Brewster B339 Buffalo and Spitfire Mk1a Project

  • Just the Wings left to do now with panel and Rivet details...


    Matt



    Spitfire 1a is pretty much done externally now apart from a few small details I missed like the pitot tube and Nav lights. Then on to the pilot and aerofly materials. I'm looking forward to seeing what it looks like in the SIM. I've built a few additional variation parts like the fishtail exhaust and fully blown canopy glass that was used on some late 1a aircraft. Also the streamlined mirror shroud (as it seems DWK has it). I'm not sure if it will be practical to implement them all in the final product as AF2 doesn't (as far as I'm aware) provide a means to hide and display individual mesh objects but we'll see.


    Matt


    Thanks to Jan's hard work the Buffalo is flying well, although it will be nice to see someone sat in the office.


    Matt

  • I didn't actually Overloaded so thank you for mentioning it. I've re-checked a couple of the sources I've been using and they do say that some late mk1a aircraft had the blown canopy and fishtail exhausts so is it possible perhaps they had limited application to earlier marks of Spitfire?


    Matt


    Preparatory to doing the Spitfire materials I've been adjusting the Buffalo textures to try to tone down the gloss... current appearance I really like. Also some tweaks to prop fade. Getting there.


    Matt


    Spitfire Mk1a exterior model finally tested in the SIM.


    Matt






    Late version with fishtail Exhaust and Blown canopy...


    Matt




  • FYI I'm suspending work on developing these projects for Aerofly FS2. Disappointing I know and I'm sorry believe me... the models look great and AF2 is a great SIM. I've made much progress with doing the TMD files for the Spitfire to the point where the control surfaces and Props are working but the Undercarriage has proved to be a brick wall I cant get over though I've spent many hour trying. The incomplete nature of SDK documentation and lack of knowledgeable help available makes this a battle I don't think I can win. I may continue working on them with a view putting them in another SIM like XP11, but as far AF2 is concerned its over at least for now.


    Matt

  • Matt me old mucker, don't give up, your models look fantastic and are much needed.


    Reach out to our Jedi Master Obi Jan Kenobi. The undercarriage is the hardest bit, I don't get it myself but I'm willing to have a look if Master Obi Jan is busy


    Steve

  • Much as I love the SIM, this is one of the things that I don't get about aerofly, in that it seems that they're helpful on the one hand, but just really secretive on the other, to the point where sometimes I wonder if they have some weird 10th dimensional concept of success that other people just can't understand.


    Again and again I've heard about a programme from one of the developers that supposedly makes all of this a lot easier.


    When people come to an impasse like this, that program is mentioned, but after literally years of waiting it's never been released, and meanwhile developer after developer, some of them with years of experience keep bouncing face-first off of the TMD, with particular mentions given to the difficulties of creating the undercarriage


    At a certain point I feel for ipacs, and respect that they have limited time and resources, whereas on the other hand over time, there is a feeling that things are just being deliberately obscured to a point bordering on ridiculousness.


    There's progress to be sure, but I have to admit I can increasingly sympathize when people just eventually throw up their hands and walk away.


    LOL!


    It felt good to get that off my chest even though I know it'll probably be deleted.8|

    Devons rig

    Intel Core i7 8700K @ 5.0GHz / 32.0GB G.SKILL TridentZ Series Dual-Channel Ram / ZOTAC GAMING GeForce® RTX 2080 Ti Triple Fan / Sound Blaster Z / Oculus Rift VR Headset / Klipsch® Promedia 2.1 Computer Speakers / ASUS ROG SWIFT PG279Q ‑ 27" IPS LED Monitor ‑ QHD / 2x Samsung SSD 850 EVO 500GB / Windows 10 Pro 64-bit /Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Gaming 5 Motherboard

  • Matt me old mucker, don't give up, your models look fantastic and are much needed.


    Reach out to our Jedi Master Obi Jan Kenobi. The undercarriage is the hardest bit, I don't get it myself but I'm willing to have a look if Master Obi Jan is busy


    Steve

    I did ask for Jan for help with this a couple of weeks ago Steve and didn't even get a reply. I understand Jan's busy, but I cant waste endless hours without purpose stabbing in the dark. I'm not totally thick and have worked out a lot of stuff for myself with little or no help and I'm pretty certain If I was helped over the hurdle of the UC then I wouldn't need to keep asking the same questions again. However it does seem Jan is the only one who really knows what they're doing and if he isn't available then there doesn't seem much point going on with this.


    Matt

  • Hello Matt,

    You can try a copy/paste of tmd sections of a similar default aircraft. That's what I did with the C152. I used sections from the C172 and the DR400.

    Most of the code needs no change, only the geometrylist object names need to be adjusted and of course recalculate the axes and positions for articulated objects. That worked for me but the C152 is much simpler than a spitfire.

    The point is to add objects one by one and test each change you made in the tmd systematically by reloading the aircraft. The tm.log file will tell you much about the errors.

  • I have adopted that approach... just been working on the left gear. Figure if I can get that to work I should be able to apply that to the right. Had a bit of time this morning so I tried tinkering with it, but it still doesn't work as I expected. Hey Ho :) I've run out of ideas for now.


    Matt

  • I have adopted that approach... just been working on the left gear. Figure if I can get that to work I should be able to apply that to the right. Had a bit of time this morning so I tried tinkering with it, but it still doesn't work as I expected. Hey Ho :) I've run out of ideas for now.


    Matt

    At least your picture made me smile.

  • Here is code for left Gear, rigid body section


    What I thought I'd done and what I've actually done could be very different. I think I've made the pivot an angled axis on the join with the fuselage. The lower gear is joined to the upper and has a linear translation axis that follows the centre of the upper leg. The Hydraulic cylinder should be pulling the gear upward via an offset pivot on the upper leg and the oleo should be placed so as to stop the leg collapsing on itself. The gear looks like below. Ignore the hydraulic cylinder visualization as I changed this to a vertical orientation since you don't see it... adding the parts just help me find the R0 and R1 point values


    Matt....






  • Hi Matt,


    First thing I noticed; the B0 is missing at the upper gear.


    When you lower the gear again; is everything moving back into the right position? In that case I would guess you find the problem in the graphics. Are the upper and lower gear simple rigidbody_graphics?.


    Kai

  • Hi Matt


    If it's not top secret, might help if you post the TMD file, You can always send it via a PM if you would rather not post


    Also, when you export, do you get a TM.log file in your intermediate folder. It should contain info like this which will help with axis


    Steve

  • I think I copied the code from the Baron and so I guess the B0 values was omitted. I read somewhere that it can be omitted if the standard matrix is required. You may have a point here Kai. I may have to work out the angles involved and put them into Jans matrix generator. I guess I'd been thinking that as I'd put the axis vector in the joint it wasn't needed. Certainly worth looking further.


    The parts do return to correct position. I will post whole TMD later when I get time so you can see if the graphic bits are wrong.


    Matt

  • Do you have the same pivot point on the lower side of the gear and the upper side of the gear?

    Sylvain ....In answer to your question I'm not sure I have. I took the inertia box size of each object from the information displayed top right in AC3D and the R0 value was the object centre displayed in the object information box. Is that incorrect? Wouldn't be surprised😀

    Matt

  • Hi Matt


    I'm afraid you get used to looking at TMD files in the end. It's much easier looking though your own TMD file as you know what the entries mean, looking through another file means a lot of searching and guess work at times, specially with geometry names. Your codes looks like it came from the F4U.


    Sometimes you need the whole TMD to follow the path from first entry to last for a given object etc which is why I asked, your error may well be in the graphics section, even in the controls.tmd sometimes


    I also tend to strip out the items I am working on into a separate file as it's much easier to find stuff when you just have those entries that refer to your object, without 6000 lines of code in the middle, eventually this get less but I still do it for something new. Normally I have the Controls...Dynamics and Graphics entries so I can follow the steps.


    I'm away on hols for a week but plan to take the Lynx TMD for some night time reading, sad I know but necessary, so will look at yours too.


    Steve

  • The Graphic parts do seem to be rigid body graphics rather than say bending body graphics. Comparing different TMD files I notice with bending body graphics an additional code section is needed to specify the rotation axis and pivot and where the angle comes from... where as rigid body graphics don't seem to need this... perhaps because you've already specified that in the dynamics section. I wont mess with this until I've got some feedback from you guys so that I don't waste time going in the wrong direction... but I'm obviously looking for the simplest way of doing this.


    Matt