guessing game. Also, 3dMax or Blender are the preferred tools. If you use Sketchup, you will run across problems from time to time. If this is the only model example you have problems with, couldn't you just remake it, perhaps without textures, and see if you can reproduce the problem?
Again, give a link to the model if you want a fix. Consider learning Blender or $3dMax. And this thread should have been in a more appropriate forum. It isn't an airport design problem. It appears to be a 3d modeling problem.

 

[GaryGB]

https://www.reddit.com/r/opengl/comments/s6rjlm/assimp_file_loading_error_wierd_behavior/

Without the actual model, this is just a guessing game. Also, 3dMax or Blender are the preferred tools. If you use Sketchup, you will run across problems from time to time. If this is the only model example you have problems with, couldn't you just remake it, perhaps without textures, and see if you can reproduce the problem?
Again, give a link to the model if you want a fix. Consider learning Blender or $3dMax. And this thread should have been in a more appropriate forum. It isn't an airport design problem. It appears to be a 3d modeling problem.

I did not notice where this thread originated by the time I replied, but many thanks to Dick for moving it to Sketchup forum.

It is good to have a Sketchup forum, as Sketchup is here to stay, and is preferred by many here for FS 3D content generation.


It is likely that this thread will involve at least some relatively (brief ?) Sketchup methodology discussion.

Then, IMHO, it will progress forward (...into the past ?) into a (another) discussion of MCX' continued use of ASSIMP library.

Even without seeing the 3D model (which I bet gouaill may be so kind as to allow examination of via a direct message ?), I'm going to "speculate" the cause may prove to be misinterpretation of 3D model geometry by MCX via ASSIMP DAE processing.


While it may be reasonable to infer that Sketchup's built-in Collada DAE Exporter processing of 3D model geometry during export 'sets the stage' for ASSIMP to make some incorrect ASS(u)MP-tions, after years of reports showing this type of bizarre geometry skewing in (certain) Collada DAE files exported by MCX, it would be reasonable to try and find out what scenarios of geometry cause this to occur, based on the ASS(u)MP-ion MCX is hell-bent-and-determined to continue using the ASSIMP library DLL to do its 'grunt' work.

IIRC, Arno's original MCX Collada DAE importer/exporter which AFAIK, he coded himself years ago, had no such errors occur.

IIUC, that was before he began implementing use of ASSIMP library.

But, that said, I am not aware of any other reports of skewed geometry derived from use of ASSIMP with non-Collada DAE files.


While it may be tempting to draw A SIMPle conclusion the original 'guilty party' is Sketchup's default exporter, I say PROVE IT.


Samuel Tallet's Sketchup plugin Ruby script (Extension) Universal Importer v1.2.6
https://sketchucation.com/pluginstore?pln=universal_importer

...successfully uses that same ASSIMP library for import of IIRC, 50+ 3D model file formats without deriving incorrect geometry.

Not only that, but IIRC, it can decimate , it also offers Axis orientation change and assignment of scalar units ...all on the fly.

But... it only works during import to Sketchup.


Hey, wait... IIUC, might 'import' with ASSIMP be when the incorrect inference may occur in MCX ?

Uhm, well... nope, it displays OK in MCX 3D preview; anything that "goes wrong" happens during export of (certain) 3D models.


So the bottom line inference to be drawn, IMHO, is something 'goes wrong' when MCX processes (certain) Collada DAE's.


If a 3D model displays properly immediately after import into MCX, what else may cause MCX distorted glTF geometry export ?


We have been here before; I do not have 'some' URLs available, but I can find threads if FSDEV threads are not "re-addressed".

We have seen rare occurrences of this type of MCX geometry export distortion previously with Sketchup Collada DAEs.


IIRC, we also saw- and cited- some evidence that ASSIMP itself had intermittent bugs over time which AFAIK, were all fixed.

https://www.reddit.com/r/opengl/comments/s6rjlm/assimp_file_loading_error_wierd_behavior/

We may point a finger of accusation at Collada DAE processing by both Sketchup's default exporter, and MCX' use of ASSIMP.


I have no Export problem in Sketchup as I use other 3D file exporters / formats; if I want a Collada DAE, I export a Google KMZ.

MCX imports / processes Google KMZ files and exports without distortion (IIRC, this excellent importer was written by Arno).


So, I recommend not using Sketchup's default Collada DAE exporter with 3D models that incur distorted geometry via MCX.


And as for "Exporters" that impose / incur rare and unwanted results, Sketchup, Blender, MSFS all have a lot to answer for.

Notice that Asobo maintains the Blender MSFS exporter at an arm's length, and makes extensive use of input by 3rd parties ?

Might Asobo "officially" take credit for a mature / 'trouble-free' MSFS exporter after more sins are expiated ...at a safe distance ?

GaryGB

 

[Christian Bahr]

Hi Christian,
Thanks for the suggestion. There is no bridge in the default FS scenery, so nothing to exclude (if this is what you meant).

Yes, I meant the bridge. It looked like an extruded bridge was showing through in the pictures. I guess I was mistaken.

 

[GaryGB]

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/t...msfs-2024-levels-of-detail.459578/post-930731

Hi Gary,

Yes, this is the Hautes-Gorge-de-la-Rivière-Malbaie NP and will be included the Grand-Jardins N Park too. A few other custom buildings are ready now.

A lot to understand from your advises. This is my simple work flow to clarify the potential location of the issue:

1- Draw a model in Sketchup. Very simple model. No component. Imported textures. No unique texture however. I may check if this could help. I just applied Purge unused and Fix problem options (no issue found) and will test in FS2024.
2- Export in Collada file
3- Import in MCX
4- Export object in gltf format. In FS2020 I was doing LODs before exporting. In FS2024 with the LOD issue, I don't do it. This model has about 38 000 triangles, so it is no a so big model.
5- Re-scale all textures in power of two with Paint. MCX is supposed to do it but I never been able to make it work.
6- Put gltf and textures in two separate files and put them in the PackageSources file of the scenery. Now int FS2024, I create texturename.XML files for each texture. Manually, this is a pain.
7- Add the model as a Modelib format in the scenery, Build the scenery and add it to the scenery.

No use of Blender even if I installed it to try.
I'll check Samuel Tallet's Sketchup plugin Ruby scripts

Sorry I mistakenly inferred based on others' posts, that you might be exporting a glTF from MCX for processing via Blender.


As to "Apply Modifiers", that phrase does not appear in MSFS SDK docs, so I assume this is a 3DSMAX and/or Blender thing ?:

https://www.google.com/search?q=site:+docs.flightsimulator.com+"apply+modifiers"&client=firefox-b-1-e&sca_esv=6f4cffb8fcc6cffb&channel=entpr&ei=ICMaaN6_MtX-ptQP5OWH6QY&ved=0ahUKEwjez46UjY-NAxVVv4kEHeTyIW0Q4dUDCBI&uact=5&oq=site:+docs.flightsimulator.com+"apply+modifiers"&gs_lp=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&sclient=gws-wiz-serp



As I recommended above, until we sort out what goes wrong with how MCX internally processes Collada DAE files imported via ASSIMP Library after export via Sketchup's default Collada DAE exporter, it is best to use another 3D file format to target MCX.

I have no Export problem in Sketchup as I use other 3D file exporters / formats; if I want a Collada DAE, I export a Google KMZ.

MCX imports / processes Google KMZ files and exports without distortion (IIRC, this excellent importer was written by Arno).

I quoted myself here, as it merits repeating, and is likely to be a quick solution.


NOTE: A Google KMZ file is a ZIP of a Collada DAE with all mapped textures and a Doc file that MCX can import.


Now that you are targeting MSFS, and are making a particularly interesting 3D model with a lot of texture detail, you may wish to explore the use of PBR texturing with Samuel Tallet's plugin Ruby scripts / extensions, and export glTF's for MCX to process.


Regarding the MCX work-flow targeting MSFS output, Arno has innovated many very helpful and useful features.

When you import your 3D model, if you use MCX Material Editor, you can:

* convert textures to current MSFS required file format

* re-format texture pixel arrays to Powers of Two / Multiples of Four

* copy processed textures to the target sub-folder in the MSFS project folder chain that MCX itself creates for you

* output the 3D model in the current required MSFS glTF 3D configuration with or without LODs

* optionally use the "MCX LOD Creation Tool" for LOD now reportedly "required" by MSFS 2024 output:

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/t...msfs-2024-levels-of-detail.459578/post-930731


I recently saw more about Arno's work with LOD creation, considering a recent mandatory imposition of LODs by MSFS 2024.

I hope Arno will pop in and and give us an update on where- and how- to access the "MCX LOD Creator tool" cited above.


If one reads the MCX Manual, it seems the tool is present internally in MCX to do certain tasks, but I see no discrete Menu item.

In the MCX PDF Manual for the April 25, 2025 MCX version, all we see is this:

AFAIK, most of us would welcome a pull-down Menu item to access this, but the 14th (!) icon from the Left is "Generate LODs".

I had seen a video years ago by Arno on that MCX LOD Creator tool as a work-in-progress that was awesome, as it showed dynamic 3D display updates in the MCX preview of what the tool can achieve using his then implemented LOD re-coding.

Unfortunately, like so many of Arno's excellent videos, it has gone offline and and he may be so busy lately, he has not had time to once again make his library of demo / tutorial videos available online.


Arno: Whatever happened to that video and the LOD edits that can be implemented- and seen live- in MCX' 3D preview ?


Back to the topic of a MCX work-flow to output MSFS scenery from imported Sketchup 3D models, I can post more if you wish.

I have some posts I can adapt that give a walk-through of how to use the MCX Material Editor to process textures for MSFS.

Perhaps Arno will also provide us with some more info on his latest work with the "MCX LOD Creator tool" ?


More to come, pending a reply by the OP, as to whether he opts for use of KMZ, glTF, or other Sketchup 3D file format exports., and whether he may be interested to learn how to use MCX as his all-encompassing solution for output of 3D scenery to MSFS.

And when the OP has time, I would love to see some more screenies of the 'nearby buildings', although they may not be involved in generating the anomalous geometry distortion that was the original basis for the this thread above.


[EDITED]

But in fairness to Dick's assertion one may "run across problems" with (certain ?) Sketchup files (via MCX / ASSIMP ?), one of the OP's screenshots does show complex geometry as BoundingBoxes involving multiple objects in a 'Group' (since the OP says he did not use 'Components').

Considering the 3D model's large horizontal extent, perhaps 'Exploding' all Groups may be a simple work-around for a "ASSIMP" bug ?

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/ever-seen-this-with-your-custom-model.459929/post-933189

[END_EDIT]

GaryGB

 

[gouaill]

Hi All,

Many things to learn from this experience.
First, sorry for the location of this thread, I realized after creating it that the 3D modeling section exists and should be a better place, and searched for a way to relocate it without success as probably that it's not an option available. So thanks Dick to have moved it. Also, thanks for suggesting Blender. I will take time to learn it when I have time somewhere between a ++full time job and 3 kids But I would like to use it to make representation of real rocks and cliffs (I have an old Nazare, Portugal scenery to completed that would benefit form that).

For the share of the model, I would not have hoped this level of help here so I haven't expected to share it. This is the original buggy model:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ba82...ey=kcjcyk4dip33rq267slxz1548&st=0ktp5uha&dl=0

So I tested the without texture model as suggested by Dick, without much luck:

I then used an old trick : create a new procject in Sketchup and import the collada file created from the original file. It makes some cleaning. This is what worked. However, it is not clear what was the issue.
I suspect the operation from MCX to import the collada file, as I saw an operation not happening in my other models : removing triangles with small area. The orginial model has 40 triangles removed and the one that worked has just 6. It is my only suspect for now.
Original:

New file:

Thanks Gary for the suggestion of Ruby script. I may need to dig how it can help. Notably for improving my textures. I will share you other picks of the others buildings as soon as I launch FS and you may suggest textures improvements potential as I don't know what to expect.

On that specific scenery topic, I would love if someone tells me if the vapor or mist effects that was available in FS2020 (NZQE scenery but maybe others) is still available in FS2024. I dig everyware without success. Smoke for house chimney also disappeared. The NZQE had a good one but is no longer there. I know they recreated the whole NZQE scenery for FS2024 but I don't know why and those thing went probably in garbage.

Also about MCX, I was using LODs tool with success in FS2020 but not now with FS2024 making desapearing object way too close. I'm using the big invisible square trick under my models, mostly for the small objects. I will need to enlarge the bridge's one btw. For the power of two tool, I may need to retest it as it was not working for me.

Thanks everyone for the help and feedback! I will come back surely for other issues that may come.

 

[gouaill]

Some images of the other buildings, the one you saw nearby the bridge and small chalets for rent in the Grands-Jardins National Park.
BTW, if you like that king of scenery, you may like my scenery of the Gaspesie National park : https://flightsim.to/file/89757/gaspesie-national-park-quebec
Please note that my sceneries and buildings are made with the intention of having a feeling of "being there" while flying so, appart from the bridge, not detailed with the intention of taking a walk, enter, ask for a coffee and read the newspaper on a good sofa. I estimate at least a 3 hours of work per model, on average.

 

[rhumbaflappy]

A suggestion is to not use spaces in any names. Not in mesh nodes (or parts) or in texture names. Use an underscore _ as it will help resolve problems in the future. Also, you'll need to start using LODs, as MSFS2024 is using them. Maybe you did create them in MCX, and that works OK.

Regarding the original bridge mesh problem, that was introduced by ModelConverterX. I could import the SKP file directly to Blender, then export, without the anomalies. You might want to go to that forum, and see what Arno thinks about the distortions, and your solution.

 

[GaryGB]

Hi All,

Many things to learn from this experience.
First, sorry for the location of this thread, I realized after creating it that the 3D modeling section exists and should be a better place, and searched for a way to relocate it without success as probably that it's not an option available. So thanks Dick to have moved it. Also, thanks for suggesting Blender. I will take time to learn it when I have time somewhere between a ++full time job and 3 kids But I would like to use it to make representation of real rocks and cliffs (I have an old Nazare, Portugal scenery to completed that would benefit form that).

For the share of the model, I would not have hoped this level of help here so I haven't expected to share it. This is the original buggy model:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ba82...ey=kcjcyk4dip33rq267slxz1548&st=0ktp5uha&dl=0

So I tested the without texture model as suggested by Dick, without much luck:

View attachment 96439


I then used an old trick: create a new project in Sketchup and import the Collada file created from the original file. It makes some cleaning. This is what worked. However, it is not clear what was the issue.

I suspect the operation from MCX to import the Collada file, as I saw an operation not happening in my other models: removing triangles with small area. The original model has 40 triangles removed and the one that worked has just 6. It is my only suspect for now.

Original:
View attachment 96441
New file:
View attachment 96442

Hi again:

Your 3D model was not to blame, IMHO; we need more info from Arno on how / when to change MCX Options for SmallTriangleLimit:

The MCX 04-25-2025 PDF Manual on Page 134, says:

"SmallTriangleLimit specifies the area in square meters of a small triangle.

Triangles with an area less than this value are removed during optimization of the object."


Arno: Is this a fixed value, and/or should it now be changed to be- / not be- 'proportional' to the horizontal size of a 3D model / LOD ?

To modify this value- or to disable it- do we / should we toggle "optimization of the object" On / Off before importing 3D models ?


FYI: An example scenario where the SmallTriangleLimit needed to be changed by the end user:

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/thanks-and-small-triangles-missing.437450/post-745403

Thanks Gary for the suggestion of Ruby script. I may need to dig how it can help. Notably for improving my textures. I will share you other picks of the others buildings as soon as I launch FS and you may suggest textures improvements potential as I don't know what to expect.

Your textures already look good in their current form; however, it can be a good enhancement to use PBR texturing in the future.


Samuel Tallet has produced a very useful PBR plugin Ruby script / extension to make PBR possible via glTFs in Sketchup 2017 and later.

Sliders in his PBR plugin GUI are comparable to what we might do with some PBR "factor" value settings in MCX or the "Materialize" app.

Texturing utilized in the PBR methods his plugin uses, are compatible with (1) way MSFS 2020 / 2024 SDK implements PBR textures.


I would be glad to discuss this method of 3D model enhancement when you are inclined to inquire as you work on your project(s).


I refer to the "Materialize" app in the context of this post:

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/t...ures-to-continue-edit-work.459431/post-929831

On that specific scenery topic, I would love if someone tells me if the vapor or mist effects that was available in FS2020 (NZQE scenery but maybe others) is still available in FS2024. I dig everywhere without success. Smoke for house chimney also disappeared. The NZQE had a good one but is no longer there. I know they recreated the whole NZQE scenery for FS2024 but I don't know why and those thing went probably in garbage.

I loaded up MSFS 2020, and wow, what a cool little airstrip !

I'll have to look for the Effect you refer to; there have been some rendering changes for Effects since MSFS 2020 RTM in both 2020 / 2024.


UPDATE: I found the Haze / Mist Effect you cited above, in the immediate vicinity of NZQE RWY at Gorge River on South Island NZ.

Perhaps this is placement of objects from the freely downloadable NZA Simulations Model Library or Milford Sound packages ?

https://flightsim.to/file/17597/nza-model-library

[EDITED]

OK, I found NZQE airstrip was actually supplied with MSFS 2020 default scenery as a special feature via NZASimulations scenery content


Placement may be in:

[MSFS-2020_Packages_Install_Path]\Official\OneStore\microsoft-airport-nzqe-gorgeriver\scenery\Microsoft\gorgeriver\nzqe_scn.bgl

This may be viewed in MCX via Object Placement feature:

* Zoom out to show New Zealand

* Zoom in on NZQE

NOTE: Perhaps we 'may' ID the GUID(s) that place Visual Effects by correlating with:

NZQE ModelLib BGL

...and/or:

* NZQE Visual Effect SPB files (de-compiled).


Visual Effects may be in:

[MSFS-2020_Packages_Install_Path]\Official\OneStore\microsoft-airport-nzqe-gorgeriver\VisualEffectLibs\nzasimulations\airport-nzqe-gorgeriver


Once we find the Effect objects placed, we can study how they were made, and possibly edit a copy in MSFS SDK Visual Effects Tool ?

I am not yet certain whether SPB files do their own Visual Effect object 'placement' ...independent of "SCN"-type BGL files.

[END_EDIT]


The "Haze" / "Mist" may be a default cloud placed AGL, or probably a MSFS Effect, since it appears dynamic, like most 'Effects', IIRC.


Perhaps we may ID what it is via DevMode Debug Menu feature options, or de-compiling NZQE file(s) to find how it is done.


IIRC, FS2Kx has translucent Sprite Effect (*.Fx) objects, and Prepar3D has a translucent (3D volumetric ?) Fog more realistic than FS2Kx.

Also about MCX, I was using LODs tool with success in FS2020 but not now with FS2024 making (a) disappearing object way too close. I'm using the big invisible square trick under my models, mostly for the small objects. I will need to enlarge the bridge's one btw.

As Dick has stated above... Asobo insists we discontinue this practice of using a big non-textured Face, and instead use actual LODs.

For the power of two tool, I may need to retest it as it was not working for me.

Thanks everyone for the help and feedback! I will come back surely for other issues that may come.

Arno reported that Powers of 2 and minimum 8x8 pixels per mapped texture image are automatically implemented by MCX when one utilizes the MSFS 2020 / 2024 required pixel array dimensions of "Multiples of 4".


So, in MCX Material Editor, after assigning the target output \Texture folder for MSFS converted textures (alongside the \Scenery folder):

In the MCX 04-25-2025 version Material Editor, one can just check:

* Ensure Size Multiples of Four

* Overwrite Exiting Textures

* Write MSFS 2024 XML (texture) Files

(Arno: Are MSFS 2024 XML (texture) Files now used to supplement- or instead to replace- the MSFS 'JSON' texture files ?)


GaryGB

 

[arno]

Hi Gary,

The small triangle limit has nothing to do with LOD. It's just a method to remove very small triangles or zero area triangles from the model and thereby making it more efficient as unneeded triangles are not processed further.

I believe the default value is 1e-6 (not behind my PC now to check). So that means that triangles smaller then 1 mm2 are removed, those are really small triangles.

If you want to not remove small triangles just set to limit to zero. Disabling the whole optimization does disable many other functions and will give you more issues.

 

[GaryGB]

Thanks for that clarification, Arno.


I now wonder if this anomaly may be due to mis-aligned vertices resulting in small Faces formed via marginal 3D Face "snap" tolerance.

One may zoom in to see where Sketchup inferences are actually elicited to see if existing End Point Inferences align with new Line Edges.


My thought was a "long shot" that drawing a long line between End Points at opposite ends of the bridge may end up mis-aligned.

Precise alignment of vertices for a new (long) Line with existing End Point Inferences is easier to achieve visually, if the Sketchup Camera Focal Length is set to 2,500mm.


Could Sketchup and MCX have a more tolerant Face-forming "snapping distance" for Direct Draw surfaces than MSFS, perhaps ?

I may have seen this in ADEv1.79x graphics rendering of CVX Vectors in the workspace GUI, where mis-aligned vertices appeared able to form colored polygon Faces in ADE, but FSX run time rendering became unstable and some CVX polygons did not render, IMHO, due to mis-aligned vertices.

Regarding the LOD idea of possible correlation proportional to variable sizes of a 3D model, I was wondering if the SmallTriangleLimit changed with the MCX-interpreted size of the largest Face in a 3D model, so that if a model had larger (longer) Faces, a resulting calculated Triangle size to be culled might also become larger, losing more Faces and Edges.

But I see 3D model import is more likely to have predictable results if SmallTriangleLimit is an assigned value- or entirely disabled- instead.

GaryGB

 

[gouaill]

Thanks Dick for the many advises. I may check my version of MCX (1.5 vs actual 1.7) and how LODs are used in my FS2024. I may have reduced objects LODs to improve performance and think it is good in general but too restrictive for my sceneries objects.

Again, the small triangle limit is just an hypothesis, not proven as the source of the issue.
Maybe the long lines as Gary mentionned is the issue as it is actually the project where lines are the longest I ever made (220 feets).

Thanks Gary for all the explanations. NZQE is really a nice complex designed strip in FS2020 only. FS2024 version has been squaled down.

So then, when you say you found the Haze / Mist Effect, was it in FS2020?
Attached are the one I found in FS20 NZQE. There were no other appropriate smoke or mist (for falls and rivers) in FS2020. Next step would be to create our own. The object library you mentioned is great but I try to havoid more and more to force people to use dependencies for my sceneries.

And thanks to Arno for his contribution on the small triangles limits.

And wow! If MCX can write XML texture files, it is gonna be great!