F-35 Variants (FS9, FSX and P3Dv4)

[MIKE JG]

Love that top carrier deck screen shot, amazing!

[swp53]

Hi John,
Just read on the AIG forums that in P3D trials by the modeler Andrew Q "Techmen"- Raven FS Labs who made the AI Embraer E-170 and E-175 and working on other models found if he used single lod AI model compared to a multi lod model the single lod were giving higher frame rates which seems odd. Another moddeler FS Painter "Missi" also found the same.
This may be of interest with your F-35's in P3D.
http://www.alpha-india.net/forums/index ... #msg266997
Regards,
Steve

[hschuit]

Does not surprise me, I compared a scenery with 20 instances of a single LOD model vs a multi LOD version of the same model in P3Dv4 and I did not see significant difference in performance (models were FSX MDL format). I am no expert in this field but I read articles on the web claiming that with current computer hardware, polygons/vertices are less important. Keeping the amount of drawcalls as low as possible seems to be what really matters.

[John Young]

Yes I've read that too and I can tell with my own installation that AI copes better in P3Dv4 than any other sim version.

We discovered back in the ACG days with scenery, following a Microsoft article on the subject, that indeed polygons don't matter, but as you say, draw calls and with them, the number of texture vertices, really do. That's why we could build control towers with very detailed steps and handrails. The number of polygons in the rails might amount to a couple of thousand. If left un-welded, the texture vertices could amount to several thousand. However because each rail can share the same texture vertices, once welded together in the mapping, the number only amounts to 4. The frame rate is phenomenal.

It's not a lot of help in the case of the F-35s unfortunately. With so many moving parts, the draw calls and the Tverts are high because very few are shared. The P3D models are not the issue for me in any case, because they are the same as the FSX native code models. I'll need to put the LODs in for that sim version so P3Dv4 will get them anyway, but I could see what happens in P3Dv4 if I take them out. It would at least cut down on file size.

John

[John Young]

I managed to get the LODs and the paints done for the FS9 F-35C's this week. The 4 aircraft of VX-23 have gone to Hartwig for inclusion in his Pax River scenery as stable mates to the 5 "B's" previously provided. 16 "C's" have also been painted for VMA-101 at Eglin. Jamie is kindly tweaking the parking in his existing scenery of the airfield to accommodate them. I have some fine tuning to do, but that should only take a day or so before I'm satisfied with the "C".

The last element in the F-35B painting are the 9 aircraft of VMFA-211 at Yuma:



These will be going to Brent today for inclusion in his update to the MAIW Yuma scenery.

Meanwhile, Steve is continuing to work with the FDE's for the aircraft to eliminate the need, where possible, for an animated lift in the STOSL models.

To summarise, these are the current model/scenery offerings that we have already finished or are nearing completion:

16 X F-35B's at Iwakuni
29 X F-35B's at Beaufort (Marines + UK)
9 X F-35B's at Yuma
16 X F-35Cs at Eglin (they also have F-35A's).
5 X F-35Cs aboard USS JFK off Jacksonville (Carr2006.zip required)
9 X F-35B's and C's at Pax River.

There are also 16 additional B's and Cs at Edwards and Lemoore that I am intending to paint now but for future use.

With a fair wind, I am hoping to start the FSX/P3D conversions next weekend. The "C" looks like the first candidate.

The "A" modelling for the 3 sim versions will be done too, but there's enough going on at the moment without further complicating things.

Huge project, but very enjoyable, thanks to the involvement of others.

John

[swp53]

Out of interest here are the results of LOD testing in P3D,
http://www.ravenfslabs.com/prepar3dv4-a ... rformance/

[John Young]

Thanks for that. I get the gist, but it would be helpful if I could read the graph legends.

Not for debate in this thread, but the news is tempting me to re-think what I build for in the future: FS9 - because people are still wedded to it and a single LOD conversion for P3Dv4. Forget about FSX and multi-LODs. That's a lot less conversion work.

John

[MIKE JG]

Me thinks Christmas might be coming early this year!

[DaleRFU]

Thanks for that. I get the gist, but it would be helpful if I could read the graph legends.

Not for debate in this thread, but the news is tempting me to re-think what I build for in the future: FS9 - because people are still wedded to it and a single LOD conversion for P3Dv4. Forget about FSX and multi-LODs. That's a lot less conversion work.

John

Really hope you don't ditch FSX John, you're making my FSX world come alive with your AI.

[John Young]

I'm not debating it now, but it is an option for the future. The idea of not having to apply a few hundred animation/visibility tags through the LODs for each FSX model is really tempting. It's tedious but it would only save about 8 hours work.

John

[COA732]

Any plans on doing the Hill 35's. I read somewhere 12 of them are at Kadena for 6 months on security deployment.

[MIKE JG]

I'm sure someone will paint them after this package is released. These packages start getting out of control when we start adding every single unit. Better to just pick a few and get them released then add the other units after the fact.

[John Young]

Hill has F-35A's I think Jamie. I haven't even started that model and won't do so until the B's and C's are all done for all 3 sims. I haven't researched "A" paints yet, but it's quite possible I can include Hill examples.

Mike is right though, there's a limit that my brain can cope with at one time. 13 models in each sim version is enough at the moment. If it hasn't been done already, you could paint the MGAI F-35A in the Hill scheme in the meantime if you wanted to.

John

[COA732]

No problem, but I sense that you think I was requesting the paint. It was merely a question out of curiosity and not a demand.

[John Young]

It’s been an intensive week, with a host of small, but time consuming changes to the “C” models following Hartwig’s tests at Pax River. These have all been completed and have been sent back to Pax. Steve has also been busy with the Carrier FDE for the “C”. He’s managed to get the models to take-off within a deck length and also return with an arrested landing that I’m so impressed with. I just wish it were possible for the hook to catch the wire and drag it out. Wishful thinking I know, but it still looks good:



Brent has completed all of his sceneries to go with the “B” models. The latest is Yuma that shelters 9 F-35B’s of VMFA-211:



While Steve works on the FDE, I painted up the remaining B’s and C’s at Edwards and Lemoore. This brings the total paints to 96, which is the total population of US Navy, Marine Corps and UK aircraft of those types according to the list that Brent obtained for me from Scramble at the start of the project. The first screen shot is a mix of 11 VX-9 and VX-1 C’s and B’s for Edwards. The second shows the 5 C’s for Lemoore.





I painted these for completeness although we have no corresponding scenery or flight plans. That’s a pity really. Proximo, who has produced a very detailed, but frame-rate hungry, scenery of Edwards last posted 2 years ago. However the download link in his Edwards thread to his work at the time is still active. I’ll need to leave it to users to set up the Edwards B’s and C’s as they wish. I don’t know what to do about Lamoore, because I haven’t found any scenery I can adapt either. I'll leave that to users too.

With Jamie’s update of his Eglin scenery done, the only thing left for me to do is create the flight plans to put the 16 F-35C’s of VFA-101 in there. Pending Steve’s revised FDE for the STOVL-based F-35B FDEs I can start to package up for release. I’m not sure if that’s going to be doable before Christmas, just over a week away. It might be possible to get the FS9 “C” package out, but my preference is to release the B’s and C’s together because both variants are present at Pax River and Edwards. Either way, it would be good to get these out. Both Brent and I are getting ourselves into knots when it comes to switching back and forth between 13 different models, 10 squadrons, 7 airfields and 1 carrier. I daren’t add to the unreleased mix by compounding it with FSX/P3D conversions, but if I get bored, I’m sure I will.

John

[bismarck]

John, MAIW has released a package for Lemoore F-18 with a scenery inside.

Giorgio

[John Young]

Thanks Giorgio. I don't know what happened there but my search of "Lamoore" in the Download Hangar a few days ago didn't return anything. This afternoon I tried it and it found two sceneries. Perhaps the search engine only works at weekends! Well that's my excuse.

John

PS: stupid spelling error, even in this post. No wonder I couldn't find "Lemoore" in the hangar!

[mikewmac]

Thanks Giorgio. I don't know what happened there but my search of "Lamoore" in the Download Hangar a few days ago didn't return anything. This afternoon I tried it and it found two sceneries. Perhaps the search engine only works at weekends! Well that's my excuse.

John

Hi John,

The NAS Lemoore scenery for FSX that Henry Street gave to MAIW to host is outstanding and works great in FSX and P3D v2.5, but has a few what look like black land texture issues in P3D v3.4/4.1, which probably can be readily fixed. The FS9 MAIW F-18 NAS Lemoore traffic files converted to FSX format also work fine in FSX and P3D v2.5, but slow the FPS way down in P3D v3.4 and of course don't work at all in v4.1, both of which are probably caused by the FS9 NBAI F-18E/F models involved.

Perhaps we should consider a future project to develop JYAI F-18C-G models for FSX/P3D v3.4/4.X. I've pretty much got the required AI FDE's covered from the work I did back in 2009 on the FS9 NBAI F-18C-G models. I even have a prototype NBAI F-18C wet FDE working for catapult takeoffs from and traps back on the USS Stennis off San Diego.

[John Young]

There's a lot of sense in that Mike. With P3Dv4 increasing in popularity, rather than hunting around for off-the beaten track subjects to tackle, concentrating on new core models might serve a better purpose. I haven't began to think about what comes after the F-35s because there's still a way to go yet with the FSX/P3D conversions and the A models for all 3 versions.

I have the two Lemoore sceneries downloaded but not set up yet. I was about to do that when Hartwig flagged a mapping error and some paint changes in the F-35C. I should have those done today or tomorrow and I get back on track.

John

[John Young]

With Steve beavering away on the F-35B FDE, I've been working to get the F-35C's released before Christmas, but as indicated in last week's update that was always going to be tight. They are all ready and settled in at Eglin and Lemoore and all I have to do now is write the manual. I could do that in a rush by late tomorrow, but I'd rather take my time and ensure it's right. It would be unreasonable in any case to expect the Library staff to process the files at that time.

Moreover, Steve is making good progress and if the F-35C Carrier model arrested landing FDE is anything to go by, the STOVL/SRVL FDE's will be worth waiting for. With Kevin's assistance, new xml code has been developed and tested that will cause a model with a 50ft animated lift in it to gently fall back by the same amount shortly after take-off so that the aircraft doesn't disappear from a traffic viewer window. We may not need the animated lift if Steve can get the F-35B to go up the Pax River ski jump with the FDE alone, but it will come in handy for the VTOL model if the lift is gently re-instated before the approach.

My preference is still the original one, which is to release the F-35B's first and in conjunction with Brent's releases of his updates for Iwakuni, Beaufort and Yuma to accommodate them. In practice the "C's" can be released at the same time. Just give it a short while longer and we can assess where we are. If it looks like Steve needs longer, I can still release the "C's" in advance of the "B's". Hartwig also needs a little more time after Christmas to complete his update to Pax River, but that can be released as a separate package if necessary.

In the meantime, here's a few more screen shots, that will hopefully maintain interest:

VFA-101 "Grim Reapers" C's at Eglin:



A solo VF-101 "C":



VFA-125 C's at Lemoore:



CF-05 of VX-23, one of the Pax River F-35C test aircraft:



Have a great Christmas everyone.

John