Military AI Works

Hi folks,

PLEASE CAST A VOTE I'm getting less than 50% of visitor participation

I would be very grateful if you could place your vote, even if the topic is of little interest to you.

The more responses, the better the picture we will get from the results.

The question relates to FS9.

Many thanks,

Dan

It seems clear which one most people do...leave as is.

I don't agree - yet.

With only 12 votes so far, the error in extrapolating these results to the wider MAIW community is still massive.

I tend to leave things alone but there are some mdl sizes that are so out of wack that I alter the size to the real life size.

I adjust to my own system for experimental purposes. As a result I have several copies of the same aircraft with different sizes. I do have some aircraft with their default sizes, but only where they do not interfere with the experiment in hand.

Here is a example of my AI 757's and 747's. All my 757's are at 25m and all my 747's are at 43m so if new 757's and 747's don't have the same radius as the ones I already have I will change it.

Why those values? Is it part of a system? Or is that just the value that the first 747 and 757 models had in your FS9 set-up?

Cheers

kungfuman wrote:Why those values? Is it part of a system? Or is that just the value that the first 747 and 757 models had in your FS9 set-up?

Cheers

Those were the values the old PAI planes had. So I just stuck with those values when I deleted the PAI planes and added the newer AIA (and other AI models) planes.

With over 15,000 aircraft I have found this to be the best method for me. When I install a new military model, I check and set the radius as follows.

Fighters MFIG 14M MIL_COMBAT (i.e. F-15, F-15, F/A-18, F-22 etc)
Trainers MTRN 8M MIL_COMBAT (T-37, T-38, T-6, T-45 etc)
Bombers MBOM 30M MIL_COMBAT (B-52, B-1 etc)
Recon MREC 26M MIL_COMBAT (U-2, TR-1, P-3, E-2 etc)
Heli Smal MHLS 10M MIL_COMBAT (UH-60, SH-3 etc)
Heli Large MHLL 23M MIL_COMBAT (CH-53, CH-47, CH-46 etc)

Cargo Sm MCRS 12M MIL_CARGO (C-12, UC-35, etc)
Cargo Med MCRM 21M MIL_CARGO (C-130, C-160, F27 etc)
Cargo Large MCRL 34M MIL_CARGO (KC-135, C-17, VC-10 etc)
Cargo Hugh MCRH 44M MIL_CARGO (C-5, KC-10, Tristar etc)

I also use the same radius with a M-Code method to set up the parking slots. This system is universal, for example, if I have a USAF C-130 (21M slot) land at a German Air Force Base it will park in the MCRM (21M slot) slot. A Royal Air Force Tristar MCRH (44M) lands at a Italian Base, it will go to a MCRH (44M) slot etc...etc.. Makes AFCAD(ing) easier for me and I can look at the AFCAD and see where and how many slots I have to program.

I am also using the same system for all my GA and BIZ traffic using XGA code and radius.

XGA GA Small (10m)
XGA GA Medium (14M)

I DO NOT USE GA LARGE if all possible.... (It would have been nice if this was a Commercial RAMP type for non-gate type aircraft (i.e. BN-2, B-1900, Metro 3, Merlins etc etc).

I also use NAVL and DOCK for my float and ship traffic. I also radius them according to size etc...

All my Commercial (Airlines, Cargo and Charter) and other (non-military goverment) traffic has been coded with appropriate parking codes and types. I NEVER leave a aircraft not coded, even if I have to make up a simple code to use. I also radius all my non-PAI commercial aircraft to PAI radius and parking standards. It does help getting them to the right places....

From what I have observed, and I do a lot of traffic watching, it works very well.

Firebird wrote:I tend to leave things alone but there are some mdl sizes that are so out of wack that I alter the size to the real life size.

Ditto

Don't have time now to check every setting so only change when its so obviously wrong and causes the A/C to go MIA

I don't agree - yet.

how about now?

btw I have FS9 and I was referring to it, but I mostly play FSX now (yes, before anyone says it I KNOW I'm mad )

Now is definitely more convincing!

Let's not forget that while the above figures are a precise representation of the people who actually entered the poll, when we interpret them to make generalisations about the wider community, we enter the territory in which statistics can be worse than lies (if we're not very careful).

Only one of the above percentages can be taken as a good indication of user behaviour: The one relating to those who don't change model radii. If we were to look at the relative strengths between the other user categories based on this poll so far, we would be on very shaky ground.

I have adjusted all my radii to a simple version that conforms to specs from The Owls Nest http://www.flightsim2004-fanatics.com/F ... Values.htm

It's all based on real aircraft radius and has worked awesome in both FS9 and FSX.