Yes... and more!

 

I finally took the plunge and got to work today on installing models and paints.  I started with the FAIB 737-800W and installed about 25 paints for models that were missing.  Wow - a lot of work and I haven't even touched any other variants or models!  I'll start rolling through all the 737 series and A3XX series since they represent the largest majority of traffic and their models and liveries are all so prominent to find and FSX native.  I can't find any FSX native 777 (other than the -200 that is included in UT2) so I think the only way around that is to use an FS9 model for the -200F, -200LR and -300ER.  I should be able to use the existing 757 and 767 UT2 model but will have to use FS9 paints, and most likely the same issue for the 747 and larger Airbus's.

 

To your note above, I am seeing an MD-11 PAX and -F in my UT2.  Are you not?  I do have the latest Summer/Fall 2013 schedule, though.  Either way, UTT has an MD-11, 787-8, CRJ-900 and -1000 that may be interesting for you (which I'm sure you know of already).  I haven't yet found an FSX native ERJ-170/175/190 yet.

 

Anyway, I need a break of installing paints for a few hours in a row and then I'll start working on the 787-8.

 

Also, do you know of any type of program I can use to load a model and paint into to make sure I installed them correctly and that they'll show up in FSX?  I hate going through all this work to install dozens of paints and not be 100% sure I am doing it correctly.  I read there is a demo version of FS Repaint that you can use but I can't seem to find a link and the program is rather old so I'm unsure if it will work with FSX models and textures.  I also think the next issue is that all these newer airlines won't have a voice callsign in Radar Contact - how have you approached that issue or how will Radar Contact interact with those airlines/aircraft?

Also, do you know of any type of program I can use to load a model and paint into to make sure I installed them correctly and that they'll show up in FSX? I hate going through all this work to install dozens of paints and not be 100% sure I am doing it correctly. I read there is a demo version of FS Repaint that you can use but I can't seem to find a link and the program is rather old so I'm unsure if it will work with FSX models and textures.

 

 

Yes - see Post#41 above.

 

Program works a treat, although I've found a limitation in so far as it can't display the AI textures if they're organised in subfolders, eg, "texture.easyjet / Madrid" etc.

 

Regarding FS Repaint, it can't open native FSX AI repaints, so as soon as you change to a native FSX model, the textures will fail to load.

 

Regards

Yes - see Post#41 above.

 

Program works a treat, although I've found a limitation in so far as it can't display the AI textures if they're organised in subfolders, eg, "texture.easyjet / Madrid" etc.

 

Regarding FS Repaint, it can't open native FSX AI repaints, so as soon as you change to a native FSX model, the textures will fail to load.

 

Regards

 

Well I installed my AI into a sub-folder of SimObjects and downloaded AI Aircraft Editor and it works just fine.

 

The only issue that the validation report is giving me is that the "atc_airline" name is unrecognizable.  It gives this error for every paint I installed.  Any idea why it would throw that error or how I could fix it?  AI Editor even throws that error code for legacy airlines such as atc_airline=Delta, American and KLM (but I know they are in Radar Contact).  I don't think Editvoicepack works with Radar Contact so I'm not really sure how it'll interact.  My hope is that atc_airline is just checking an old, default FSX file for those airlines and they aren't in there (although I still have a hard time believing Delta or American wouldn't be in there) but that Radar Contact will recognize them.  In the least I know those names are in Radar Contact so I'm hoping RC will pick them up.

 

 

I can't find any FSX native 777 (other than the -200 that is included in UT2) so I think the only way around that is to use an FS9 model for the -200F, -200LR and -300ER. I should be able to use the existing 757 and 767 UT2 model but will have to use FS9 paints, and most likely the same issue for the 747 and larger Airbus's.

 

True, because TFS is the exclusive author of freeware 777 AI models and does not offer a FSX native edition, you are better off sticking with the UT2 model and only replacing with FS9 models for the models not covered like the ones you mention.  Also, if you really want to get picky, you will replace the 772 and 773 RR models with PW and GE models/paints since UT2 has installed RR's on those non ER/LR models. 

 

 

 

To your note above, I am seeing an MD-11 PAX and -F in my UT2. Are you not?

Yes, you are correct!  It's been a while since I used UT2 model that list I supplied above, it's only for the "big three" freeware authors in UT2.  The MD-11 is one of the "ugly" models supplied by Bernhard Renk, who provided the bare bones models for the ATR and ERJ/CRJs as well.  No offense to Mr. Renk, because those basic models served a purpose in olden days when FSX was in it's infancy and hardware was not as robust as it is now.  Also, some folks really couldn't care less about the accuracy of the external models as long as a somewhat plausible paint job was slapped on.  But now with I7 setups common, and with the wealth of alternative models by the likes of UTT (MD-11), AIM (CRJ-200), and Alpha India (CRJ-700/900) flooding the net, those older models really stick out like a sore thumb.   I remember when I first got UT2 around 2009 everyone was on a mad rush to find replacements for the RJs in UT2.  Those subpar models in the otherwise excellent UT2 model collection was my introduction to the world of freeware AI painters.   Before UT2, I just let World of AI do all the work, set it and forget it.  Now, look where I'm at.  I have UT2, of which 148 airlines are "second hand" schedules imported via powerpack, and I have 738 traditional .bgl traffic schedules.  When I'm not flying I'm tweaking my AI to make sure I have the most current paints and flightplans for the airlines I see most in the sim.

 

 

 

I also think the next issue is that all these newer airlines won't have a voice callsign in Radar Contact - how have you approached that issue or how will Radar Contact interact with those airlines/aircraft?

I don't use RC, so I cannot speak to that program and it's interface with AI. 

 

Regarding the questions on RC and Editvoicepack, I would suggest that you grab some other utilities that will help in managing your AI collection.  These supplemental utilities will help you hunt down things such as typos in aircraft.cfg files, badly formatted texture files, etc.   While manually pasting paint bitmap folders and appending their text entries into the subject AI model folder's configuration file, aircraft.cfg, mistakes can easily crop up and lead to issues of missing airplanes or paintjobs.  Also, if an AI model calls for a special effects file or bitmap texture, and it's not installed in your sim, it's been said that it can lead to stutters in the sim from the program running into a loop looking for the missing files. 

 

Some utilities I always use periodically to keep my AI collection in check:

 

ACA-2013 CTP http://aifs2.pvdveen.net/?p=233  A one stop shop that lists all your repaints by airline, and it has a batch error function that will show you which of your AI models have missing or incorrect callsigns, missing paints, or aircraft.cfg typos.  I believe this is the most important tool for anyone's AI collection, and it was just recently released for FSX!   It previously was FS9 only, and FSX users had to use all kinds of workarounds to get it to work before.  Also, if you install World of AI flightplans into FSX, those flightplans need to be converted to FSX format otherwise they may prevent native FSX flightplans from working!  This program will easily convert any FS9 traffic.bgl files for you with a few clicks!  This program and AI Aircraft Editor are the bare minimum utilities one must have in their AI toolset.

 

AlphaSearcher2 - Register at Alpha India Group, and search for this utility.  It locates bad bitmap files, namely, DXT3/5 .bmps without alpha channels.  Missing alpha channels can lead to stutters, and not only will you find AI paints without the alphas, you may notice lots of payware sceneries with the missing texture layer.   After adding alphas with another tool, DXTBmp, you may find that certain sceneries or paints that invoked stutters run smoother.

 

There is too much out there in the manner of variables that can hinder sim performance if your AI install is missing pieces, but I would suggest a good read of the suggestions from the AI experts at Alpha India Group.  AI is an art and a science, and you will discover all sorts of tricks to help you enjoy this little sub hobby by checking out that particular forum.  Because of my attention to my AI collection, I have picked up some best practice approaches to optimizing my overall sim installation by paying attention to the textures installed by payware addons, not the least of which is the importance of mip mapping textures to improve performance AND image quality.  

Well I installed my AI into a sub-folder of SimObjects and downloaded AI Aircraft Editor and it works just fine.

 

 

 

I think that you misunderstood what I meant by subfolders.

 

In my easyJet example, I have one common texture folder called "Texture.easyJet" responsible for holding all the different (FAIB A319 - CFM) easjyJet paints schemes, for which there are many. All the different paint schemes are held in subfolders within the original "Texture.easyJet" folder. Hence, there will be a subfolder named, "Come on let's fly", another named, "Madrid" etc. It is the repaints in these subfolders that AI Aircraft Editor can't see.

 

Regards

The MD-11 is one of the "ugly" models supplied by Bernhard Renk, who provided the bare bones models for the ATR and ERJ/CRJs as well.

 

Boy are you right.  I was taxiing in at Dubai last night and saw the UT2 model of the MD-11F sitting at the ramp - definitely added it to my list to be replaced!  I already downloaded the UTT MD-11 but I have yet to install it.  There are too many things I want to install - the 787s, 747s, 777s, 737s, A3XX... eesh; it's never ending!

 

For clarifications sake I wanted to ensure I understand about FS9 paints and FSX models.  The FS9 paints designed for FS9 models will still work for FSX models (including the night tail lightmap issue), correct?  I don't know why but I was thinking they were just port-overs of FS9 paints for FSX models, but now I understand why that really doesn't make sense.  For example, there are many FS9 paints designed for the FS9 AIA 747-400 GE model.  With UT2 including an FSX AIA 747-400 GE model, I can just install one of the FS9 paints designed for its FS9 model for the FSX version (with the same engine variant, of course)?

Boy are you right.  I was taxiing in at Dubai last night and saw the UT2 model of the MD-11F sitting at the ramp - definitely added it to my list to be replaced!  I already downloaded the UTT MD-11 but I have yet to install it.  There are too many things I want to install - the 787s, 747s, 777s, 737s, A3XX... eesh; it's never ending!

 

For clarifications sake I wanted to ensure I understand about FS9 paints and FSX models.  The FS9 paints designed for FS9 models will still work for FSX models (including the night tail lightmap issue), correct?  I don't know why but I was thinking they were just port-overs of FS9 paints for FSX models, but now I understand why that really doesn't make sense.  For example, there are many FS9 paints designed for the FS9 AIA 747-400 GE model.  With UT2 including an FSX AIA 747-400 GE model, I can just install one of the FS9 paints designed for its FS9 model for the FSX version (with the same engine variant, of course)?

 

Except for the fact that UTT has all but admitted that they have taken others work, made some modifications to it without the consent of the original author and then released it as their own work (and even going as far as selling the source code).  It is because of this that UTT is on the AVSIM Wall of Shame.  http://forum.avsim.net/forum/632-the-wall-of-shame/.  And it is because of this that I am not using the UTT MD-11, B748, CR9 and CR1000, I am not going to support these kinds of actions even if it does provide FSX native AI models.

 

MD-11 was ripped off from GWAI who borrowed parts of it without consent from iFDG (I think it was their MD-11).

B748 was ripped off from the AI Aardvark B747 without their consent.

CRJ9/CRJ1000 was ripped off from the Posky CRJ series without their consent.

The FS9 paints designed for FS9 models will still work for FSX models (including the night tail lightmap issue), correct? I don't know why but I was thinking they were just port-overs of FS9 paints for FSX models, but now I understand why that really doesn't make sense.

 

I need to test that out first myself.  The theory is the daytime bitmap ought to work, as there is no difference in how FS9 or FSX applies that image file to the external model. 

But you WILL run into issues with the FS9 nighttime bitmap, referred to as a lightmap.  FS9 lightmaps applied to an FSX model will appear very faint, especially the tail logo.  This may not be an issue if you don't fly at night, or can live with the faint tail logo.   FSX lightmaps have to have the airline tail logo embedded in EVERY lightmap file, whereas FS9 just uses a global blank tail logo which is overlaid over the daytime file with the airline's tail paintwork.  Very few repaint authors have started to offer FSX specific lightmaps now, since the majority of AI enthusiasts use FS9 or don't own UT2.   You could create your own FSX lightmap, but that is very time consuming work.  Bottomline, you could technically use the FS9 lightmap, but aesthetically the nighttime appearance will suffer.  I'm going to be testing the FS9 on FSX model texture scenario shortly.

 

 

 

With UT2 including an FSX AIA 747-400 GE model, I can just install one of the FS9 paints designed for its FS9 model for the FSX version (with the same engine variant, of course)?

That is assuming UT2 doesn't offer a specific paint you want to see on the UT2 AIA 747-400 GE model, but is available for it's FS9 nonUT2 counterpart.   Say, the new Air France livery?  That is one prime example that I may test out now.  I downloaded the new AF paint and installed on the FS9 model, but if this FS9 on FSX test works, I may just install that livery on the UT2 model, and reuse the old AF livery's lightmap. 

 

I'll get back to you on how this experiment works out.   If so, it may see some improvement at LFPG with more FSX AF 747s vs FS9 747s.

 

edit: I have run the test, and according to the model preview in AI Aircraft Editor, pasting the FS9 paints into the FSX UT2 folder works fine, with the exception that the FS9-FSX lightmap issue remains, but that was expected.   So this is good news, you can net some performance improvement if you want to use the FSX native UT2 models with the ubiquitous FS9 paints!!!

 

 

Me again, after that successful test of adding a FS9 Aardvark repaint to the corresponding UT2 FSX model, I have done some more research, and it looks like the practice of merging FS9 paints into the UT2 models has been "a thing" for some time.  I can't believe I didn't think of this sooner, but thanks to Greg for the idea!

 

Here's a quote from what I found on the intrawebs: "If you want to pursue replacing your models - buy a commercial package like Ultimate Traffic 2. Use the models from that package with many of the WoA repaints. The UT2 package contains many AIA, DJC and TFS models which were recompiled as FSX native models. Since these are the same aircraft and texture maps as many of those used by WoA in the FS9 version - you can use the same textures."  This quote is attributed to http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?220077-FSX-native-models-vs-AI-models-as-AI-Traffic

 

So, someone may even go so far as to get UT2 just to acquire the FSX models for DJC/Aardvark/TFS.   Another reason to own UT2!

I noticed something strange in AI Aircraft Editor.   It displays the nighttime lightmaps properly for the UT2 models, but not for any of my FS9 native non-UT2 models.  I used FSrepaint in the past and don't recall running into this issue. 

 

I don't see lightmaps on the FAIB birds in AI Aircraft Editor either, even on the FSX native models.  I can't explain that one, at first I thought it was because the lightmap for the FAIB Airbus models is one shared file located in the FSX root Textures folder, but the FAIB 737NGs have the LM in each individual livery folder, like the UT2 LMs that do display properly.   I also see a strange checkerboard pattern on the FAIBs in the night rendering mode......I suspect that this program has some kinks that need to worked out.   Overall, it's still a great resource, and free!

 

 

edit: I have run the test, and according to the model preview in AI Aircraft Editor, pasting the FS9 paints into the FSX UT2 folder works fine, with the exception that the FS9-FSX lightmap issue remains, but that was expected. So this is good news, you can net some performance improvement if you want to use the FSX native UT2 models with the ubiquitous FS9 paints!!!

 

Well before you replied I had actually installed some FS9 747 paints and got the same result as you, so that is good that we can use those repaints.  It's pretty much either use FS9 paints and deal with the lightmap issue or not have that airline fly around at all so I've kept them installed.

 

 

 

I don't see lightmaps on the FAIB birds in AI Aircraft Editor either, even on the FSX native models. I can't explain that one, at first I thought it was because the lightmap for the FAIB Airbus models is one shared file located in the FSX root Textures folder, but the FAIB 737NGs have the LM in each individual livery folder, like the UT2 LMs that do display properly. I also see a strange checkerboard pattern on the FAIBs in the night rendering mode......I suspect that this program has some kinks that need to worked out. Overall, it's still a great resource, and free!

 

I just tried it and also got the same results.  I know the lights work properly in FSX since I saw one the other night arriving into Dubai, so at least it is only an AI Aircraft Editor issue.

 

Anyway, this AI stuff is extremely time consuming, so thanks for introducing me to it all - as if we needed a bigger timesink for FSX! B)  I've installed about 70 different liveries so far.  I'm still trying to decide if I want to install FS9 models into my FSX or not.  I'm tempted to just leave them out so I can keep lots of AI and maintain good performance.

 

 

True, because TFS is the exclusive author of freeware 777 AI models and does not offer a FSX native edition, you are better off sticking with the UT2 model and only replacing with FS9 models for the models not covered like the ones you mention. Also, if you really want to get picky, you will replace the 772 and 773 RR models with PW and GE models/paints since UT2 has installed RR's on those non ER/LR models.

 

AJ - I was going through UT2 again and I noticed there actually are all variants of the 777 included that are FSX native (777-200/F/LR, -300/ER).  You will still have to use FS9 paints for it but just giving you a heads up!

Anyway, this AI stuff is extremely time consuming, so thanks for introducing me to it all - as if we needed a bigger timesink for FSX! B)  I've installed about 70 different liveries so far.  I'm still trying to decide if I want to install FS9 models into my FSX or not.  I'm tempted to just leave them out so I can keep lots of AI and maintain good performance.

Yep, it is a project, to say the least.  But it's one of those things that you build up over time, in my case, 4 years.   It's a constantly evolving, living ecosystem.  I don't have the skills to design scenery, so I love tinkering with this "movable" scenery that adds so much immersion to the sim.  I also learn so much about aircraft types and the constant fleet changes, I don't follow sports teams, so catching up with what is going on in the airline world or the stock market fills that void for me, and I love trying to get the AI in my sim to mirror the evolution in the airline fleets IRL.  It's like a virtual model railroad set, but with airlines of course.   I noticed you have a similar system to mine.  I run 100% AI and compared to my older system, I don't find any need to trim the AI density even when I'm at heavy payware airports in bad weather, so I don't think you should feel constrained in the quest to add more AI.   Maybe a few years ago when hardware was less powerful, it was necessary to watch what you add, but as you can see in the level of detail of the newer FSX AI models, any performance hit is very minimal if you run more higher density levels of AI when you have a modern generation i7 cpu.  In the past we had to accept poorly shaped models to avoid hindering performance, not so anymore.   You may or may not be aware, but the finer AI models like FAIB and Aardvark, FSX or FS9 native, use something called LOD (Level of Detail) optimization so that the full featured, polygon intensive models are only seen when you are close up to the model in the sim, say at the gate or at the runway holding point.  As the viewing distance increases, the geometric detail (and draw on cpu/gpu resources) decreases proportionately so that even high levels of AI do not cause a great FPS hit.  So even though these models look like they are resource hungry because they look like real aircraft, the model authors when to great lengths to minimize the hit on the cpu by optimizing the geometric design and adding multiple LODs, and when you mipmap or downgrade the texture format from DXT3/5 to DXT1 you can get even greater performance/fit more AI into the sim.

 

AJ - I was going through UT2 again and I noticed there actually are all variants of the 777 included that are FSX native (777-200/F/LR, -300/ER).  You will still have to use FS9 paints for it but just giving you a heads up!

Are you sure?  Please note, the 200LR and the 300ER have raked wingtips, the 777 base models in UT2 are not so equipped as they are the basic 200/200ER and 300 variants.   And also, the engines are RR only of course. 

These are just slight visual differences, but some people like myself want to see the correct engines/wings for the other variants not supplied as UT2 FSX models.

AJ's totally correct, there are NO 777 LR, F, or 300ER models in UT2.

Are the external differences big enough compared to the stock versions to warrant new models?

 

Remember, AI doesn't care much about flight distances. You've got a model, you've got a flightplan and that's it. You can make a Cub go 2000nm if you want to.