101st Air Refueling Wing Support Thread

[campbeme]

Didn't know that. I thought that there was just a typo in the wing span. I do use Jan's FDEs but wasn't aware about the flight characteristics regarding the wing span.

I was working on a FSX AFCAD since the stock FSX KBGR didn't have any MIL_CARGO parking. Guess I'll revise the wing span back to 45.8 ft. They still should park in the proper spot since I marked them as K135.

Steve

Steve,

You would probably be better off marking the spots with 132A, this is the code used in the aircraft.cfg for the package.

Mark

[SteveLewis]

Changed the parking codes in my ADE file to 132A and they parked where they should. Now I'll change the wingspan to 145.8 and see what happens. Tuess I'll have to do some plane watching to catch them though.

Steve

[MIKE JG]

FSX related questions belong here:

http://www.militaryaiworks.com/newforum ... m.php?f=44

[Firebird]

Didn't know that. I thought that there was just a typo in the wing span. I do use Jan's FDEs but wasn't aware about the flight characteristics regarding the wing span.

Steve

If you go to his website and have a look at his documentation it is probably the best complete description, that I have seen, of the way that different parms alter an fde. Whilst this documents the immediate direct impacts due to the nature of the balancing act that is the fde there can be knock-on indirect causes as well. It is not often that changing one parm can fix an issue and leave everything else unchanged.

[MIKE JG]

As I understand it, in the FS9 Aircraft.cfg file, the wingspan helps control the virtual "size" of the AI model. You could model a rock and make it fly either like a fighter or transport by altering things like gross weight, wingspan, etc.

In this case the Stratotanker's wingspan value has been shorted so that the aircraft flies a more normal sized VFR traffic pattern, one that allows the aircraft to line up with the runway much better than with no alteration.

To see what I'm talking about, take any of your large commercial AI models, write a quick flight plan that has them do VFR touch and goes and watch how clumsy the model flies its VFR pattern trying to land. That was no good for this model, we wanted it to be able to do real VFR touch and goes because they do this all the time in real life. Mike MacIntyre did some experimenting with different values and by tricking the sim into thinking the model is smaller in physical size than it really is, the sim flies a closer, tighter pattern more suited to doing VFR touch and goes.

Mike M. is the brains behind all this, but this is how I understand it to work.

Unfortunately that wingspan value is used for additional things in FSX so that screws things up if you try to use it in that sim.

[Tom C]

Me, Tom. Sad to see you don't remember me.

Huh, how could I forget you Greg, you turned me off BRU for a long time

Once I had re-read what was typed, I kind of figured it was you the question was been asked of.
I really must get that file of mine going again, so many ADE files sitting doing nothing all probably waiting for the last 20% to be done.
I turned into a lazy git after the last few files we released at AIG Ground.
Now that's gone tits up, I've only made a few for my own sim.
Shame the way it died there, but everything in life goes away at some stage I guess.

Anyway, in all my yapping, I forgot to thank you guys for all your work and help over the years.

[viper810]

Hi Guys, Three questions regarding the new model aircraft cfg and textures.
1. The suffix Heavy being used "atc_heavy=1" I have never heard the KC-135's based at Mildenhall here in the U.K. use heavy after the callsign? Surely theis should be "atc_heavy=0" I realise the KC-135 can operate at a maximum gross takeoff weight of 322,500 pounds and aircraft with a gross takeoff weight of 300,000 pounds or higher should use Heavy as a suffix but perhaps this is more commonly used with the KC-135's in the States?

Regards, Steve

The KC-135's from Mildenhall also use "HEAVY" sometimes. Last week i've heard it twice. I can also proof it.

[KellyB]

This is a great place! Glad I found it.
Just installed the 101st scenery and it brings back memories of my time there. I still live close to KBGR. Even the building I worked in, which was OPS at the time, is there.

One question: What controls when the buildings, etc, pop into view? It seems they should do so sooner than they do on my machine. (Intel i5-3750; Nvidia GTX 650). Is there an adjustment I can make, or is it coded in the scenery? Or is it just FS9?

Thanks.

[campbeme]

This is a great place! Glad I found it.
Just installed the 101st scenery and it brings back memories of my time there. I still live close to KBGR. Even the building I worked in, which was OPS at the time, is there.

One question: What controls when the buildings, etc, pop into view? It seems they should do so sooner than they do on my machine. (Intel i5-3750; Nvidia GTX 650). Is there an adjustment I can make, or is it coded in the scenery? Or is it just FS9?

Thanks.

Hi there and welcome, to answer your question the buildings are designed that way to give better performance around the field.

[KellyB]

This is a great place! Glad I found it.
Just installed the 101st scenery and it brings back memories of my time there. I still live close to KBGR. Even the building I worked in, which was OPS at the time, is there.

One question: What controls when the buildings, etc, pop into view? It seems they should do so sooner than they do on my machine. (Intel i5-3750; Nvidia GTX 650). Is there an adjustment I can make, or is it coded in the scenery? Or is it just FS9?

Thanks.

Hi there and welcome, to answer your question the buildings are designed that way to give better performance around the field.

So I gather that it is not something I can adjust after the fact? I don't want to seem critical here, I just want everything my way

Seriously, I was just wondering if it's possible to tinker with scenery after it's done. If so, there are other sceneries I might muck about with a bit. If not, then I'll just enjoy this well done scenery as it is, along with the others, and marvel at the skill and ability of those who CAN.

Thanks.

[Greg]

I was just wondering if it's possible to tinker with scenery after it's done.

Not in this case, sorry. The LOD distance is normally built into the individual models, which are then compiled together into the library bgl file you find in the package.

[KellyB]

I was just wondering if it's possible to tinker with scenery after it's done.

Not in this case, sorry. The LOD distance is normally built into the individual models, which are then compiled together into the library bgl file you find in the package.

Thanks. Question answered.
It really does not detract all that much from this well done scenery.

[KellyB]

I'm doing something wrong.
I have placed the requisite files in their proper locations, i.e., the aircraft in the aircraft folder, and the traffic bgl in the Scenery/World/Scenery folder. Traffic slider is at 100%.
I cannot get the flights to work.
If I use AI Traffic Scanner, it shows more Maine aircraft than there should be, and if I change the date and time to match one of the flight plans, nothing happens.

Native fs9 ai is working.

FS9 sp1
win 7 home 64 bit

What should I be looking for??

[MIKE JG]

Check to see if you have duplicate AFCAD or ADE or AFX files for the base you are looking at.

[KellyB]

Thanks for the reply.
Since I posted, I got it going. Uninstalled MAIW Maine, thoroughly scrubbed and cleaned the folders, and then reinstalled. Mirable dictu, Maine kc135's started taxying and flying.

I don't know, and probably never will know what was preventing them in the first place, but all is well now.

[MIKE JG]

Good to hear! That was a fun little package to make, Maniacs!

[KellyB]

Until 1994, when I retired, I was with the 101st, and remember when the kc135a's arrived to replace the f101 voodoos. There was a lot of grumbling about the planes and even more about SAC. Then came the end of the cold war and AMC, and yet another round of grumblings.
In the end, it all worked out, and it is still a very active outfit flying daily over my head at the house.

So, for me this package has a special sort of place in the sim, and I thank you for building it.

[KellyB]

Another question:
For some reason the kc135's now show up in AI Traffic Analyzer as "SILENT" rather than "MAINE" as they were doing.

What sort of thing(s) might cause the change?

Thanks again.

[Firebird]

One of two things either you have altered all their atc_airline parms from MAINE to SILENT or you have added atc_airline=SILENT to the [General] section. The SILENT should only be used for the atc_type parm under the general section.

[KellyB]

Mystery solved: It was in the [GENERAL] section. Thank you.
Mystery begun: I didn't do that; at least not knowingly. Is there some other way that might have happened? I'm just puzzled.
I did look at the flight plans in AI Flight Planner, but made no changes. Other than that, I cannot imagine what might have changed the callsign. And as I indicated in my original post, they were showing up as MAINE in AI Traffic Analyzer previously.