Kieloben

Dear fshobby, that indeed reads complicate, but seams as well to point out the correct way to solve the issue. I'll give it a try in the next days and/or weeks If it works out that way, then I'll mark your post as "solved". If not, well, then obviously not. (-; Sincerily, Stefan.

The issue got solved by "spokes2112" in http://www.avsim.com/topic/499068-fsx-wrong-water-surface-wakes-under-hovering-helicopters/#entry3540479 and does works out this way also in FS9. Sincerily, Stefan.

Das Problem wurde von "spokes2112" in http://www.avsim.com/topic/499068-fsx-wrong-water-surface-wakes-under-hovering-helicopters/#entry3540479 gelöst. Mit besten Grüßen, Stefan.

Dear Spokes2112, that is great! Thank's a lot! With very best regards, Stefan

Dear Sascha, definitely there is no "tricial" methode to "make" it work. That fact pushed me into this community. "Trivial" I'ld have done at myself just "on the run". If there are people with the competence and effort around to create such a mayor change at FS9 or FSX, then it should be peoble made from the hard wood like the ones, that already created "arrestor-cables" and so on. Where to find those people, if not at for axamble AVSIM? Sincerily, Stefan.

Dear "n4dix", in the future I'll take care on your "On a side note, it may be only a problem with not being a native English speaker, but such remarks as "Please next time with more competence." are quite rude and condescending. Please try to be more polite in the future." As you correctly guessed, I'm not a native Anglomerican language speaker. Most of the poeple on the planet as well as in the Web aren't. In addition to that, I'm an autist. From then to then I'm not able to recognize the tune in communications. Often enough I'm just able to create and to follow the main-text only, not yet the sub-text. It ist not an excuse, it just is a fact and I do work on changing my attitute to the better at all the time. Thus, thank you very much for giving that feedback on that sentence. Leaving the sideway, back to the issue: - I learnt to distrust any pointing at "hardcoded in the simulator's engine, and not configurable by the end users at all." My over-and-over-examble on that in the simmer-world ist the arrestor-cable-function in FS9 and FSX. It was hardcoded in the simulator's engine to not make it work and simmers did find a way to make it work. Now there is this water-spray-issue embedded some-where in the FS9 as well, as in the FSX and very likely it ist possible to find and to change it. I'm joining a forum like this, because I do strongly believe in the outstanding possibilities simmers are able to realize against any "hardcoded in the simulator's engine, and not configurable by the end users at all.". It is proven by several times and issues, that there is no "hardcoded in the simulator's engine, and not configurable by the end users at all." Actually, there is no "at all" at all outside the science of mathematics. Back to the issue: I'm the guy who's able to modify given ".air" and "aircraft.cfg" at an aircraft to make it's chracateristics as real as it can get to real.world characteristis at the real-world-aircrafts, If those are known by me. Others are able to create aircrafts, and/or ".ar"-files, or terra-mesh, or weather-phenomens, or sceneries, or complicatet stuff like arrastor-cable- and catapulting-functions. I'm pretty sure, that there also is someone out there, being able to dig into the hardcore programming to find the landing-ground-splash-trigger at any aircraft to than customize it to let's say one, two, three. If you look at helicopters and fixed-wing-aircrafts, then you'll notice the programmers to have put into the FS9 as well as the FSX at least two different "triggers" to ground-splashes already, to create the class of helicpoters and the class of fixed-wing-aircrafts to show up with different effects. Like adding the arrastor-cable-function, it should be possible to add some more ground-splash-trigger-classes to the FS9 as well as the FSX. We only have to find a simmer who is able and willing to do that. Where to find such a competence, if not at virtual-comunities like AVSIM? Sincerily, Stefan.

Dear sascha, any idea how would be able to do "terra mesh" on water surfaces?

Dear spokes2112, you're wrong. The rotorspray effect is called "fx_rtr_wtr.fx" and the image forced by it shown at the water is called "fx_rotwash.bmp" The "aircraft.cfg" at for examble the default Bell206b Jet Ranger III in FS9 shows this: [EFFECTS] wake=fx_wake water=fx_spray dirt=fx_tchdrt concrete=fx_sparks At the same helicopter in FSX it says in the "aircraft.cfg": [EFFECTS] wake=fx_wake water=fx_spray dirt=fx_tchdrt concrete=fx_sparks EngineFire=fx_heliFire Conclusion: the rotorwash effect "fx_rtr_wtr.fx" does not get triggered by any "aircraft.cfg". Please next time with more competence. What leads to the fact: - still not unsolved issue. Sincerily, Stefan. The "fx_rtr_wtr.fx" What I forgott: there is no sence in adding another rotorwash effect through the effect chapter in any helicopter's aircraft.cfg, if the wrong (default) one still show, since it get triggered somehow different. At helicopters like the Chinook or the Fa-223 one then would notice the new 8 (Fa223) or double 8 (Chinook) with a circle in its center. Nope. The new effect has to replace the old one, not be added to it. And it has to be different from Helicoptertype to helicopter type. Thus we have to finde the place, were it gets triggered to then adjust it from helicopter to helicopter to get the rotorwash 1, 2, 3 (and of course to the simmers how do prefere that, the default one to the default Jet Ranger III). Sincerily, Stefan.

Ich diskutiere das Problem auch auf Englisch auf http://www.avsim.com/topic/499068-fsx-wrong-water-surface-wakes-under-hovering-helicopters/ und http://www.avsim.com/topic/499067-fs2004-wrong-helicopter-water-spray-texture/ und bekam bereits Nachrichten an mein hiesiges Profil von Leuten, die Lösungsideen haben, aber sie leider nicht posteten. Wie dem auch sei: Stand der Dinge: es ist nur ein Effect. Die "fx_rotorwash.bmp" zu ändern in eine, sagen wir "fx_rotorwash8.bmp" dürfte kein Problem sein. Auch könnte man eine fx_rotorwasch88.bmp" für Tandemhiubschrauber wie den "Chinook" entwickeln können, oder eine fx_rotorwash_big8.bmp für Quertandemhubschrauber, wie die Fa223. Das Problem ist wohl dann: wie macht man es, dass ein Hubschrauber nicht mehr den default effect aufruft, sondern den auf ihn modifizierten? Und so weiter und so weiter, Stefan. Hey, nicht nur gucken! Auch antworten! Ich diskutiere das Problem auch auf Englisch auf http://www.avsim.com/topic/499068-fsx-wrong-water-surface-wakes-under-hovering-helicopters/ und http://www.avsim.com/topic/499067-fs2004-wrong-helicopter-water-spray-texture/ und bekam bereits Nachrichten an mein hiesiges Profil von Leuten, die Lösungsideen haben, aber sie leider nicht posteten. Wie dem auch sei: Stand der Dinge: es ist nur ein Effect. Die "fx_rotorwash.bmp" zu ändern in eine, sagen wir "fx_rotorwash8.bmp" dürfte kein Problem sein. Auch könnte man eine fx_rotorwasch88.bmp" für Tandemhiubschrauber wie den "Chinook" entwickeln können, oder eine fx_rotorwash_big8.bmp für Quertandemhubschrauber, wie die Fa223. Das Problem ist wohl dann: wie macht man es, dass ein Hubschrauber nicht mehr den default effect aufruft, sondern den auf ihn modifizierten? Und so weiter und so weiter, Stefan.

Well, since it is the very same issue in FS2004, as in FSX, I also opened the topic there http://www.avsim.com/topic/499068-fsx-wrong-water-surface-wakes-under-hovering-helicopters/ I hope some effect-creator-guy will solve it. With very best regards, Stefan

Actually, it just is a water-effct. It should be possible to make certain helicopters not to "call" the default "fx_rotowash.bmp". but an other one, like "fx-rotorwash_8.bmp" for ordinary helicopters, and "fx_rotorwash_88.bmp" for tandem helicopters, like the Boeing CH-43 "Chinook", or a "fx_rotorwash_odd8.bmp" (or so on) for tandem helicopters that (like the Focke-Achgelis Fa 223) have the rotors placed on a left and a right fuselage-tail instead of having it placed on the fuselages front and aft section (like the allready mentioned "Chinook". My wild guess is: it would be easy to create the effects. The defficulty just ist to make a certain helicopter to "call" it instead of the default effect. Yet I decline any "it is not possible". Think about working arrestor cables and steam catapults at aircraft carrieres. That had not been possible in FS9, nor FSX. But creative simmers made it work. How easy compared to that has it to be to make a certain aircraft to call a certain effect and to not call another one? Sincerily, Stefan.

Yes, I do have, like for examble the TU-114. )-:

Dear Dave, I rather doubt to get "moving" waves into any FS-water-surface. It would collide with the surface-definitions. If you would go to put moving waves into the FS, than landing on would most properly create a crash with dynamic sceane. Deacticvating that would not help you either to land on water, even though, the aircraft would not "crash". Instead the waves just would go through your Aircraft and your aircraft would jaust go through the waves. Despite the fact of the impact on the frame rate by having moving waves at the water surfaces, it would kill my firt intention, to get water-landings and water starts more realistic. To have that long-frequented fixed waves would be good enough, since the all of us once learned in physic that, according to Newton, it would not matter at all, what object is moving, if two objects are meeting, or seperating. The only piont counting ist the differenc between the both of them. Thus, if the aircraft is moving and the wave is fixed, you do get the very same effect, as if both of them would move. By that idea it should be easily possible to get "fixed" long-waves into it in a kind of "TerraMesh" on Ocean Surfaces. It would create a mayor difference by a very low off-shore fly and of course, by a landing, or starting at water. A "TerraMesh"-"water" also would have the charming side effect to not go harder on the framerate, than for examble flying aaound in a mountain range, like, to point at the most extreme example on Earth and in any FS-World, the Himalaya Mountain Range. But I trust the FS to load slower, like my FS9 already does, since I've put Stephen Rothlisberger's TerraMeshWorld into it. Yet once loaded, what now takes a few minutes, it acts ansd behaves like normal. Still, I have no clue about creating, or just modifying any mesh-datas. I need help. Sincerily, Stefan.

Dear Zuendholz, it couldn't be harder on the frame rate, than any mountain range where you to take your flight to. But I trust the FSX as well as the FS9 to launch slower after you picked your flight, like my FS9 does launches slower since I installed Stephen Rothlisman's TerraMeshWorld. The flight itself than gets anharmed at the FPS. Since as well the FS9, as the FSX is dividet in "areas" it does not loads the world anyway. If You fly at the Himalya Mountain Range, to bring up the most hilly area on the planat and in any FS-World, you don't have the Pacific Ocean loaded at the same time. I do admit, the Scenery-World-Folder will get big, if water masses gets hilly. But flying across any "area"-boarder-line in a mountain range, like for examble the Himalaya Mountain Range, does minimizes the frame rate (if at all) only by a tiny impact and only by a very short time and only, if you at this moment are going to undertake a "view-cruising" around your aircraft in outside view. What should be occure different by flying above a hilly water? Yet, like Sacha, I have no single clue about creating, oder even only modifying any Mesh-Datas. I need help. With very best regards, Stefan

Dear Bill, I even had a closer look into it and now go for its solution,. I downloaded rotwash.zip and "play" with its possible modifications. It looks like, as if it would be an issue that is possible to solve and even, by creating different named effect images and reorganising some Details in some programmed details im FS-double-rotor-helicopters, like the CH-47, oder the Fa 223, it looks like as if it would be possible to individualize it to create it an single eight below single-rotor-choppers and a double-eight below double-rotor-choppers. (I admit, the Fa 223 will be the most difficoult one, since it has to be a faded double eight in a bigger eight in a even bigger circle.) I'm a family man in a fulltime job and never did any effects, so it will take some time to closer get into it and figure it out in detail, yet the rough idea should work. May be someone more spezialised on effects is reading this and may solve it faster. If this wont happen on the long run, I will have it solved at myself. Sincerily, Stefan