• 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.

Yes Great Program but ......

Messages
15
Country
australia
Indeed there are some clever people around in the sim world. I downloaded the latest version yesterday and found it easy to use provided everything went right.

When its not right then there is a "brick wall" learning curve.

I am trying to use the outputs in FSX. The aircraft are infact FS9 flyables that I fly in both simulators.

My project is to develope a "display day at an airfield" using about 20 WWII aircraft and some later jets from the 70's maximum. A high percentage of these aircraft are payware. The aim of the project is to produce a film NOT to try and get permission to upload anything that results.

The centerpiece of my display has no landing gear, despite seeming to have the correct settings for wheels down and compressed.

Another (Vulcan) has the articulated U/C with the wheels tilted and not both touching the ground, only one.

Both those aircraft had no errors or missing bmp's.

Another has no tires on the U/C wheels because the bmp is missing but fine as a flyable. Maybe the common textures come within the Model file as in this aircraft other stuff like panel guages are not to be seen anywhere but appear in the aircraft. This aircraft cannot be flown in FSX but appears just fine as a static at my airfield except for white tyres.

The brick wall is too high for me to jump over so the project will lapse. I do not know how to generate AI's and associated plans to get them into my airport. I have substituted these aircraft for testing in other peoples airfield AI plans and they are just fine and looking great.

Great program but.......

Cheers

PS I have an image but will have to go and upload it so it will be seen here:

Display1.jpg
 

scruffyduck

Administrator
Staff member
FSDevConf team
Resource contributor
Messages
34,853
Country
unitedkingdom
Are you saying they work if you use them in another place but not where you want to use them?

I guess you will understand that it can be extremely compex to unpick the model files used with these aircraft and that we do not have access to the file formats that are used (they are MS proprietary and we have only the work done by dedicated members of the community who have spent many hours trying to understand the format). To me it is a minor miracle that we can get static models from aircraft models at all - let alone that they are perfect. My experience is that it is rare to get a complete result especially when working with the highly complex addon aircraft produced by payware designers.

In fact creating AI plans that make flyable aircraft appear static may well be much easier than trying to make static models. There is a good tutorial out there on how to do it.
 
Messages
15
Country
australia
Thanks Jon

Its quite amazing and very clever to do what SAMM does.

The models that have given me trouble show in an AI based outcome as a complete, properly orientated model. Wheels on the ground etc etc. I also made sure all were for FS2004 and not ones converted for FSX.

Its unfortunate that SAMM struck some models not tested and could not get a good result like the others I wanted in the display. Those giving trouble are payware. No trouble with anything I have downloaded over the years from this site by 3rd party providers.

What I have not done is tried the outcome in FS2004.

Thanks for your reply.
 

gadgets

Resource contributor
Messages
9,388
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
Thanks, Jon. Didn't know you were "on board".

Sticks, as mentioned in the manual and as alluded to by Jon, there are few standards when it comes to MS FlightSim aircraft design. A designer can "tie" an animation to just about any variable he/she pleases and use just about any range of values for that variable he/she wants. If that weren't bad enough, he/she can also "invent" their own variables. And, Microsoft hasn't exactly been forthcoming in making available the design of the innards of FlightSim.

But, the news is not all bad. There does seem to be some generally accepted practices in aircraft design. SAMM takes advantage of this and allows you to select a variety of poses using checkboxes on the main panel. For those aircraft that use a different design, SAMM also allows you to select all animations (less efficient) or a custom set. (I've found that about 75-80% of aircraft models convert satisfactorly using the checkboxes and about 10-15% more can be "fixed" using Animations:All.) To assist you when Animations: ALL doesn't solve the problem, SAMM generates listings of both the aircraft .mdl file and the static aircraft .mdl and allows you to select a custom set of animations and/or preset any variable used by an aircraft (once you figure out from the listings what the right value is).

I appreciate that working your way through a listing of the code for an aircraft model isn't for everyone - particularly someone who seems to have an aversion to steep learning curves. But, unfortunately, that's what's required for some aircraft. Or, you might try similar models from other designers. Almost certainly they will work differently.

You mentioned that these same aircraft work as AI. (That's of little relevance, however, since as AI, these models are handled as aircraft, not as scenery.) Perhaps you should invest a little time learning how to program static AI. Much of the enjoyment from FlightSim is in the "knowing" as well as the "doing".

SAMM is not perfect. But, ask yourself, before SAMM, how many ways were there to convert FS8/9 aircraft to static scenery models?

Don
 
Messages
15
Country
australia
Thank you for your replies and the lecture contained there in.

Actually I can read and the manual is very clear that there was no point in asking "how". You should note I have not asked for that.

In the case of the aircraft with missing undercarriage. It first had missing bits like rudders ailerons etc so I used custom but ALL became the best option. I used the tools to read what the settings where for the undercarriage and in both original and the static conversion files, 150 was used. I found the items in the txt files but the wall arose because I did not know how to look for the link to other keys or what ever.

This U/C problem occurred with 6 aircraft different from the same payware provider. At least he is consistant.

For the aircraft with white tyres the bitmap was missing together with about 12 others as listed by SAMM. Most of those where related to internals. There was no shared texture folder in the original aircraft. Indeed in the aircraft I used with shared textures I produced a full version of textures in a specific aircraft folder for this excercise. In the aircraft where I had converted textures to dds I made sure I used the FS2004 version bmps.

In relation to "try another" there are NO others available for this aircraft other than payware with no where near the choices for a display day. The alternatives on the sim sites are from way back in CFS1 days or FS2000 and therefore not convertible by SAMM even if flyable in FS2004. Poor graphics anyway.

The Vulcan aircraft had the articulated U/C on tip toe and I had no idea where to look or how to interpret the listing for a solution. The basic code was set to 150.

Getting over walls needs a little bit of help and in 7 years of simming that in general, so far, has not been a problem.

You might like to have a cuppa and look at this film. Perhaps even pondering the walls that needed jumping over to produce it and the operation ready aircraft to do it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMYGHAwiN0M

Happy New Year.

Cheers
 
Messages
15
Country
australia
I forgot to make comment on the recommendation that I spend time to become familiar with Ai's. Thanks for that.

The film I am trying to make is in conjunction with a simmer in the Netherlands who has had 5 years expereince in making Ai's work. He has hit a wall with this display idea as the aircraft either do not appear or disappear and they have been difficult to position accurately.

I came to try SAMM because I posted a short message on a sim forum and got an immediate reply that SAMM should be able to do it. In relation to positioning each aircraft I use the inbuilt placer to a common position and then use an object placer to locate each accurately in the display.

The film will not go ahead unless the simmer in the Netherlands can find a solution and generate the display of 20 aircraft. Probably no one is much interested in what others do but here is a link to the film that shows us arriving for the display in BMW760, version 4 workup.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=HHASMXZN

Over & Out
 

gadgets

Resource contributor
Messages
9,388
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
sticks, re the screeshot, the closest Lncaster appears to have a texture problem but othyerwise seems OK. The one in the distance lookse pretty good.

Re static AI, I've been using this technique for some time at both my airports (CYYJ, CYQQ) for vintage aircraft on outside display. Simply create a dedicated parking spot not connected to the runway system for each aircraft, program a flight plan for each aircraft with weekly frequency that simply performs a single touch 'n go. A sample flight plan follows:
AC#3,CF-100,60%,Week,VFR,1/11:00,TNG1/11:19,10,R,0,CYQQ,1/11:20,1/11:39,10,R,0,CYQQ

Don
 
Messages
15
Country
australia
Yes thats what my friend in the Netherlands is doing. The spots are not connected to the runways and have been placed in front of the hangars off the taxi-ways. But as I said the aircraft often do not appear or they disappear. I do not know the full details of his problem. I just thought SAMM would be a great alternative.

Whether a mix of SAMM produced good aircraft will work with Ai's positioned in the bad places I do not know as that will reduce the number of spots required. I have sent him my SAMM outcomes so he can check that option.

The other problem he has is: the system draws taxi lines to the spots and actually places "sand" over the scenery textures. I will see if I can dig out an image and post it below.

What I thought and he also, that this was easy to do has turned into a Mt Everest.

Back to SAMM and the image above: As noted in a previous post the missing textures for the wheels etc do not appear anywhere in texture files. It is my belief they are hidden and SAMM does not know about them. Although I looked I could find no link to them in the SAMM txt files. The middle image has wheels missing and the one in the distance is fine, different providers (payware) for all three of them.

I have replaced the Vulcan with a Victor that does not have the undercarriage tip-toe problem. I will fly the Vulcan into the display day instead and park it just like PA474. Well thats if the project gets to that stage.

I have placed about 10 good aircraft but the no wheels Lancasters (6) will kill the project as no other provider has the range from Mk1 to Mk10. Without them there is no story to tell. There is no way I will go to any film with obvious errors in it

Nothing is easy except with "good likeable SAMM aircraft".
 
Messages
15
Country
australia
DB_Scampton2.jpg


By way of explanation: This is a screen grab using my flyable AJG positioned where I wanted her in the display. Nigger's grave is just to the right. The other aircraft are NX611 Just Jane's (I sat in her pilot's seat and used the controls in 2007) placed on my friends allocated parking spots to see what the quality might be.

In the distance is the "sand" across the taxiway with taxi markings and rounded off textures. Totally un acceptable and no film if it remains like this.

Easy, do not think so.
 

scruffyduck

Administrator
Staff member
FSDevConf team
Resource contributor
Messages
34,853
Country
unitedkingdom
What tool are you using to edit the airport data? The sand looks either like a bleed through or there is a short piece of taxiway with the wrong surface material.
 

GHD

Messages
12,243
Country
england
I had no problems with the Lancaster model I happened to have:



Here are the old and the "newer" at Scampton

 
Last edited:
Messages
15
Country
australia
ScruffyDuck: I cannot answer that as it results from my Netherlands connection in this project. It is not the result of what I have done with SAMM. SAMM came into the picture as a possible alternative for the problems.

Golf - HotelDelta Yes there are some aircraft that work fine. Nice to see someone using Scampton. We are placing our Lancaster Display down in front of the Museum (Hangar 1) and also in front of Hangar 2 where Nigger's Grave is. Cannot quite see if we are on the same scenery. In the area that you have used because of its association with the Red Arrows we are placing Jets of the early era and a Mosquito that was part of 617 Squadron path finding activities. We also have a Hampden, the first aircraft used from Scampton.

The problem we face now it that my Plane Design Lancasters are not SAMM friendly so the whole story line looks like a pipe dream.

No AJG for the DB main display. If I add the DB AJN and the 617 Tallboy Lancaster with bulging bombay doors that have trouble with white tyres in SAMM then you have the whole story of a 617 Display section going out the window.

I also wanted the following Lancs as part of that story, the flying Canadian FM213 and NX611 that taxi's. PA474 will be flown in to join the display and will park between Hangar's 2 & 3. Add ED888 that flew the most missions (140), S for Sugar that was second with 137 missions, neither can show up. The MkII's and the first Canadian Mk10 off the production line (KB700) would complete quite a story in the making. But without them there are NO replacements that can fill in.

The WOP Grand Slam works but their Mk 3 does not show at all. FSC Lancasters work but the selection is poor for a Scampton 617 related Display Day.

It is necessary to have the Vulcan and Victor with Blue Steel on board as they were part of the 617 story. Both flew to Australia (Vulcan from Scampton) for testing that weapon.

I wonder if you have read the description on Nigger's Grave stone. This set of story board images transferred into a sequence in the movie would add interest during an up close drive around in the Unimog.

Scampton_Niggers_GraveStone.jpg


(I have to upload the image before it will appear)

A General Comment: No one seems to realise a MkIII Lancaster built in Canada (KB700+ or FM100+) is a Mk X with different gauges and panel layout from the British built Lancaster.

Simmers flying Lancasters from some providers are being taken for a ride if they think what they are flying is anything like the real. For example, NO ONE in the modern era of sims has yet produced an Operation Ready Dambuster Lancaster with the modifications that those Lancs had to low fly and achieve the dam breaches. Those Lancs also had a Front Gunner AND a Bombaimer for the whole mission. The DB Raid was not flown out of Conningsby it was flown from Scampton.

Finally NX611 "Just Jane" is a Mk VII Lancaster not a MkIII. Apparently it was a Mk1 with Merlin 24's fitted and electrically operated mid turret. The mid turret was moved forward almost to the rear edge of the wing. Bet no one has seen that in any sim version, then again it may not have been on all Mk VII's, who knows what the real truth is?

Cheers
 
Messages
15
Country
australia
George: It looks like she is a PO. Which Squadron was she from RAAF 463 (Waddington) or RAAF 467 (Scampton)? What's her serial Number?

Cheers

Ross
 

scruffyduck

Administrator
Staff member
FSDevConf team
Resource contributor
Messages
34,853
Country
unitedkingdom
ScruffyDuck: I cannot answer that as it results from my Netherlands connection in this project. It is not the result of what I have done with SAMM. SAMM came into the picture as a possible alternative for the problems
.

Well that problem is almost certainly associated with the underlying airport design and can only be dealt with using an airport design tool. That is unless the airport was created using a 3D tool such as GMax.
 

GHD

Messages
12,243
Country
england
George: It looks like she is a PO. Which Squadron was she from RAAF 463 (Waddington) or RAAF 467 (Scampton)? What's her serial Number?

Cheers

Ross

Ross,

The model is a B III by David Garwood and the texture is for POV, 467 Squadron, RAF Bottesford 1943.

Did you by any chance convert the SAMM FS9 model to FSX format using Arno's Model Converter? At present it doesn't work with my Lancaster.
 

gadgets

Resource contributor
Messages
9,388
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
Sticks, as Jon suggested, the sand is a problem in the airport design.

The parking spots for the static AI should be completely isolated from the taxi system - no taxi links, no apron links (which I suspect is the problem), no nothing. Just a parking spot of the correct size with a unique airline designator. (The AI aircraft to park there must also have the same airline designator.) If set up corrcetly, this should work 100% of the time. The only exception should be when you have insufficient parking for all the AI and another AI aircraft grabs the parking spots before the statics are processed. Even this can be fixed throught judicous file naming.

There is no conflict between static AI and SAMM models - other than would be between any AI aircraft and nearby scenery.

Don
 
Messages
15
Country
australia
Don: Thanks I will check with my Netherlands connection. I have given him this forum page link but not sure if he has viewed. I know in the past he has had Lancasters and other WWII aircraft taxi-ing and taking off from his airfields, so maybe .....

George: Thanks, I was interested in when she was actually built but need the serial number for that. Not to worry.

I tried to use the other converter that will be linked to SAMM but found I got nothing out. Then again I thought it was for FSX designed aircraft to make them suitable for SAMM and not for existing FS2004 aircraft that are already suitable.

DAMBUSTER LANCASTER: Twelve months ago I got permission to update the payware Plane-Design Dambuster Lancaster to Operation Ready status for FS2004, ie add the tools to low fly and attack the Moehne & Eder Dams. At last count the aircraft had been downloaded 9725 times. I have been Dambustering since 2003 and visited the Eder dam in 2007, what an experience to see the terrain those crews flew over in moonlight.

I made the mistake in that aircraft of trying to cope with attacks from the 2D or VC cockpits so it was quite complicated to operate to say nothing of the flying skills needed to get it right at the dams.

My dams scenery is appalling stuff from CFS1 (which I still fly in each May) and is only used to confine the pilots to the attack routes at the dams. Most simmers will try to take the easy straight in routes and thats no tribute.

Then came FSX. The aircraft will fly in FSX but old gauges will negate the operation ready bit. I updated the aircraft as version 2 deleting the 2D pilots panel and using the VC to low fly and the bomb aimers view to attack the walls. This was necessary so as to make the film in FS2004 and FSX which is linked to YouTube and to the sim sites with a higher resolution version. My 7 year old computer quit just after making the film, the new one would have made a better job of it.

I have a Lancaster sim web site which summarises the enormous amount of research needed to understand the Dambuster's and to simulate. If your interested in flying a Dambuster aircraft out of your Scampton (John Young's I guess) then I suggest you do not actually download the Version 1 from the sim sites but contact me by email from this link. The learning curve will be less and more enjoyable with version 2 and it is suitable for FSX.

http://netleygrove.net/FlightSimulation/Dambuster2004.html

I think one should be very aware that the Dambuster aircraft only flew in training at tree top level and at a maximum of +1500 feet AGL. So flying a DB aircraft at altitude is not "simulating" and no tribute at all to their skills. These Lancasters never flew again after the attack so they are very special.

When you have been up close with a Lancaster (East Kirkby) then you will realise just how realistic the Plane-Design external graphics are. Here is AJG about to taxi past herself with no wheels in the FSX Scampton Display under developement.

SAMM_2.jpg
 
Messages
15
Country
australia
Thank you all for the input to this thread.

Unfortunately my Netherland Connection has not been successfull in positioning Ai's in FSX nor has he been successful in using SAMM.

The Project is therefore Cancelled.

There is no story to tell without the British Plane-Design Lancasters.

However, there was a post on this thread that indicated a tutorial was available to learn about Ai's.

Are there differences for FSX or was the post really talking FS2004?

FSX being FSX I bet the FS2004 tools will not function. I would appreciate someone just pointing me in the right direction and I will try and go it alone.

The movie file has been removed so the link to it above is now dead. Thanks to the 10 persons who downloaded it.

Thanks. Happy New Year!
 

Sidney Schwartz

Resource contributor
Messages
512
Country
us-oregon
I wonder if you have read the description on Nigger's Grave stone. This set of story board images transferred into a sequence in the movie would add interest during an up close drive around in the Unimog.

I'm trying not to make any assumptions here, so I'll ask. Does the word "nigger" have some other use than as an incredibly offensive term for black people in your part of the world?
 
Top