Jump to content

Timmy

+MODDER
  • Content count

    183
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Timmy


  1. It really has no FM yet. I'm using the F-86D as a base for testing although I've done something to it that makes landings very tricky.

     

    Speaking of landings. I've searched here and at TW and have yet to find a reasonable answer to this question... How do you get the gear to compress where you want it on the ground? I built the model using reasonably good drawings - so I'm happy with the relative size of the gear uncompressed. In real life, under the weight of the aircraft, the gear should compress much more than they currently do in the game. Is there a general rule of thumb to compress the landing gear under the weight of the aircraft on the ground or is it simply a matter of five hours tinkering with the spring and damping factors in the .ini file?


  2. I agree that mapping is the most difficult part of any 3d project.

     

    So far I have little distortion. I understand the need to have panel lines running perpendicular but that need is compromised by the need to have everything as large as possible and for everything to look like the object you are trying to paint. As I stated earlier - I hate trying to paint the stock 3rd wire models because I can't figure out what anything is. IMHO, mapping swept wings as disjointed - straight panels butted up against each other makes no sense. I'd rather be able to see what I'm painting and sacrifice a bit of space rather than filling up every pixel with map.

     

    This is what I now have (basically taking the 4 maps I already had and combining them.) This probably isn't as good as could possibly be done but I think scaling every major piece the same is important as well. Having wings with larger rivets than the fuselage looks goofy to me. I'll grant you that there is room for improvement here - but I doubt that I'll change it much from what you see. Thanks for the help!

     

    J32.jpg


  3. Look at the bitmap below. In the upper right corner is the left half of the vertical fin. I was planning on mapping the left half on the left wing bitmap and the right half on the right wing bitmap. The problem is that the game won't recognize multiple maps on the same mesh. So I've mapped myself into a corner. Just looking for a solution.

     

    J32LeftWing.jpg

     

    As you can see below - the vertical fin is mapped - but it shows up as a blue material in the game. (I have already solved the material problem with the fuselage that appears in this pic)

     

    img00007.jpg


  4. Ahh - the voice of doom... :smile:

     

    I thought about the random damage factor. The only solution I can think of it to scale the vertical fin down and put it on one of the wing bitmaps. That won't cause major problems and the re-mapping won't be terribly difficult or tedious (no more than normal.)

     

    I'm not too worried about the FM. Get to it when you get to it. I've still got some heavy lifting to do on this end.


  5. Right now I have four bitmaps - Nose, Fuselage, Right Wing and Left Wing. The standard has been five (adding tail) so that's the way I've always done it - I don't mind multiple maps as long as I can figure out what is what. I really hate the TW default aircraft maps as they make no damn sense with parts everywhere. My opinion is to split the model up into top, bottom and sides so that it doesn't distort too badly - but leave it together so the skinner will know what is what.

     

    The current maps are 2048X2048 and render beautifully in MAX. Not so much in the game - hmm, have to check out the detail levels...

     

    Thanks for the answer. I'll get to testing.


  6. Moving right along with the Lansen - I've tried to minimize the number of .bmp files while fillinf up as much space as I can. The problem lies in my mapping - I have mapped the vertical tail in halves on the left and right wing bitmap respectivly. Not knowing that there was a limitation in the game regarding multiple materials on a mesh (It renders fine in MAX but doesn't show in the game.) My idea for a work around is to split the vertical tail into two vertical tails while retaining the aerodynamic properties of only one tail. This will allow me to keep the current mapping - reducing textures - and allow for proper damage modeling by making the hit boxes the same on each mesh they should, in theory, be damaged eequally.

     

    Like this:

     

    VertTailLeft

    ParentComponentName=Fuselage

    ModelNodeName=VertTailLeft

    DestroyedNodeName=DAM_VertTailLeft

    ShowFromCockpit=TRUE

    DetachWhenDestroyed=TRUE

    DamageRating=DESTROYED

    MassFraction=0.027

    HasAeroCoefficients=TRUE

    CD0=0.0007

    Cyb=-0.3201

    Cyp=0.0202

    Cyr=0.2895

    Clb=0.0031

    Clp=-0.0002

    Clr=-0.0028

    Cnb=0.1447

    Cnp=-0.0091

    Cnr=-0.9511

    CD0MachTableNumData=4

    CD0MachTableDeltaX=0.469300

    CD0MachTableStartX=0.00

    CD0MachTableData=1.876000,0.999480,0.996480,13.299700

    ClbAlphaTableNumData=15

    ClbAlphaTableDeltaX=4.00

    ClbAlphaTableStartX=-28.00

    ClbAlphaTableData=-23.562,-20.743,-17.822,-108.739,-72.182,-8.599,-5.421,-2.216,1.000,4.211,7.401,10.555,13.658,16.694,19.649

    ClpAlphaTableNumData=15

    ClpAlphaTableDeltaX=4.00

    ClpAlphaTableStartX=-28.00

    ClpAlphaTableData=156.409,119.508,86.496,58.047,34.743,17.070,5.402,0.000,1.000,8.415,22.134,41.920,67.422,98.173,133.606

    ClrAlphaTableNumData=15

    ClrAlphaTableDeltaX=4.00

    ClrAlphaTableStartX=-28.00

    ClrAlphaTableData=-20.253,-18.526,-16.439,-14.032,-11.351,-8.450,-5.384,-2.214,1.000,4.194,7.307,10.277,13.047,15.564,17.777

    CnbAlphaTableNumData=15

    CnbAlphaTableDeltaX=4.00

    CnbAlphaTableStartX=-28.00

    CnbAlphaTableData=0.860,0.893,0.922,0.947,0.967,0.983,0.993,0.999,1.000,0.996,0.987,0.974,0.955,0.932,0.905

    CnpAlphaTableNumData=15

    CnpAlphaTableDeltaX=4.00

    CnpAlphaTableStartX=-28.00

    CnpAlphaTableData=-5.706,-5.146,-4.477,-3.711,-2.864,-1.951,-0.990,0.000,1.000,1.991,2.952,3.867,4.716,5.482,6.152

    CnrAlphaTableNumData=15

    CnrAlphaTableDeltaX=4.00

    CnrAlphaTableStartX=-28.00

    CnrAlphaTableData=0.102,0.110,0.117,0.123,0.429,0.710,0.913,1.038,1.000,0.884,0.604,0.130,0.126,0.120,0.113

    MinExtentPosition=-0.06,-8.07,0.57

    MaxExtentPosition= 0.06,-3.27,2.77

    CollisionPoint 001=0.00,-2.543,0.78

    CollisionPoint 002]=0.00,-4.952,2.709

    CollisionPoint 003]=0.00,-5.092,0.708

    SystemName 001]=Rudder

    SystemName 002]=RedTailLight

    SystemName 003]=TailLight

    HasArmor=TRUE

    ArmorMaterial=ALUMINUM

    Armor FRONT].Thickness=7

    Armor REAR].Thickness=7

    Armor RIGHT].Thickness=7

    Armor LEFT].Thickness=7

    Armor TOP].Thickness=7

    Armor BOTTOM].Thickness=7

     

    VertTailRight

    ParentComponentName=Fuselage

    ModelNodeName=VertTailRight

    DestroyedNodeName=DAM_VertTailRight

    ShowFromCockpit=TRUE

    DetachWhenDestroyed=TRUE

    DamageRating=DESTROYED

    HasAeroCoefficients=FALSE

    MinExtentPosition=-0.06,-8.07,0.57

    MaxExtentPosition= 0.06,-3.27,2.77

    CollisionPoint 001]=0.00,-2.543,0.78

    CollisionPoint 002]=0.00,-4.952,2.709

    CollisionPoint 003]=0.00,-5.092,0.708

    HasArmor=TRUE

    ArmorMaterial=ALUMINUM

    Armor FRONT].Thickness=7

    Armor REAR].Thickness=7

    Armor RIGHT].Thickness=7

    Armor LEFT].Thickness=7

    Armor TOP].Thickness=7

    Armor BOTTOM].Thickness=7

     

    Question: Will this work the way I want or should I re-map the vertical tail, rudder, stabilizers and ailerons into their own bitmap? The latter causing problems with space utilization within the bitmap (There will be gobs of free space on the tail bitmap if I keep everything to scale. Not being lazy - as I've yet to map the right side, but trying to be efficient (that's what I keep telling myself.)

     

    TD


  7. Let me tell you a secret kids, mapping an aircraft sucks ass.

     

    It's not the mapping that's difficult. It's the mapping that will make for good skins that sucks. Each and every polygon has to be placed on a flat surface in such a way that when you put color on it - the rivets won't distort - and the decals don't bleed all over the train...

     

    GUEST #4:

    No, the food was excellent.

    MAÎTRE D:

    Perhaps you're not... happy with the service?

    GUEST #4:

    No, no. No complaints.

    GUEST #4'S WIFE:

    It's just that we have to go. I'm having rather a heavy period.

    GUEST #3:

    Hmm.

    GUEST #3'S WIFE:

    Mm mm.

    GUEST #4:

    And... we... have... a... train to catch.

    MAÎTRE D:

    Ah.

    GUEST #4'S WIFE:

    Oh. Yes. Yes, of course. We have a train to catch, and I don't want to start bleeding all over the seats. Ha, hm hm hm.

    MAÎTRE D:

    Madam?

    GUEST #4:

    Perhaps we should be going.

    GUEST #4'S WIFE:

    Oh.

    MAÎTRE D:

    Oh! Very well, monsieur. Thank you so much. So nice to see you, and I hope very much we will see you again very soon. Au revoir, monsieur.


  8. In TK's many descriptions of the gear animating sequences he always states the following:

     

    At frame 0 the gear should be fully retracted and uncompressed.

    It should start this way in key frame 1 (or 11 or whatever) and end in frame 10 with the gear extended and compressed.

     

    Is this all that needs to be done for shock stroke in max?

     

    I see a couple of paragraphs that explain that shock animation can de done seperatly. Could this be done with key frame 41 extended, uncompressed and frame 50 extended and compressed? Or is it in the same frames as retraction?

     

    I'm having problems with the shock animation because of the canted stance of the main landing gear - simple linear motion throws the oleo out of the pison so I was thinking about animating the shock stroke. I'll probably be able to answer my own question with trial and error - but any input would be appreciated.

     

    TD


  9. I generally take an aircraft that is similar in size or shape (no help there) and change the .ini files to match my model.

     

    For instance - I used the F-86K with the Lansen model. I renamed all the meshes and changed the positions of the pilots - afterburner - guns - the radius of the wheels. That will get it into the game. Then you will have to fix the rotation angles of the ailerons, elevators, flaps, rudders etc... Truth be told, I know nothing about getting the aircraft to perform properly, but I can get it into the game.

     

    There is a program out there by p10ppy called min-max that will give you a great deal of information that you'll need regarding your model to get it working properly in the game. This program is invaluable and p10ppy was not only nominated for a Nobel Prize for his efforts, but was also cannonized by the Order Eels Keen on Hovercraft.

     

    You can find min-max here: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autoc...p;showfile=5125

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..