UH-72A Lakota

[clickclickdoh]

Those aren't in an object library. Those are custom objects John Young mad UKe that embedded in the scenery filled themselves


Let me get with John and see if he is okay with me compiling so.e of his objects into a single fsx/p3d library to make life easier on users of those sim versions

[John Young]

That's fine with me Brent. Let me know if you need the model files.

John

[jimrodger]

Cheers guys, saves me pulling out what hair I have left trying to find them ..

mant thanks

Jim

[geoffj]

Hi John,

I am relatively new to FSX, only slowly building for the last 5 months. I recently installed the Lakota package and on taking a look around Laupheim I noticed some trees and default buildings on taxiways. On checking the file EHTL_ADEX_JY.bgl with ADE I see that the airport properties all relate to Fort Polk KPOE rather than to EHTL Laupheim. I downloaded the package again yesterday just to check and it is the case with the current download file. I am not sure if this would result in the EHTL_ADEX_JY_CVX.bgl file not displaying exclusions correctly or is it more likely that there is a problem with my FSX installation given that there are no previous reports of this that I can see on the forum?

many thanks, Geoff

[John Young]

We produced the Lakota package 3 years ago and unfortunately, Brent, who made the Laupheim scenery is not on the FS scene at present. However, I've just checked the scenery and there are indeed 4 trees on the edge of the small apron on the north side of the airfield. I couldn't see any stray default buildings.

I can't easily try and correct the scenery myself because the paths to objects are all set to the installation in my old PC which is packed away. However, the trees can be removed by reducing the autogen density to "Normal".

Best I can suggest at the moment.

John

[geoffj]

Hi John,

Many thanks for your reply, all understood. On my system I have found that the effect of the ETHL.ADEX.JY.BGL file having the properties of KPOE, except for the altitude, is that FSX only displays Brent's original scenery at ETHL, and KPOE ends up as 2 airports at different altitudes and does not display correctly.

By removing the three "_JY" files from ETHL and making ADE exclude and airfield ground polys for Brent's original ETHL files, both ETHL and KPOE now display as expected. The only thing missing is whatever was in the ETHL_ADEX_JY_OBJ.BGL file.

The images show the before and after views at ETHL looking west from just south of the 27 threshold. I still need to remove the strange "ice taxiway" visible in the foreground and add some FSX trees to make it less sterile, but just surprised that no FSX users have reported encountering this before.

Many thanks for all your work for the fltsim community and very much looking forward to the S-92.

All the best, Geoff

[John Young]

The ETHL_ADEX_JY_OBJ.bgl file contains an exclude area and some trees.

John

[Kaiii3]

AIG has uploaded the first flightplan with an upgraded H145 to the servers. Thanks to John for allowing us to made the changes. If you want to check out the new helicopter system get AIGAIM 1.0 as well as AIGTC 0.3 and watch both Helicopters of East Anglian Air Ambulance flying from theier bases to different emergencies and hospitals around the area.

Full support only in P3Dv5 but many features do work in V4.5HF3 as well

In case you have not seen the preview: http://www.alpha-india.net/2020/02/16/a ... o-preview/

[miljan]

Serbian Police H145 with flightplans and update for Luxembourg Police uploaded.

[Wojtek]

Hi John, I don't have any Lakota lights in fsx. Maybe I'm missing something in the Effects folder?
greetings
Wojtek

[John Young]

You are not missing anything Wojtek. My Lakota models don't have attached lights. Aircraft.cfg lights can't be used because of the animated lift.

John

[Wojtek]

Too bad, they will fly dark as witches
Regards,
wojtek

[jgowing]

On the Agusta A109 thread today, there's an image showing the A109's and NH-90's together. The NH-90s have lights, and also a nice animated lift, it seems, so I wondered what technique was used to achieve the lights.

Jon

[John Young]

Good question Jon.

Normally lights are specified in the aircraft.cfg file. However lights specified that way will not rise with the animated lift. To overcome that in FSX and P3D, lights can be specified as effects files, but attached to parts within the model so they rise with the lift. In FS9, so I have always thought, it's not possible to attach effects, so I have no lights at all in that version. Maybe Lukas could say how he achieved the lights in the FS9 NH-90 model. Maybe it's with xml code.

I think I took the view at the time with the Lakota that I would treat FS9 and FSX/P3D the same and not use lights at all.

The A109's for FSX and P3D do have attached lights, but I am thinking of removing the landing lights because they tend to separate from their positions at a distance and look odd. I had the same problem with other of my models since viewing them with my new PC, but after asking around on the forum, others were not experiencing the problem when viewing landings. There was no problem on my old PC. It might just be a feature of my new graphics card, but I would rather not take the chance of others experiencing the same problem.

John.

[mage]

...lights specified that way will not rise with the animated lift. To overcome that in FSX and P3D, lights can be specified as effects files, but attached to parts within the model so they rise with the lift. In FS9, so I have always thought, it's not possible to attach effects...

Lights (and any other effect) can be attached to parts of a model for use in FS9. There's an "attachtool" as part of the FS2004 gamepack for Gmax. I had a brief look online and it's not widely mentioned, but is here in this post https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/resou ... orter.183/

Lights attached can look a bit orb-like and generally are very visible (perhaps too much) over considerable distances.

The United Traffic Team's Boeing 787 models use it to place wingtip lights that follow the flexing of the wings on that model.

[John Young]

You can use that tool to attach an effect to an FS9 scenery object, but you can't attach it to an FS9 AI aircraft. You can do both in FSX/P3D though.

John

[Wojtek]

I added beacon and strobe in FSX, they are correct only when taxiing, then they are too low but at least I can see them at the airport
[LIGHTS]
//Types: 1=beacon, 2=strobe, 3=navigation, 4=cockpit
light.0 = 1, -20.0, 0.0, 11.90, fx_beaconh ,
light.1 = 1, -20.0, 0.0, 11.90, fx_strobe ,

wojtek

[John Young]

Unlike FS9, light effects can be attached in FSX and P3D and have them rise with the helicopter animated lift. For the Lakota, I chose not to do that. As you have discovered, you can't make the lights rise if specified in the aircraft.cfg file. They look a bit daft when the helicopter lifts off.

John

[Wojtek]

Of course, I only fly at night and that's why I needed this lights.
wojtek

[proximo]

Hello
NH 90 was created in FSDS, all lights are simply polygons ( child parts of the take off animation polygon) with specified name ( light_beacon , light_nav ), see FS9 MakeMDl Material Names, nothing special, no attached effect, no xml code.
All lights are only in LOD 400/300, LOD 200 beacon/taxi/land only, LOD 100 beacon only, remaining LODs are without lights

Lukas

Good question Jon.

Normally lights are specified in the aircraft.cfg file. However lights specified that way will not rise with the animated lift. To overcome that in FSX and P3D, lights can be specified as effects files, but attached to parts within the model so they rise with the lift. In FS9, so I have always thought, it's not possible to attach effects, so I have no lights at all in that version. Maybe Lukas could say how he achieved the lights in the FS9 NH-90 model. Maybe it's with xml code.

I think I took the view at the time with the Lakota that I would treat FS9 and FSX/P3D the same and not use lights at all.

The A109's for FSX and P3D do have attached lights, but I am thinking of removing the landing lights because they tend to separate from their positions at a distance and look odd. I had the same problem with other of my models since viewing them with my new PC, but after asking around on the forum, others were not experiencing the problem when viewing landings. There was no problem on my old PC. It might just be a feature of my new graphics card, but I would rather not take the chance of others experiencing the same problem.

John.