Best place to find AI models?

[Christopher Low 5,332]

I absolutely agree with you. I am very grateful for all of the work that AI modellers/painters/flightplan builders do for the community, but I can't help feeling that sometimes they are rather too protective of their work. After all, this is freeware. The only condition should be that it remains free. As an example, the Fernando Martinez Bae 146 models need to be updated to work in P3D v4, but apparently the original developer is no longer involved in the community, and therefore this conversion work can't be done because of lack of permission. In my view, if someone else is capable (and willing) to update the models, then they should do it (assuming that they have tried and failed to make contact with the original developer as a courtesy). It just seems at times that the freeware community creates problems where none should exist.

[honanhal 1,420]

As people have pointed out, the biggest shame is not that someone has to put in the work to put everything together, but that everyone has to put in the same work to put everything together, over and over and over again (with the result, of course, that the overwhelming majority of simmers just don't bother, and thus never see the work of the repainters/modelers/flightplan compilers). It's insane, and I have to admit I'm totally baffled by the people who insist that the situation is appropriate and normal. Ok, maybe it has to be this way because of copyright law -- but are you really going to argue that the situation is in the best interests of, well, anybody?

I've spent what probably amounts to full weeks of my time putting together a set of custom AI, which is beautiful in the end. But I hate that I had to spend so much time reinventing the wheel, and also that no one else can have it unless they also spend huge amounts of time. I wish that, as a community, we could find a solution to this problem.

Also: if someone can explain to me how a freeware developer might have an enforceable copyright claim against someone who compiled their work without their permission and posted it, I'd love to hear it (genuinely). Two issues you might like to address in your answer: 1) What would the measure of the damages be, if the compiler doesn't charge for it and the original developer didn't either? and 2) If the original painter/developer has used the protected work of another entity (e.g. Airbus or Delta) without permission, does that affect their claim?

James

[jason99vmi 157]

It literally took me like 10 min to do a huge airline like British Airways.  Not sure what you are all crying about with putting in time.  I barely get an hour or 2 to fly a night and had no problem updating many airlines.  Also you don't have to do EVERY airline.  Some small Asian airline with 6 aircraft you'll probably never see is not really needed. 

The people who put together the AI models, flightplans, and the program to implement all of them have done a huge effort in order to make it EASIER on us.  AIFP literally makes it a snap to implement up to date flightplans and download and install correct models/paints. 

They copyright to avoid someone taking their FREE work, repackaging and selling said work as their own. Thus taking advantage of this great community.  We've seen it many times.  Every time its called something different whether its ICE, SKAI, or something else.  

The compiler if he decides not to charge for it all he has to do is ask permission from FAIB or AIG etc.  But they NEVER do.  It would be such a simple email.  But they never ask. 

Also they are probably wary of some compiler who doesn't know what they are doing, screw something up.  Then the blame will be on AIG, FAIB etc not the compiler. 

They test, they know what works, and all you have to do is use AIFP.  Simple. 

[aamontoy 1]

1 hour ago, MadDog said:

That's all well and good until you fly over a large airport at FL 380 and framerates tank while 200 jetways suddenly have to move themselves into the correct position.  Personally, I comment out all the exit data in the AI aircraft .cfg files to avoid it.

... and as much as I respect the work done by the AI community, I agree that they are constantly shooting themselves in the foot.  So much of their effort goes to waste because most sane people don't want to spend months (not minutes) tediously assembling models, paints, and schedules.

Well im one of the many repainters out there and believe me...we dont do it for you...we do it for us and you just tag along if you want...one thing that cannot be permitted is some users packing all our work and selling them for a fee...that is not right...

cheers

[kiki 89]

3 hours ago, DaveCT2003 said:

I used freeware AI models for, well, an eternity.  Since moving to P3DV4 I decided to try Ultimate Traffic again, and I have to say that I haven't been happier.  No more work, and the models aren't hard on frames.  It also has some great features like jetways moving to arriving aircraft and moving away from aircraft pushing back all over the airport.

I'd recommend giving it a shot.  I think there is a trial available, but don't quote me on that.

Best wishes.

 

That is almost like my story... I have gone the hard way with freeware everything. When I moved from FSX to P3D I also left all that tweaking behind and bought the MyTraffic. No more installing over over again! But I am not totally happy, the models in MT look just terrible and the schedules are not accurate.

Does UT have GA and military traffic? Are the models and schedules ok? I am willing to pay if I get good AI-traffic without too much work.

[kiki 89]

3 hours ago, DaveCT2003 said:

 

 

Sorry, double post. Deleted.

[aamontoy 1]

31 minutes ago, honanhal said:

As people have pointed out, the biggest shame is not that someone has to put in the work to put everything together, but that everyone has to put in the same work to put everything together, over and over and over again (with the result, of course, that the overwhelming majority of simmers just don't bother, and thus never see the work of the repainters/modelers/flightplan compilers). It's insane, and I have to admit I'm totally baffled by the people who insist that the situation is appropriate and normal. Ok, maybe it has to be this way because of copyright law -- but are you really going to argue that the situation is in the best interests of, well, anybody?

I've spent what probably amounts to full weeks of my time putting together a set of custom AI, which is beautiful in the end. But I hate that I had to spend so much time reinventing the wheel, and also that no one else can have it unless they also spend huge amounts of time. I wish that, as a community, we could find a solution to this problem.

Also: if someone can explain to me how a freeware developer might have an enforceable copyright claim against someone who compiled their work without their permission and posted it, I'd love to hear it (genuinely). Two issues you might like to address in your answer: 1) What would the measure of the damages be, if the compiler doesn't charge for it and the original developer didn't either? and 2) If the original painter/developer has used the protected work of another entity (e.g. Airbus or Delta) without permission, does that affect their claim?

James

1. Socialism is dead...best interests of well anybody...

2. let say you made a freeware project...and 2 days later you see your own project in the web and some selling thousands of copies for just 1 dollar each download...let see how you feel about copyright then...

 

[honanhal 1,420]

Is the status quo really in the interest of the repainters and modelers, though? Sure, in theory they avoid their work being appropriated without credit being given (although we all know that does still happen). But they also end up with way fewer people using it, because most simmers just don't compile their own AI packages. I don't doubt that some of the creators are fine with that tradeoff, but are all of them?

James

[Christopher Low 5,332]

let say you made a freeware project...and 2 days later you see your own project in the web and some selling thousands of copies for just 1 dollar each download...let see how you feel about copyright then...

He is not talking about people selling freeware illegally. He is talking about making the result of weeks of work available to someone else so that they do not have to reinvent the wheel. It makes perfect sense. As for taking 10 minutes to create an entire package for British Airways......I have spent a massive amount of time over the years creating a custom model/repaint database for airlines/military aircraft that fly in and out of the UK and Ireland, and the vast majority of the airlines that I added/modified took a LOT longer than 10 minutes to create. To be fair, I tend to adjust many of the fltsim.cfg entries, like adding missing atc_id registrations, or adding individual registrations to texture statements/folders so that they make more sense....instead of stuff like NC/OC/webtitles/unnamed/white etc. Nevertheless, it still takes time to add all of the entries to existing aircraft folders.

[akamphaug 15]

31 minutes ago, aamontoy said:

Well im one of the many repainters out there and believe me...we dont do it for you...we do it for us and you just tag along if you want...one thing that cannot be permitted is some users packing all our work and selling them for a fee...that is not right...

cheers

Thanks for participating in the thread, I am really curious, As a repainter, is the current situation ideal for you? Could you imagine a scenario where an application (think FTX central) would download and subscribe to your repaints. Would that be ok? What about an opt in model where you could submit your repaints to a centrally operated repository that would let users download it as part of a package (for free of course)? Both options I think are better for us users than hunting for models, then repaints, then flightplans, then compiling. But obviously a new way of doing things would have to work for all parties. I just feel like we are stuck with a system here that really is no good. The update to V4 literally means doing everything all over again for me, and that is just no good. 

[Christopher Low 5,332]

If/when I upgrade to P3D v4, I expect to be able to haul my massive Airplanes AI folder across to it, and do nothing more than upgrade the model files that do not work. Any more than that, and I will stick with P3D v3.

[honanhal 1,420]

5 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

If/when I upgrade to P3D v4, I expect to be able to haul my massive Airplanes AI folder across to it, and do nothing more than upgrade the model files that do not work. Any more than that, and I will stick with P3D v3.

Christopher, I've got good news and bad news. Bad news first: you can't just drag the folder across without changes -- that will cause P3D v4 to CTD every time an incompatible model is called. What you can do is enable aircraft folders one at a time based on which ones are compatible. The good news: a fair number are compatible, and they're converting models as we speak over at AIG.

I won't lie to you: I have spent many hours over the past few weeks checking on exactly which models are and are not compatible, and upgrading the models that have been converted, and checking them one by one. Again, I'm not sure that was the greatest use of my time, but there's no way around it to get your custom AI into v4, unfortunately.

James

[aamontoy 1]

Just now, akamphaug said:

Thanks for participating in the thread, I am really curious, As a repainter, is the current situation ideal for you? Could you imagine a scenario where an application (think FTX central) would download and subscribe to your repaints. Would that be ok? What about an opt in model where you could submit your repaints to a centrally operated repository that would let users download it as part of a package (for free of course)? Both options I think are better for us users than hunting for models, then repaints, then flightplans, then compiling. But obviously a new way of doing things would have to work for all parties. I just feel like we are stuck with a system here that really is no good. The update to V4 literally means doing everything all over again for me, and that is just no good. 

Well i also play ARMA3 on steam and their workshop/download section for mods is fantastic and thats what AI should migrate too...problem is trying to consolidate every model/owner with every different repaint/painter for each model and coordinate such a massive effort...some modellers arent even in the community anymore...

However that being said...you just need to compile each airline once...and whenever a new repaint/model or say optimized model comes out, update the airlines accordingly with AIFP. i have at least 500 different fltplans for the entire world and whenever a new paint comes out it takes me 15 mins to get them flying...i probably update this on a daily basis if something new and shiny comes out...but thats just because im picky and i want the latest and the greatest...guess if i have to wait for someone to do that for me ughh...thats what got me into repainting...i couldnt wait to get a fleet in my sim which in turn led me to repaint them by myself...and now i see many users worldwide using them as well...

im sure it would be ideal to have it the way you are presenting it but it would entail such a massive effort im willing to bet it would have to stop being freeware, and having to cut the pie into all of the modelers/repainters/fltplaners would be more difficult to accomplish...

my 2cts

[jason99vmi 157]

1 hour ago, honanhal said:

Christopher, I've got good news and bad news. Bad news first: you can't just drag the folder across without changes -- that will cause P3D v4 to CTD every time an incompatible model is called. What you can do is enable aircraft folders one at a time based on which ones are compatible. The good news: a fair number are compatible, and they're converting models as we speak over at AIG.

I won't lie to you: I have spent many hours over the past few weeks checking on exactly which models are and are not compatible, and upgrading the models that have been converted, and checking them one by one. Again, I'm not sure that was the greatest use of my time, but there's no way around it to get your custom AI into v4, unfortunately.

James

Thats untrue.  I had a ton of FS9 model folders running in P3D v4 and caused zero CTDs.   But i'll caveat this as I junction link my AI folder to my HDD so all my AI resides on there and not on the sim drive.  Every simmer should have it this way since it frees up space on the Sim drive.  The FS9 models are just invisible or you see just the tail etc.  Now, the FS9 AI ships from Henrik's AI Global Ship package supposedly did cause CTDs.  But he has since updated that anyway. 

Chris, you can totally use all your hard work in v4 and just upgrade the FS9 models.  I'm doing just that myself.  Almost done thanks to the hard work the AIG guys who are updating those old models from now defunct AI modelers like TFS. 

I think the only major ones missing are the A330, A340.   There are still some regionals missing like CRJ200, EMB135, EMB145.   A great way to check your models is Lorby's freeware ThumbnailX tool.  Lets you know what is FS9 and what is FSX models. 

Almost all military ai aircraft will not work since they were FS9.  I think the guys over at MAIW are talking if not working on updating these models. 

there is a great list of what works and what doesn't over at AIG and the link at the bottom takes you to where you can download updated models. 

http://www.alpha-india.net/forums/index.php?topic=25472.0

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

3 hours ago, honanhal said:

As people have pointed out, the biggest shame is not that someone has to put in the work to put everything together, but that everyone has to put in the same work to put everything together, over and over and over again (with the result, of course, that the overwhelming majority of simmers just don't bother, and thus never see the work of the repainters/modelers/flightplan compilers).

Some people have attempted to automate the process, but have run afoul of modelers, repainters and schedule builders complaining that their intellectual property rights were being violated. There is really no obvious solution to that issue. In the long run, my prediction is that most freeware AI models will eventually give way to payware versions. The developer of the beautiful and accurate FSPXAI models has already shifted over to producing payware. I'm continually impressed that the author of the FAIB models has not yet done the same.

 

2 hours ago, honanhal said:

Bad news first: you can't just drag the folder across without changes -- that will cause P3D v4 to CTD every time an incompatible model is called

This is a bit of an overstatement. It really depends what the incompatibility is. Most often, the model appears black, because the textures are incompatible. The next most common problem is that a specific animation (flaps moving, land gears, etc.) does not work. The CTD is a not a common problem, although it does happen.