Military AI Works

Is there anyone out there that could do a new Bitburg AB, since the one at flightsim, slows down the computer.

Pemor2.

This one has gone unanswered for a few days so I'll just add a quick response from me. The question is very simply put and without any elaboration of what is being asked for. Yes, I could do a new Bitburg, but If I were to do it, I would want to do it to the same standard as the airfields I have already built. That would require two things - the photographic information to work from and about 1200 hours of time. Performance wouldn't be an issue as I know how to program efficiently in Gmax for FS9 and FSX. It would tie me up about for about 10 months and you really need to be motivated to do that. I don't think it would interest me unfortunately.

Sorry about that Pemore2. I'll gladly teach you Gmax though if you want to have a go yourself.

John

John Young wrote:This one has gone unanswered for a few days so I'll just add a quick response from me. The question is very simply put and without any elaboration of what is being asked for. Yes, I could do a new Bitburg, but If I were to do it, I would want to do it to the same standard as the airfields I have already built. That would require two things - the photographic information to work from and about 1200 hours of time. Performance wouldn't be an issue as I know how to program efficiently in Gmax for FS9 and FSX. It would tie me up about for about 10 months and you really need to be motivated to do that. I don't think it would interest me unfortunately.

Sorry about that Pemore2. I'll gladly teach you Gmax though if you want to have a go yourself.

John

I'll agree with you there ,John .Not to mention the hours of research involved ! Bases, as aircraft fleets ,are in a constant flux it seems . Just when ya've got it nailed another pic turns up and WTF you've got to re-analyse the subject Retro -ing involves many pitfalls . Offhand, looking quickly at Bitburg ,there SEEMS to be no problem for someone to do it .The only major drawback would be the unique control tower !

Im not going to committ to full blown scenery of BT, but im sure I can do a basic one with HAS, Tower, Hangers, trees, parking. I have most of the models already. As for FPS, 72 HAS at BT.

Cheers

Ian

PS Version 1.0 of Upper Heyford is not far away now. Im doing the night textures at the moment.

I don't think most people realize how much time a full base takes. It took me two years to do Nellis and I had actually been there in person to take pictures for the textures. Without those and having been there first hand, would have taken even longer.

MIKE JG wrote:I don't think most people realize how much time a full base takes. It took me two years to do Nellis and I had actually been there in person to take pictures for the textures. Without those and having been there first hand, would have taken even longer.

Mike

Agreed. I have spent hundreds of hours on Upper Heyford and the first release is nearly complete. But I have not even touched the area behind the hangers or the domestic part, yet the volume of objects in the scenery is staggering. Bitburg is not far from the complexity of UH and to do that would take forever unless I spent 12 hours a day on it which I dont have. I look back to when I made my first scenery which was Spangdahlem back in 2005 and think it looks poor in comparison to my latest efforts. BUT it took two months (as did Lakenheath) start to finish including research to release compared with Coningsby which took at least 2 years on and off and hundreds of hours.

Cheers

Ian