Military AI Works

Hello,

With the superb Tu-95/160/ etc. conversions available, I wanted to create some filler traffic for occasional intercept over their typical routes.

I found the FS9 "Mother Russia" pack, and converted the Engels flight plans as a trial to P3Dv4 format, but I'm stuck with the airport; all the airports (except for SVBL El Libertador) are FS9 airfields with non-real ICAO airfields. So even though my aircraft file now reflects available aircraft, and the flightplans match, the airfields are missing.

I'm sure I'm not the only person who's considered this, especially with the wealth of lovely conversions of a large segment of Russian military models. I'd settle for just AFCADS of suitably applicable airfields (as opposed to mapping the airports file to say, Russian civilian airports just because they exist and have parking spots available.

I've tried looking at avsim.ru, but it's not easy for a non-cyrillic reader, even with the english mode on.

Any ideas for some basic airfields that could generate traffic out over the North, Baltic, or other sea environments?

thanks!

dl

The FS9 airfields should work in P3D. When you convert the flight plans you’ll have to tell AIFP the positions of each field, but that’s about it. If you want to observe the airfields, you might want to get rid of the VTPP files and replace them with a CVX (use ADE), but it’s not compulsory.

I you go on avsimrus.com and just type in the search term "district" you will find afcad bulk packs of the various Soviet airfields by an author called Андрей АНТА... I would say two things:

1. You would be wise to go look on Alpha-India's page as they have an AFCAD converter that converts older AFCADs to P3d format...

2. As mentioned by Tim the FS2004 excludes typically don't work also there are often elevation issues using older AFCADS in P3d. So in many cases you may find issues such as autogen and trees showing through taxiways and runways; broken up looking runways; airports and AI traffic floating above or sunk into the ground ect...

While it would be nice to run all of these through ADE and fix them (adjust elevations and create appropriate excludes) just due to the volume (yes there are ton of these afcads) and or the issues of scenery objects it could be a very sizable task... Not to mention getting permissions from the original authors if you wish to share...

Thanks gents.

I assumed wrongly the FS9 fields wouldn't work, so I'll start with those, and convert if as/required. Will also reinvestigate avsimrus' offering.

Kind regards,

dl

OK - trying a different tack here to get some traffic going - unfortunately, my poor AI programming skills are holding me back. The extent of my AI skills was simply to decompile, assign different aircraft of a different era, recompile, that kind of thing. Worked to my satisfaction, but creating from scratch is proving trickier than I thought.

I'm looking to get some TU-95 Bear traffic that skirts the top of Scotland. So using the stock P3D planning tool I found that a direct flight from UMKK / Kaliningrad to CYQX Gander has the perfect profile. So I created daily flights with two legs each (from / to UMKK) using the following:

MAIW converted TU-95,
Mike Major's UMKK basic airport scenery - available here: https://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?C ... LID=197164
Sydney Schwartz's CYQZ basic airport scenery - available here: https://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DLID=203403
Checked both for faults in ADE - no issues.

Using AIFP, created the following flightplan, airport, and aircraft files: (no errors were reported at compile):

AC#1,,1%,24Hr,IFR,01:00,10:30,380,R,0031,CYQX,11:30,19:01,370,R,0031,UMKK
AC#2,,1%,24Hr,IFR,02:00,11:30,360,R,0034,CYQX,12:30,21:00,350,R,0034,UMKK
AC#3,,1%,24Hr,IFR,03:00,12:30,340,F,0035,CYQX,13:30,22:00,330,F,0035,UMKK
AC#4,,1%,24Hr,IFR,04:00,12:00,380,F,0038,CYQX,14:30,23:30,370,F,0038,UMKK

CYQX,N48* 56.22117',W54* 34.08816',496
UMKK,N54* 53.40000',E20* 35.55001',43

AC#1,384,"MPAI_Tu-95RTs_392ODRAP_Red_03"
AC#2,384,"MPAI_Tu-95RTs_392ODRAP_Red_04"
AC#3,384,"MPAI_Tu-95RTs_392ODRAP_Red_07"
AC#4,384,"MPAI_Tu-95RTs_392ODRAP_Red_08"


So the aircraft show up at the correct airports at the right time, but fail to start up. If the leg times are under what's needed for turnaround, and there's no faults in the Airport nodes, etc. - what could cause the AI to be stuck?

Thanks so much in advance for what I'm sure is a frustratingly easy thing I'm clearly not seeing.

Daniel

OK. If I understand this correctly, you look at UMKK and CYQX at the times that the aircraft should take off but they don't start up. Is this the case?

There are two things here that I can think of. Firstly confirm that you are looking at the locations at GMT time not local. You would be surprised how often this gets forgotten.
Secondly, I am curious as to why you haven't got any aircraft identifiers in the second parm of your flightplans.

Now this I do not know, but there is always the possibility that with no identifier the aircraft doesn't call the tower. I am not saying that is the case, just that I can see the logic that a system might use.

Used AIFP to create the FP, left the identifier blank (ATC used N700MS), loaded in the Bears.
FS9 default UMKK.
P3D Mike Major's

Set time to 0100 GMT repeated 0200, 0300 and 0400.

1 x A/C spoke to ATC as N700MS for clearance etc.
Started up and departed as would expect.

Jim

Thanks all,

The issue was the GMT offset. I had made the plans in local time, and that's what messed me up.

Now I'm set, with both TU-95s as well as few TU-22Ms I threw in for something extra viewable and flying as they should.

Now to find them while on patrol over the North Sea ...

thanks again,

dl

Disregard... after engaging brain before keyboard I realised what an absolute load of rubbish I was saying...don't know what I was thinking about, but the 10nm and AI visibility and respawning at airfields came to mind.

Hope you succeed with your intercept concept.


Jim

jimrodger wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 09:55 I may be wrong, but in the back of my mind I seem to recall that AI once it's approx 10 miles from the take off point vanishes and only reappears 10 miles (ish) from its landing site. I don't think you'll see any traffic mid flight unless there's a waypoint in the FP where the AI reappears as per takeoff and landing.

Extremely happy to be wrong, but I believe you may be disappointed in what you're trying to achieve.

The only way I've seen an intercept scenario work was on FS9 using FSRecorder.


Jim

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

When flying over Belgium (in FS9 of course) I see aircrafts coming from UK and going to Dubai, or any other AI Traffic. So these planes stay visible.

TheFoufure wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 10:54

jimrodger wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 09:55 I may be wrong, but in the back of my mind I seem to recall that AI once it's approx 10 miles from the take off point vanishes and only reappears 10 miles (ish) from its landing site. I don't think you'll see any traffic mid flight unless there's a waypoint in the FP where the AI reappears as per takeoff and landing.

Extremely happy to be wrong, but I believe you may be disappointed in what you're trying to achieve.

The only way I've seen an intercept scenario work was on FS9 using FSRecorder.


Jim

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

When flying over Belgium (in FS9 of course) I see aircrafts coming from UK and going to Dubai, or any other AI Traffic. So these planes stay visible.

OK realised I was spouting total rubbish, I'm blaming old age.....

Jim