• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

Interesting Result

A

art209

Messages
637
Country
unitedstates
I created a library of all my FS9 GA and military aircraft as static objects for placement in FSX using ADE. Results were good, except a few aircraft were discarded due to separation of parts from the main model. This tool does a pretty good job.

Display of a C130 in ADE got an interesting result as shown in the attached picture. The object is shown as a huge rectangle covering a good portion of the airport, but it displays correctly in FSX.

Art
 

Attachments

  • c130.jpg
    c130.jpg
    96.2 KB · Views: 588
What happens if you approach the area shown with crash detection on in FSX?

Regards, Mike Mann
 
art209 said:
I created a library of all my FS9 GA and military aircraft as static objects for placement in FSX using ADE. Results were good, except a few aircraft were discarded due to separation of parts from the main model.
Art
Click to expand...

Hi Art,

For those aircraft you discarded, did you try the "All Animations" setting?

During testing, in some cases where there were missing or out of place parts when using Auto Animations, reconverting the aircraft with "All Animations" solved the issues.

The conversion process is so quick, I began making two conversions of every new aircraft, one with All Animations, the other with Auto Animations, and in most cases one or the other or both were successful.

There is a third selection for animations which is "Custom", and you can also tinker with the settings in the Listings and Tools.
(rocket science/greek to me - see the SAMM Manual) :D

Cheers
Gary
 
Gman said:
For those aircraft you discarded, did you try the "All Animations" setting?
Click to expand...

Thanks, I tried the "All Animations" on one of the problem aircraft and it compiled correctly.

Read the manual?:eek:

Although I selected "Keep Crash Code" in Samms and unchecked "Do not cause aircraft crash" in ADE, there is no crash when coming in contact with these static aircraft, including the C130. Other static aircraft placed with ADE do cause crashes.

Art
 
Art, re the inability to enable crashes, I wondered how long it would take for someone to catch on that it didn't work.

The crash octrees in aircraft models is scaled differently than in scenery models. (Presumably, the static models you referenced placing with ADE were developed as scenery models. SAMM converts aircraft models to scenery and, consequently, has some limitations where aircraft and scenery .mdl file format differs.) I didn't think this feature was valuable enough to justify the effort in writing the code to rescale the model crash octree - since the interpolation of the octree is so crude for other than rectangular objects that most people run with crash detection off - or at least want their scenery to have the crash code disabled. Unfortunately, I forgot to remove the control from the main panel.

I suspect the large rectangle shown in your ADE screenshot is the result of you enabling the crash code in the model.

Static models should be created with "Keep Crash Code" unchecked. I'll remove the checkbox in the first update.

Don
 
gadgets said:
The crash octrees in aircraft models is scaled differently than in scenery models. (Presumably, the static models you referenced placing with ADE were developed as scenery models. SAMM converts aircraft models to scenery and, consequently, has some limitations where aircraft and scenery .mdl file format differs.)
Click to expand...

I agree that the crash detection is not important, but I don't understand that the lack of crash detection is due to the model being a scenery object. As I stated in my earlier post, the FSX aircraft scenery objects do detect crashes when your aircraft comes into contact with them. Edit: Oh, perhaps these are the scenery objects to which you refer in parenthesis, and the Samm models are converted aircraft models instead of scenery models. I think I now get it.

gadgets said:
I suspect the large rectangle shown in your ADE screenshot is the result of you enabling the crash code in the model.

Static models should be created with "Keep Crash Code" unchecked. I'll remove the checkbox in the first update.
Click to expand...

Creating a model of the C-130 with the "Keep Crash Code" unchecked still results in an object with an enormous rectangle in ADE.

Art
 
Last edited:
I agree that the crash detection is not important, but I don't understand that the lack of crash detection is due to the model being a scenery object. As I stated in my earlier post, the FSX aircraft scenery objects do detect crashes when your aircraft comes into contact with them.
Click to expand...
I don't understand. My mostatic model is a scenery model and there is no crash detection between scenery models. perhpas you cou;d expand.

Creating a model of the C-130 with the "Keep Crash Code" unchecked still results in an object with an enormous rectangle in ADE.

Please send me the aircraft or a link to where I can obtain it and I'll take a look.

Don
 
gadgets said:
I don't understand. My mostatic model is a scenery model and there is no crash detection between scenery models. perhpas you cou;d expand.

Creating a model of the C-130 with the "Keep Crash Code" unchecked still results in an object with an enormous rectangle in ADE.

Please send me the aircraft or a link to where I can obtain it and I'll take a look.

Don
Click to expand...

Maybe I don't understand your position on the crash issue after all. I have placed a number of static scenery models for which crash detection works. Those that are aircraft come from the vehicles_aircraft.bgl library in the FSX global scenery folder.

The C-130 aircraft file that was downloaded from AVSIM a few years ago has been emailed to you. While it looks odd in ADE, it works fine as a static object. So far, it is the only aircraft that has caused this enormous rectangle in ADE for me.

Art
 
Creating a model of the C-130 with the "Keep Crash Code" unchecked still results in an object with an enormous rectangle in ADE.
Click to expand...
First, the good news. I have converted and placed your C-130 using ADE. The ADE "footprint" is about the size I would expect.

Perhaps what happened is that you initially placed the aircraft with the crash data included - which would explain the very large "footprint'. I don't know whether or not Jon has fixed it but, several months ago, ADE's library manager did not update a model's "footprint" when the model was re-imported. So, once it was there and "big", it would stay "big" no matter what you do later with the model itself.

I suggest you delete the model from ADE's library and re-import it.

Maybe I don't understand your position on the crash issue after all. I have placed a number of static scenery models for which crash detection works. Those that are aircraft come from the vehicles_aircraft.bgl library in the FSX global scenery folder.
Click to expand...
I don't have a position on the crash issue. I was simply trying to explain why the original crash data from converted aircraft files wasn't useful.

(At least some of) the models in vehicles_aircraft.bgl are FSX scenery models in FSX .mdl file format. So, comparing them to converted aircraft models is "apples and oranges".

Let me explain. Scenery .mdl files use 1m. as the standard unit of measurement. While the designer may work in different units, the .mdl file is "measured" in meters. Aircraft .mdl files, on the other hand, use whatever unit of measurement is specified by the designer. For most FS8/9 aircraft, this is 1/1024 or 1/512 meter. In order for converted aircraft models to display as scenery, SAMM rescales all dimensional data in the aircraft .mdl to 1m (among other things).

Rescaling the crash octtree is rather difficult, so I chose not to. The end result when you asked for the crash data to be retained (a capability I removed last night, now that you've brought it to my attention) is that you get a crash box 512 or 1024 times the intended size - hence the big "footprint" in ADE. (Presumably ADE's library manager uses the largest dimension it encounters, irrespective of what is the intended use of the dimension.) But you didn't get any crashes because the FS9/FSX crash detection mechanism expects to find the crash data in a different place in scenery models than where it is placed in aircraft models. (While designed-for-FSX scenery and aircraft models all use the same .mdl file format, this is not true for earlier versions FSX of FlightSim. The FS8/9 aircraft model format, while based on the same langauge as the scenery files, is handled quite differently from scenery files inside FS.)

I hope this clarifies.
Don
 
gadgets said:
Let me explain. Scenery .mdl files use 1m. as the standard unit of measurement. While the designer may work in different units, the .mdl file is "measured" in meters. Aircraft .mdl files, on the other hand, use whatever unit of measurement is specified by the designer. For most FS8/9 aircraft, this is 1/1024 or 1/512 meter. In order for converted aircraft models to display as scenery, SAMM rescales all dimensional data in the aircraft .mdl to 1m (among other things).
Click to expand...

Something doesn't sound quite right here. If the modeler is using Max/GMax correctly, the project's "Unit Scale" will be set to "1 Unit = 1 Meter." The measuring scale used in Max/GMax is only for the convenience of the modeler...

...it is perfectly acceptable for the modeler to change the measuring scale as often as needed while modeling, which frankly is a very "good thing" as not all of the sources one might have access to will use the same measurement scales!

When exported, the "Unit Scale" setting will automatically rescale the entire project to the standard FS expects: 1 Unit = 1 Meter. This is true whether the exported object is an aircraft, automobile, or scenery object.

If in fact you're seeing anything different, then it's quite probable that the modeler did not have his/her Max/GMax configured correctly... :eek:
 
Thanks, Bill.

There are FS8/9 aircraft models. Every one I've encountered makes use of SuperScale settings below 31. I have to rescale everything -otherwise it displays 512/1024 times too big.

Is there an easier way?

Don
 
gadgets said:
Thanks, Bill.

There are FS8/9 aircraft models. Every one I've encountered makes use of SuperScale settings below 31. I have to rescale everything -otherwise it displays 512/1024 times too big.

Is there an easier way?

Don
Click to expand...

Ah, FSX is a very different "critter" than the one's compiled using the FS8/9 SDK tools. "True" FSX models (i.e. those compiled with FSX's XtoMDL.exe) should behave as I've described above. Those that were compiled with the FS8/9 SDK are compiled from .asm files, and those are indeed rather peculiar...

Nonetheless though, the same requirements for Max/GMax "Unit Scale" still hold. The only reason SuperScale may be different between models is quite probably more the result of the modeler having either set up Max/GMax incorrectly, having modeled at too large a scale deliberately (usually FSDS modelers who need to oversize their models because of viewport clipping when zoomed in closely), or for some other reason peculiar to them. :D
 
And folks wonder why there aren't lots of FS8/9 aircraft model converters around.

Don
 
gadgets said:
And folks wonder why there aren't lots of FS8/9 aircraft model converters around.

Don
Click to expand...

Ya think? BTW, by "...some other reason peculiar to them" I was referring to the recent techniques introduced that deliberately overscale the interior model, then use an .asm or .x file "tweak" to rescale them during the compile.

This is done to overcome the 4mm autowelding threshold of the silly compiler that causes small detail parts to collapse into crumbled bits of aluminium foil when displayed in the sim...
 
Excuse the snotty-nosed kid observation,
but I have noticed that when I go to delete some of the static aircraft I have placed with Instant Scenery2, the "bounding box" of the aircraft which is displayed when in the move/delete mode to show which object is selected, is slightly larger than the aircraft for some aircraft and for pretty much all scenery objects, yet for some of the aircraft I have converted these boxes are huge, perhaps 10x the size of the aircraft.

This of course has had no apparent effect on anything, just an observation.

(running along to go play now) :D

Cheers
Gary
 
Gary, please send me an aircraft for which you've experienced this 10x problem.

DOn
 
Well, I erased all the models and libraries and started over following instructions in this forum thread. I compiled 21 FS9 aircraft into a library for FSX. When I placed them, the stock FS9 Cherokee displayed in ADE larger than it should have and a helicopter was shown with a 39,000 foot square:eek:. The C-130 was displayed in ADE the correct size:).

All of the objects displayed great in FSX, so no complaints.:cool:

I hope everyone enjoys using this tool as much as I do.

Art
 
Art, would you send me the two models that didn't quite "behave. (I don't seem to have a stock Cherokee.)

DOn
 
gadgets said:
Gary, please send me an aircraft for which you've experienced this 10x problem.

DOn
Click to expand...

Hi Don,

Er, ummm, it's NOT a problem, some are just way bigger than most of the other bounding boxes in IS2 move/delete mode.

I'll find one or two and send them to you though. :)


Cheers
Gary
 
gadgets said:
Art, would you send me the two models that didn't quite "behave. (I don't seem to have a stock Cherokee.)
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it has anything to do with the original aircraft models Don. It seems that sometimes this happens to any aircraft. The Cherokee model was okay in the previous library I made, and it's already been shown that the C-130 can compile correctly.

Something I have noticed about scenery objects imported into ADE libraries is that they often (if not always) have the wrong size listed in their edit windows.

I'll do some experimenting to see if the helicopter will fix itself.

Art
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top