Military AI Works

VulcanDriver wrote:

GZR_Sactargets wrote: Thanks Crop, I am finding the forgetting gets easier every day.

Here are some screenies from the Soviet Stuff I have loaded.

Where did you get the scenery from. Its really good.

Cheers

John

Hi John,
The good stuff in the Moscow Area is the payware "Moscow Global Scenery", RIAT is also payware. Koltsovo is an outstanding freeware airfield as is Novosibirsk. The airfields in the RU ATC packages are not detailed at all- many do not even have any parking and it must be added to have the AI traffic fly correctly.

http://www.visualflight.co.uk/fairford/index.htm RIAT Fairford
Payware

payware scenery "Moscow Global Scenery", by Simulation Software Workshop
There is an FS9 Update.
http://www.simsoftworkshop.com/
http://simsoftworkshop.com/modules/wfse ... rticleid=3 Order page.

AT FLIGHtSIM.com

FS-ACOF - FS2004 Scenery
FS2004 Moscow City Scenery

[ Download | View ]
Name: moscphot.zip Size: 2,265,649 Date: 10-12-2005 Downloads: 2930
FS2004 Moscow City Scenery, Russia. Adds many buildings and other features to the city.

[ Download | View ]
Name: af2_uuee.zip Size: 104,205 Date: 11-01-2003 Downloads: 1335
FS2004 AFCAD2 For Moscow Sheremetyevo (UUEE), Russia. A representation of the parking spots and taxiways in the Airport of Moscow Sheremetyevo (UUEE), in Russia. It has been designed over the payware scenery "Moscow Global Scenery", by Simulation Software Workshop and probably won't work well with the default airport. By Carlos Lorenz Benlloch.



FS-ACOF - FS2004 Scenery
FS2004 Scenery--Moscow Photorealistic

[ Download | View ]
Name: moscph02.zip Size: 7,915,487 Date: 03-30-2005 Downloads: 333
FS2004 Scenery--Moscow Photorealistic Cityscape, Russia. By Olonovsky Alexey Nikolaevich. File 3 of 3. (See also MOSCPH11.ZIP, MOSCPHS1.ZIP).


If you don't use the payware-here are some free items for the defaults.
FS-ACOF - FS2004 Gates & Taxiways
FS2004 AFCAD2 For Moscow Sheremetyevo






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Category: Flight Simulator 2004 - Scenery
Koltsovo 2006 - USSS


File Description:
We hope that Koltsovo will become your favourite airport. Tolmachevo TEAM wishes you pleasant flights



Filename: usss.zip
License: Check within download
Added: 31st December 2005
Downloads: 3386
Author: design by Hawker & Usachev Pavel
Size: 13420kb


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Category: Flight Simulator 2004 - Scenery
Koltsovo USSS


File Description:
This AF2_USSS file adds the missing ILS for all runways at Koltsovo Russia remember this is only for FS2004.



Filename: af2_usss.zip
License: Freeware
Added: 7th March 2006
Downloads: 696
Author: John Sousa
Size: 6kb
************************************************************************************
AT AVSIM:

FS-ACOF - FS2004 Scenery
FS2004 Scenery--Tolmachevo Airport

[ Download | View ]
Name: unnt_.zip Size: 18,569,048 Date: 03-04-2004 Downloads: 1707
FS2004 Scenery--Tolmachevo Airport (UNNT), Novosibirsk, Siberia, Russia. Highly detailed scenery of one of Russia's largest airports. By Hawker and Sergey Andruhov (Tolmachevo Team).

The following are for the Russian ATC Packages (Civilian)


http://homepage.ntlworld.com/sergs.skj/ ... wnload.htm The SKJ downloads for aircraft.

http://www.trafficsystem.ru/indexeng.html RU ATC systems

For those who are interested.... The following were made available today over on avsim...:

Flight Simulator 2004 - Aircraft Repaints, Textures and Modifications
((for IRIS's payware MiG-29 package http://www.irissimulations.com/catalog/ ... 7e81136497))

Ukrainian Air Force MiG-29 Fulcrum C, "Ukrainian Falcons" Display Team by Michael Pearson
http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DL ... fs2004acrp
Ukrainian Air Force MiG-29 Fulcrum C, Current Camo Scheme by Michael Pearson
http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DL ... fs2004acrp
Russian Air Force MiG-29 Fulcrum C, 120th Fighter Regiment, Domna AB, Siberia by Michael Pearson
http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DL ... fs2004acrp
Russian Air Force MiG-29 Fulcrum C, 1st Fighter Regiment, Turkmenistan, 1990 by Michael Pearson
http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DL ... fs2004acrp
Belarus Air Force MiG-29 Fulcrum A by Michael Pearson
http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DL ... fs2004acrp
Belarus Air Force MiG-29 Fulcrum C by Michael Pearson
http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DL ... fs2004acrp

This aircraft is flyable but the package includes AI models. I have no clue of the polygon counts or numbe of LODs. I've had a half dozen on screen on the ground and still had a relatively smooth 15-20fps during a low pass flyover. (My system is definitely mid-range, only a 6600AGP (corrected from 6200 to 6600) video card and only 1GB memory.) YMMV

Of course, there IS a freeware AI Mig-29 available on avsim and simviation - but I figured what the heck.. I'd post this just out of total boredom.

I don't believe there are any true AI Mig-29's. Someone may be working on one, though.

BadPvtDan wrote:I don't believe there are any true AI Mig-29's. Someone may be working on one, though.

It must be the AI Su-27's I am thinking of then... I'm not at my home computer where my notes are. (Senility.. the curse of enthusiasm and age.)

The IRIS 'AI' MiG-29 has 57490 polys and 1 LOD. I wouldn't want to use as an AI aircraft personally!

I do believe we have someone building a dedicated AI version though...

John

John brings up an interesting point. What is desirable in an AI and what is a killer? I know we are all interested in Frame-rates but some would say that is an incorrect criteria. Others say ignore those and go with smoothness of the game play. I guess I am fortunate to have enough machine to handle most things. What I find to be a killer is not the aircraft per se, but a combination of Aircraft and scenery. When my system gets sluggish, it is usually the result of overly dense or complex scenery rather than an airplane. Am I totally wrong here?? This seems to be an elusive and recurring point of discussion. Maybe someone has some good data we could use to evaluate stuff. From a qualitative point, I am interested in a bird that has good details and I will give up other items for that. I hate those bland, one color, no panel lines things even though they may be great for frame-rates.

Well, we here at MAIW strive to provide great looking, frame-rate friendly AI aircraft. IMO, the aircraft being listed in the Aircraft Design forum are great looking. I can't tell Henry's F-16 from Mike Stone's Viper.

What a FS user deems acceptable as far as frame rates go is entirely subjective. One person may think that 5-10 Iris Mig-29's on their flightline while getting frame rates in the low teens is fine. Some may find that deplorable.

That being said, all of our models and packages at MAIW will be as frame-rate friendly as possible (read: multiple LOD aircraft). I believe this is especially important with the resource hog that FS X has turned out to be.

So Danny votes for FR-Friendly and Good Looking? Is multiple LOD the only way to get that? My question was really seeking information rather than a position. I don't have FSX yet so I can't comment on it being a FR Hog-but that might well be a function of settings and machine performance. I have seen many comments that initial FSX impressions were negative-until the used did some tweaking and then they were quite happy. I try to keep an open mind about what will work best.

I only posted about the aircraft to inform others of the new addition to avsims library - not to discourage anyone here from making new freeware models.

Note that I said I was using a payware model - soemthing counter to what I understood the goal of this group to be.

I specifically onlly mentioned the number of aircraft I had on the ground and not anything about the quality of the payware model itself for the same reason. There is one rather prolific freeware designer's aircraft whose models simply kill my FPS when I use them... so I tend not to.

My point is, PLEASE do not take what was intended to be a "information post" as one of recommendation or endorsement.... especially if you can't or don't want to afford the payware package. I didn't buy the Iris package I mentioned - I returned from an out of town trip to find that my girlfriend had done so without my knowledge or agreement based on links and papernotes I had left on my desk. Had I really been interested in this particular package, I'd have bought it myself...(Remember I had been making a tally of what Russian aircraft are out there - this was part of those notes and she misunderstood and was trying to make me happy. Of course, I'm not going to "send it back", but it wasn't something I'd wanted to buy, so it's an "early Xmas present" and something I simply kissed her "thank you" profusely for.)

lol no worries. You do see both payware and freeware, non AI aircraft in my virtual skies. Nasa T-38's for one

The packages coming out of MAIW, howevger, will be ai specific. Groups such as pai and woai do not use non ai aircraft. They have enjoyed success. We hope to mirror that success with military ai.

That being said, I would still encourage the creation of packages using whatever aircraft you want. Use these forums and your community mates for help and to share!

Hello guys,
I think the real goal a flight simmer wants to reach is a combination of a heavy scenery with many planes inside it, and all animated (air traffic, moving airports vehicles, animated roads, people, ...)!
So, i think that no machine could be enough...

I wish to have, perhaps in a near future:

1. light scenery full of details, with many lods;
2. Ai planes with few poligons and many lods like Henry's F16 of Fernando's Tornado (and the others we know);
3. a good video card, a good CPU, a good hard disk, a good RAM quantity,
4. and.... a comprehensive wife!

Instead of we'll have FSX, and a new need of more powered machines, with more fast video card, with more RAM, with more fast HD, with one or two CPU, with ... with ... with ...

I hope my wife will not find a divorce lawyer, even if i think he'll take less money than the new machine will take me!!!

Cheers

Luciano

Despite having wasted some time looking for a job in the real world.... since I started this thread, I figured I'd let ya'll know where I am with my bigger-than-I-originally-intended personal project that might turn into an MAIW one as it moves along.

I've reviewed the web sites referred to earlier in this thread for OOB data and status of Russian military airfields. It was pure coincidence that the two sites mentioned by others just before I posted while away from my home pc and reference papers are the same sites I had found the previous night (great minds think alike an d all that stuff, I guess).

On a personal note, having been out of the intelligence game for a bit over a decade, I'm constantly surprising myself just how much I remember - but then "the present" hits me in the face as I find that what was once a "key" location may no longer even have active aircraft or HQ in location after location.

Anyway, I've reached the point where my personal Russian AOOB, which does differ from what is individually at scramble.nl, russianairfields.com and even airbase.ru, is functional and usable if not 100% accurate or 100% complete in terms of what today's intelligence weenies will actually have. This AOOB is currently tailored to the situation I want to create - a mixture of memory and current economics/politics and events. For instance, I'm planning on using Yelizovo (Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky area) as a staging/refueling point for TU-22M/TU-95 exciter flights enroute to Alaska. I'm probably going to take a few liberties like "reactivating" Sovetskaya Gavan - which means I'll have to create an ICAO code for it because I can't find one - as I remember it was once fairly important when I "watched" that area in the past.

I'll probably throw a few Migs or SU's up into the high altitude international airways that come near/skirt the Kamchatkan Peninsula and Sakhalin Island. Doing so is something most people wouldn't bother with and I may forget at some point that I have even done it. But imagine the fun if/when a Mig/SU shows up near you/me at FL340 or so while enroute Japan/Korea and Alaska/Seattle.

((That said, my AOOB's flexible enough to reflect the current situation by allowing for adjusting the total AI traffic level through eliminating or substituting certain flightplans I have in mind to develop.))

So, I'm beginning to pencil-whip some preliminary flightplans in terms of "operational goals" and desired areas of activity. The details of the individual plans should be relatively minor in terms of difficulty. It's the method and end result that interest me at this point... but the flightplans should begin to evolve/emerge in/over the next ten days or so.

I could be closer to a real flightplan or three had I just made them up straight away... but I work from big-picture downward (deconstructively) as opposed to building a picture piece by piece up from a blank slate (constructively).

I'm still searching for some Net-references for a few things like Russian bombing range locations/coordinates, places equivalent to Edwards AFB, Groom Lake, etc. My problem is finding them "honestly" - that is, without ... well, having to kill someone/myself (Think Top Gun, "I could tell you but I'd have to kill you"-type thing.). I know some sources I still need to check... but, it's time-consuming. If you know of any, I'd appreciate a PM or a post here.

(Heh, writing that just reminded me of a book I can use to get a reference! And then I can say honestly, "I can neither confirm nor deny" my sourcing, just point to the book. )

My first preliminary fun flightplan will probably involve either TU-22s or TU-16s/95s/142s in the Far East doing recce or exciter ops. Look for something roughed out here probably late next week. I still have to do a bit of experimenting with low-level, mixed flight level/multi-leg low-level gear up fly by routing for some ASW and recce profiles and such. I also need to finalize a few non-show-stopping details concerning locations/AOOB issues.

But I'm beginning to feel good about this and am looking forward to sharing some of what I've done.

This sounds extremely interesting. Will be interested in watching it unfold.

The funny thing is, in looking around the Net to "source" my project, I've basically found four other similar projects (in terms of breadth and depth) not directly associated with the FS community. Some of us intell weenie/operational types just can't seem to give OOB work up!

Also the similarities to academic research are unbelievably striking - very much like what I did while working towards my PhD until just recently, only on a different subject.

I was right.. There is an AI Mig-29 on avsim. It's hidden inside a package by Klaus Jone. Limited to a single livery... Have a look.

Lechfeld Airbase, ETSL "lost MiG-29" (Download #77353)
http://library.avsim.net/download.php?DLID=77353

Reworked Lechfeld Airbase, ETSL (Bavaria, South-Germany) including AI-Package (Download #77342)
http://library.avsim.net/download.php?DLID=77342

That being said, I have used it in my experiments and it works for me.. Of course, some people regularly use "hi-poly count" regular flight model aircraft ... especially when multi-LOD AI aircraft aren't available yet.

Also, I can't evaluate the quality of this aircraft in comparison to one someone here might be working on as I haven't seen the latter. One of you modellers/more experienced guys might care to take a look and respond concerning what you think of this model.

For now, for me, it's either this or payware... and I'm cheap.

I completely forgot I had Lechfeld loaded. IIRC it is a good layout and traffic. I will take some screenies.

Yeah, it's a good package. Can you compare the "lost" MIG-29 to other AI aircraft you have seen in terms of load on your system? Polycount?

I have eye problems, so I don't really see different LODs so much while flying, though I can see stutters and blurries and such. For comparison sake, I'm definitely not the one to make them... in terms of accuracy and experience lookig at AI aircraft (yet at least).

Ran into what I thought might be a semi-serious problem.... Microsoft, in its infinitely narrow-minded view (sarcasm there, ya know) screwed the pooch when it came to Russian airports (along with China and other countries). They simply didn't include all of the military fields or even all of the civilian ones which HAVE established ICAO codes.

At first I thought this would be a MAJOR problem... even afer finding that one guy had created a file that listed the missing airports for FS2k2. It took me a while to find that he had later updated the file to include those missing in FS9.... Great, huh? Yeah, except that there are STILL missing/non-existent airfields in some areas as well as ICAO codes that are either assigned incorrectly to airports that do exist in FS9 or are not assigned to certain airports that do exist... at least as far as I can tell.

So, the crossroads at this point is figuring out how to make an airport visible in the "start flight at" menu. I mean, is creating an afcad and sticking it in the \Addon Scenery\scenery folder enough to do that? What good does creating an afcad for a previously non-existent airport do if you can't start a flight from it... <<< showing my noobishness here. I simply don't know what can and can't be done here.

My guesstimate is that roughly 25 key airfields are affected/involved.

I need a break and to win the lottery!

drmweaver2 wrote:I was right.. There is an AI Mig-29 on avsim. It's hidden inside a package by Klaus Jone. Limited to a single livery... Have a look.

OK, I had a look:

Barney Bigard
gmax, FS2002

at Avsim.com:
mig29k_partie_1.zip
mig29k_partie_2.zip
mig29_v3_newtext.zip

A good looking baby but with 25000 polygons (ACM2.5) and only 1 LOD she does not fit into MAIW standards, sorry ...
It does not stop one to have two or three of them in a custom setup, if he/she owns a FSX capable PC of course
A real AI Mig-29 is needed here anyway




PS. Heh guys, something GREAT will born from this thread I see. I would like to support this much when I'm done with current work and closest plan

Maybe Dan Cooper work about MIG29 will be the solution to this question...
See the post "first try" in the other session of this forum: "ai aircraft design".

Cheers

Luciano