Aircraft carrier import

    Quote from Rodeo

    Sorry guys,

    there is something wrong. I better remove the download until the problem is solved.
    I assume, the surface has to have a certain attribute like a runway. Now it seems the aircraft gets damaged as soon as it touches the carrier. Oh man, I thought, it's done...


    Rodeo, carriers are fully functional airports, you got that right.

    ipacs would need to define your given coordinates as such, and add some nav, tac, atc, rwy stuff.

    implementing a 3D-model is considered an obstacle only. What you are looking into, is how the user should interact with it.

    You would also need to make this carrier a mobile version of an airport or even airplane or car, a moving object, since you want to move the ship and turn it against the wind before
    someone can land on it. Carriers move between 10 and 30 knots, that makes landing so difficult. You must add that speed to your landing speed, let's say 130 + 15 kts or so.

    So, what you plan to do is creating a mobile airport, half-dived in liquid.


    By the way, anyone know whether we get some water?

    Quote from Almdudler

    Rodeo, carriers are fully functional airports, you got that right.

    ipacs would need to define your given coordinates as such, and add some nav, tac, atc, rwy stuff.

    implementing a 3D-model is considered an obstacle only. What you are looking into, is how the user should interact with it.

    Ideally yes, but if I can safely land on roads, grass and even water (and take off again) perhaps the carrier doesn't need to be a special class of object.

    A useful test would be to try and land on the roof of a large building. I've tried that a couple of times and failed, but only (it seemed) because the roof had obstacles on it.

    i forgot to mention that ipacs has not implemented something you would call "damage modelling",
    like you see it in other sims.

    So, when landing on roofs - no matter what else is standing on that roof, you hit an obstacle, and
    that gets you a flight reset, and you find yourself at some threshold of the nearest available runway.

    Damage modeling is a strong simulation feature, since it demonstrates the consequence of your activity.
    It can grow to explosions and decline to a simple peep tone. It also includes malfunctions.

    • Official Post

    Just increase the reset timer to indefinetly, then you don't have to worry about a reset. So some damage is modelled. And you can land on roofs in the FS 2. I've landed on the terminal building of Zurich airport a couple of times by now, it is definetly possible. Even without crashing!

    Damage is only partly modelled. Try to hit one wing of the extra on a building for example. You can manage to continue flying in a knife edge position. Failures or structural damage is not really implemented, that is correct. Mainly because we are a flight sim and not a crash sim at the moment and there are not enough systems to rectify a full failure simulation. In terms of programming, it is already possible to freeze controls, turn of the engine or damage it through some event (e.g. flying upside down). It's just that no one has implemented things like that into the aircraft yet. If you wanted to (as a third party developer) you could simulate entire system failures (just jet engines producing no thrust is currently not possible - but you could idle them and fake the indications).

    Quote from Jet-Pack

    Just increase the reset timer to indefinetly, then you don't have to worry about a reset. So some damage is modelled. And you can land on roofs in the FS 2. I've landed on the terminal building of Zurich airport a couple of times by now, it is definetly possible. Even without crashing!

    Damage is only partly modelled. Try to hit one wing of the extra on a building for example. You can manage to continue flying in a knife edge position. Failures or structural damage is not really implemented, that is correct. Mainly because we are a flight sim and not a crash sim at the moment and there are not enough systems to rectify a full failure simulation. In terms of programming, it is already possible to freeze controls, turn of the engine or damage it through some event (e.g. flying upside down). It's just that no one has implemented things like that into the aircraft yet. If you wanted to (as a third party developer) you could simulate entire system failures (just jet engines producing no thrust is currently not possible - but you could idle them and fake the indications).

    Jan, same question as always. Exactly how do we set the Reset to infinity? Which file, line of code and expression for infinity?

    Regards,
    Ray

    Quote from jk1895

    I can land without any problems on large buildings.

    Yes, this is correct. And this is also part of the solution.
    The problems with the carrier eating aircrafts are originated in double sided polygons. Collision detection cannot distinguish between both sides. As soon as I reduce the deck surface to single sided polygons, it works.

    And of course, I would love a large carrier automatically cruising with 30 knots through the sea.
    But not to be too humbly, I want to have a hook system and a catapult as well! :cool:

    Quote from Rodeo

    Yes, this is correct. And this is also part of the solution.
    The problems with the carrier eating aircrafts are originated in double sided polygons. Collision detection cannot distinguish between both sides. As soon as I reduce the deck surface to single sided polygons, it works.

    And of course, I would love a large carrier automatically cruising with 30 knots through the sea.
    But not to be too humbly, I want to have a hook system and a catapult as well! :cool:

    Hey Guys,
    First, let's see if we can find a simple solution to updating whatever it takes to land on a moveable object placed in a fixed location, say stuck in the non-wet area of the sim with wind on our nose.

    Maybe Aerosoft FS 2 can have "Electro-magnetic" catapults like the USS Gerald R. Ford CVN-78 No steam used, no waiting, just position the aircraft and press the button for "Launch".

    Regards,
    Ray

    Increasing speed has its definition in the aircraft files,
    ask Jan (Jetpack) to add an alternative speed acceleration value set.
    This alternative set simply tells the aircraft new speeds per time and is seen as a value curve brought to a csv-table.
    This set could then be activated with any button, expample below=Space Bar.
    So you are pushed to take off faster than when departing from a land based runway.
    I am sure he will do it.


    how it works:

    1. (brakes released) press space bar (simulating launch bar hook front wheel connecting to steam cable) while ...
    2. ...pushing full throttle. Hands off FCS (Flight Control Stick/Joystick).
    3. Release space bar (=release brakes/hook) and the acceleration command pushes the F/A-18 from still to v2/rotate in a predefined time.
    4. launch time elapsed or when NWOW (no weight on wheels) revives manual control while the alternative speed value set is deactivated.

    While space bar is pressed and WOW (Weight on Wheels), no manual interaction is possible.

    Steam Cable and stuff does not visually exist in this easy solution of course,

    Space bar fills 3 functions: 1. Brake, 2. activate alternative speed table, 3. activate pre-set autopilot

    autopilot set: climb 1000 ft., turn 20 degr. left/right, remain Afterburner, Gear and Hook up

    So, first thing you have to do when reaching +1000 feet after take off is: De-activate Autopilot and take control.

    • Official Post

    We can't just add speed. The Aerofly does not work like that. All forces are created by simulated real world objects, e.g. the jetengines.
    There is no acceleration value that I can set... What would be possible is using fake jetengines to create the necessary forces of the launch or the catch hook. Go ahead and try it yourself if you want to. All you need is a powerfull jetengine attached to the front gear (I hope the gear is strong enough) with little inertia and its throttle input changed to something like N1 (times some factor) minus input break or something like that.

    I'm going to finish the autopilot first, then we will see what the next task will be...

    Sure a moving carrier with working catch cables and catapults would be amazing. But don't forget that we would need to program a couple of things beforehand.
    - Firstly we'd need a vehicle-aircraft interaction of some sort. That would come in handy for push back trucks, too.
    - You would want to collide with the carrier (bounce of the deck for example) so the collision detection need to be reprogrammed to account for the moving vehicle
    - You probably would like to land on the carrier and steer and brake relative to the moving carrier deck - that requires some reprogramming of the wheel physics, that currently only know about a static earth with zero velocity.
    - Then we would need either some sort of autosteering to line up with the catapult (or marshaller) or we'd need some takeoff positions on the deck where you are already hooked in for the launch.
    - For the catapult we would need a connection between the front gear and the deck to hold back the aircraft's full afterburner thrust which we would need to disconnect on command. That physical joint does not exist yet.
    - And lastly you'd need a connection from the aircaft to the catapult hook that acts one-way only, (only pull the aircraft forward) also does not exist yet.

    The autopilot would be the least problem, that's just couple of control laws and autopilot modes.

    Regards, Jan

    Cessnas are tasty with ketchup.

    Devons rig

    Intel Core i5-13600K - Core i5 13th Gen 14-Core (6P+8E) @ 5.5Ghz / G.SKILL Trident Z5 RGB Series 32GB RAM DDR5 6000 / GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4070Ti GAMING OC 12G / Sound Blaster Z / Oculus Quest 2 VR Headset / Klipsch® Promedia 2.1 Computer Speakers / ASUS ROG SWIFT PG279Q ‑ 27" IPS LED Monitor ‑ QHD / 6x Samsung SSD/NVME's various sizes / Windows 11 Pro 64-bit / GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS ELITE AX LGA 1700 ATX Motherboard DDR5

    So you better use this version.

    I tried to remove all double sided polygons, flipped normals to have a correct display, set textures again and a lot of other stuff. Please test this version, if you experience stuttering, give me a feedback. And don't hit the tower!

    [Blocked Image: http://www.smilies.4-user.de/include/Militaer/smilie_mil_007.gif]



    It is still not working although the 3D models looks good.

    Rodeo,
    Amazing work - we all thank you not only for the final result - seeing the carriers in our scenery - but also for charging through the many obstacles to finding the correct path to scenery development success. When you find the time (please rest a bit!), let us know what you have learned that could apply to our efforts. I want to be able to place some buildings, trees, and static aircraft at some undeveloped airports - actually, I need to have a simple runway model that I can scale and orient correctly using Blender and AC3D. So more info please but what a great start for us!!

    Thanks again
    Dave

    Thank you Dave,

    I always like some feeedback. Most important is:
    Use only 1 sided polygons, so do not cover both sides with texture. aerofly uses obviously this information as collision surface.

    If you take this into account during model creation, everything should be fine.
    If this is mixed up, the correction is a lot of additional work.

    Do you know my tutorial about object placement in the developers' section? I did not try to hit the house with an aircraft, so I did not pay attention to the polygon faces. It came up first with the carrier deck interacting with the aircraft.

    Regards
    Rodeo

    Quote from Rodeo

    So you better use this version.

    I tried to remove all double sided polygons, flipped normals to have a correct display, set textures again and a lot of other stuff. Please test this version, if you experience stuttering, give me a feedback. And don't hit the tower!

    [Blocked Image: http://www.smilies.4-user.de/include/Militaer/smilie_mil_007.gif]

    Hello Rodeo,

    I managed to land the Cessna on my first try. It looks to the fixed at first glance. I will taxi around the deck and make myself familiar with the Yorktown. I see two additional carrier sites have also been added. Nice.

    Thanks for all the hard and creative work on the is project. I am off to try the Corsair now.

    I did notice the engine stopped at the instant of touchdown on the deck, but this was evidently caused by my hard landing. A softer touchdown and I can taxi around on the deck. ha.

    Anyone know if it is possible to start a flight on the carrier? I have a spot that I use with the location screen that is directly aft near landfall at 1000 feet elevation and 98 deg heading. Lined up for a bolter.

    Thanks again.

    Regards,

    Ray

    I was taxiing the Cessna around the Yorktown deck and found a soft spot - see image. I am going to experiment and see how large the "Venus Fly Trap" is. Wish me luck.

    EDIT: The big area with the yellow lines - maybe an elevator - avoid this area on your takeoff run. I am able to taxi around the edges just fine. Once on the other side and with better light, I see the elevator is not full up. duh. Where are those airdales when you need a good deckhand?

    Hey, I just noticed that the carrier deck has motion. Yep, I got seasick and had to run over the rail and barf. Yuck.

    Regards,

    Ray