Posts by whitav8

Jet-Pack (IPACS),
I'd like to create a camera view for the F-15 (any jet) that simulates being a wingman. I would really like to be in another F-15 cockpit of course, but just being in the wingman position is a first step and I am using the following for that:
<[string8][object][camera]
<[string8][Name][CameraLeftWing]>
<[string8][Body][LeftWing]>
<[tmvector3d][R0][ -15.0 8.0 0.1 ]>
<[tmvector3d][Direction][ -0.1 -0.99 0.0 ]>
<[bool][InCockpit][false]>
<[string8][Tags][left wing]>
>

Thanks - P.S. Try flying real low over the Colorado river inside the Grand Canyon with that camera setting!!!!

Dave

Jet-Pack (IPACS),
Thanks for the camera help. I would like to use the mouse for either zooming or moving round in a circle about the aircraft - can I do either of those in VR? Even if not, I still would like to know how to do that in Non VR. Also, for some reason, it is the "2" key that cycles the views in my setup. Also, what about the views available in the other "1"through "5" keys - what file sets that up?

Much Thanks

Dave

An example of where the tmd files are (one per aircraft) :

X:\SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator\aircraft\a320\a320.tmd

Jet-Pack (IPACS),
You say you haven't seen the variable "PI" in the Aerofly code:
But, from above in this thread:

tmvector2d LonLatFromWebMercator( const vector2d webmercator )
{
vector2d lonlat;
lonlat.x = ( webmercator.x * 2.0 * PI / 131072.0 ) - PI; <<=============
lonlat.y = webmercator.y - 65536.0;
lonlat.y *= -2.0 * TM_PI / 131072.0;
lonlat.y = exp( lonlat.y );
lonlat.y = atan( lonlat.y );
lonlat.y = 2.0 * ( lonlat.y - PI / 4.0 ); <<====================
return lonlat;
}

I would imagine that it has the same value as "TM_PI" but since I am not exactly getting the correct web-mercator values, maybe there is some difference.

Thanks

Dave

IPACS Support,
Thanks much - all is OK now - all textures (aircraft and scenery) look good.

I look forward to being able to use my own small photoreal BMP patches in the future, being able to place objects that have already been created from a library, and perhaps someday use a freeware 3D modeler like Blender that can already generate the FBX (or something equivalent) format. You have made a great start with the SDK release and we appreciate it.

Dave

First off, Avast scanned the Aircraft Converter and found it to be OK.

As far as the Content Converter, it's file date is 7/12/2016 (last year)while the Aircraft Converter file date is 1/9/2017 - I redownloaded the SDK last night, uninstalled both converters and then installed them from the latest download - please check. My version of the Kingman airport conversion has a lot of "blotches" on the taxiways and runways - the textures are corrupted.

Thanks

Dave

I don't think you updated the texture conversion for the Content Converter in the latest SDK.Also, I am getting a message from my Antivirus App that there perhaps is a possible virus in the Aircraft Converter - please let us know if that is OK and just a false positive.

Thanks

Dave

Jet-Pack (IPACS),
Maybe I have confused you - the issue is to NOT use 3DStudioMax (the actual tool) at all - due to its cost. But perhaps to use their exchange format called FBX which should support nearly all of the MAX file format functionality. Many of us have been developing freeware for our own use of mostly less complex FSX/P3D objects (aircraft and scenery) for several years and have a lot of tools to help that development (format converters, imagery conversion, freeware 3D modeling tools, object placers, etc..) This way, we can make and possibly share reasonable versions of our own airports of choice as well as some limited areas of photoreal scenery.If we could convert to FBX format one way or another, we might be able to reuse some of the models/scenery.

@IPACS,
Thanks for the response - I was simply hoping that FBX which is defined by 3DStudioMax might be "easy".
On the other hand, is there a chance that your scenery converter tool could use a DLL that we users could develop so that other formats could be utilized? The folks at fsdeveloper.com are very talented at 3D format conversion - but of course, they can not produce MAX format.

Thanks again

Dave

@IPACS,
Is there any chance of also using the 3DStudioMax exchange format called FBX with your scenery converter tool - I suppose it would take some code alterations but since FBX can represent the MAX format, maybe the changes needed wouldn't be too significant. The reason I ask is that many of us users can't afford 3DStudioMax and we just want to make small changes like adding simple airports (one runway, taxiways, a few buildings, a couple static aircraft, etc..) and a freeware 3D modeler called Blender can export/import FBX.

Thanks

Dave

As far as pilot eyepoint movement, you can assign keyboard/buttons to move forward/aft, left/right, up and down. Settings->Controls->View->Move (at the bottom of the scrollable list). Personally, I use the Point of View HAT on my Thrustmaster Hotas 4 Joystick/Throttle system because I feel that each aircraft needs a different setting. I want to be as close to the instrument panel as possible so I can read the instruments (old steam gauges are easier than electronic displays) but I still want to see well. I also like to sit back in my physical chair sometimes and then I need to move the eyepoint.

Jet-Pack (IPACS),
My preference is your preference - as evidenced by your incredible effort with New York City - especially in VR mode! Many times in FSX/P3D I would purchase 1 meter photoreal and then object by object add back in trees and buildings so as to make it fairly nice - a lot of work.
However, the question might be what to do until the world is populated with that same level of quality. Everyone has their favorite spots to fly, and right now, FS2 is limited to small but beautifully done areas of the world.. Maybe some database (like OSM) oriented + AI tool (where are the buildings and the trees in the image?) could be used along with a object placer like Instant Scenery 3 over maybe a 4 to 8 meter (not sure what resolution is there right now for the entire world) imagery to add some reasonably improved areas - perhaps designated by the user. Note that some of the folks at fsdeveloper.com have done some of that for FSX. Along with a simple runway system generator for now, users could at least fly over areas of their interest. My preference is at least to have the underlying imagery be photoreal - even at lower resolution to begin with - I don't care for Landclass.
This is a great topic for discussion - it's nice to have input to such a talented set of developers.

Dave

theskyisthelimit99,
Happy New Year almost (to all FS2 enthusiasts!!),
I think if you see 45fps, you are getting ASW to kick in. If you want to see it without ASW, hit CNTL+Numpad_1 (check numlock mode) and you should get back to 90fps. To go back to ASW, CNTL+numpad_4. ASW removes jitter on my system but adds back quite a bit of texture warp distortion so I don't prefer it.

Don't give up just yet - it's possible that IPACS may have some ideas - and it might not be the OpenGL issue with regards to trees, but something else. I was just guessing at a possible problem - I think that Nvidia cards have kept up with newer OpenGL - just not sure about AMD. FSX SE is still twice as slow as FS2.

I agree on the hopeful future use of bump mapping the terrain using color and/or some vector map data (like OpenStreetMap) to help. War Thunder uses that technique on some of its maps to great effect - any roads, rock area, mowed/plowed fields, etc look so much better than "flat". FS2 uses bump mapping to great effect on their aircraft - hope that someday (along with many other wishes) they can on terrain. I would like some houses and generic buildings as well wherever there is a reasonable size rectangle in the texture.

One thing we all have to remember is that Aerofly FS2 uses OpenGL4.5 for graphics and not DirectX11. I don't think that older graphics cards are always good at recent OpenGL since it isn't used by many games.

Jan,
Thanks for your thoughts. As far as ADE, I just use it with an ortho-rectified aerial image from FsEarthTiles so I know the lat/lon corners, and then lay out the runways and taxiways over the real image - and save that - no hangars, no aircraft,etc. Then I use Flight1 Instant Scenery 3 to select library objects (including ones that I have added - aircraft, buildings, trees, cars, towers, ILS shacks,etc...) and move them carefully into place using the realtime FSX/P3D screen to see that they are going to the exact spot and orientation I want - which then updates the placement BGL file. I can fly right then without having to restart and test, restart and test! One to two hours later, I have a pretty good airport - assuming that a flat rectangular area is OK. If I need some different elevations, then SbuilderX is utilized to fiddle with terrain height. Instant Scenery 3 is $30 - wonderful - the other tools are freeware - BTW, add ModelConverterX from fsdeveloper.com into the mix in order to view and fixup the actual objects.

@IPACS - I now get the correct answers for lonlat to web-mercator conversion at Kingman - BUT not exactly, either my trig functions are different (I'm using Visual Studio 2015 with everything being "double" ) or my values for PI and TM_PI and Rad_to_Degree are slightly different - if you could provide those, it would be helpful. Again, thanks for the code - pretty much what I had but different scale factors. I now can place some objects at KOKB - my home airport in Oceanside, CA. Thanks again!

A couple of comments about three screen (non VR) viewing:
1) A detailed setup comment on Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/fi…s/?id=738066887

2) - OR - I just set the graphics in Aerofly for Windowed Mode instead of 1920x1020 and then stretch it with the mouse - but there is no precision in that - things don't exactly line up - but it's simple and I don't run in Surround mode.

I prefer VR but sometimes fly 3 screens so that others can watch what I'm doing. Aerofly has such great performance (FPS) that it still is quite great with 3 screens.

VR mode:
You seem to have normally fast 2D performance but quite slow 3D. It should easily be 90fps (it really has to be smooth most all the time)but maybe with quite a bit lower RenderScale Factor - I run at 1.5 or so on my 970. I also use custom graphics settings - window mode, off, custom,high, high, medium, medium, medium. Also, low to medium on cloud density plus visibility near high. Stereo VR should simply halve the FPS in 2D minus some for RenderScale. Of course when you fly at highly detailed cities like San Francisco or New York City, the FPS will go down but as I said, I expect VR to be somewhat better than one third what I get in 2D.

Also, I don't run Steam VR - just straight Oculus Runtimes and I sometimes have to hit CNTL+Numpad_1 to get rid of ASW which I don't like at all.

Dave

In addition to an exact starting flight scenario (Position, orientation, height, speed, aircraft configuration(flaps, gear, throttle, etc...), weather(cloud layers and densities, wind direction/strength), time of day,etc..) and which aircraft - for testing purposes, users like to have a filename for these starting points so they can easily restart with a filename choice window in that situation without it being written down on paper and a lot of mouse clicking. We also like to save the graphics and other simulation settings in a config file with a filename choice window with a complete list of all choices that we have saved.
We might end up after a few months with over 50 flight scenarios(e.g. "F-18_GrandCanyon_overRiver_400knots" and maybe 5 to 10 config files (e.g. "Medium_graphics_RenderScale1.4").

Of course it depends where you are, but you need to set tree density (graphics settings at the bottom) at least at MEDIUM. If you go to Calaveras in California, RWY 31 takeoff in Cessna, this is what you should see.