Sign in to follow this  
LuisFelizTirado

linking objects

Recommended Posts

I've been placing objects for the last two weeks so I wouldn't call me a guru in this matter :)... One thing I've observed is that when an object is very close to another one, it doesn't show up in the sim even if the compilation goes smotthly.Besides "attaching" objects (only for library obj.), is there a way to circumvent this apparent interdiction of promiscuity :) ?I'd like to link at various angles concrete blocks made of a generic object I defined the purpose being to shape up a multisided dock.thanks Dominique

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Hi Dominique.This is simply not true. The Gmax/XML placement of objects is just fine.http://webpages.charter.net/ludowr/MultiObject.jpgThese are separate Library Objects piled on top one another, with perfect display.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><FSData version="9.0" xmlns:xsi='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance' xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="bglcomp.xsd">	<SceneryObject lat="42.6724578583117" lon="-88.6380536931544" alt="0" pitch="0" bank="0" heading="0" altitudeIsAgl="TRUE" imageComplexity="NORMAL">		<LibraryObject name="A8DAB2BC4F8B678C8F7F83BA3C05F1B0" scale="1.0" />	</SceneryObject>	<SceneryObject lat="42.6724578583117" lon="-88.6380536931544" alt="-0.25" pitch="0" bank="0" heading="30" altitudeIsAgl="TRUE" imageComplexity="NORMAL">		<LibraryObject name="4E7852894CE91F6613FE6F95D48752B8" scale="1.0" />	</SceneryObject>	<SceneryObject lat="42.6724578583117" lon="-88.6380536931544" alt="0.5" pitch="0" bank="0" heading="90" altitudeIsAgl="TRUE" imageComplexity="NORMAL">		<LibraryObject name="46B6A68F404978EAD6C9E3B9CCFD868D" scale="1.0" />	</SceneryObject>	<SceneryObject lat="42.6724578583117" lon="-88.6380536931544" alt="0.25" pitch="0" bank="0" heading="120" altitudeIsAgl="TRUE" imageComplexity="NORMAL">		<LibraryObject name="DD00D3D340EB84041517C08D0513DA51" scale="1.0" />	</SceneryObject>	<SceneryObject lat="42.6724790521736" lon="-88.6380536931544" alt="-1.0" pitch="0" bank="45" heading="0" altitudeIsAgl="TRUE" imageComplexity="NORMAL">		<LibraryObject name="A8DAB2BC4F8B678C8F7F83BA3C05F1B0" scale="1.5" />	</SceneryObject>	<SceneryObject lat="42.672475234406" lon="-88.6380466530758" alt="0" pitch="6" bank="0" heading="0" altitudeIsAgl="TRUE" imageComplexity="NORMAL">		<LibraryObject name="4E7852894CE91F6613FE6F95D48752B8" scale="1.0" />	</SceneryObject></FSData>

Dick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ThanksIt was just something I observed several times not something I was so sure of. And I was referring to the default FS9 library objects...Ok I obviously got to check further hey ?! That's good news anyway.Dominique

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dominique.I have a suspicion you are referring to generic building objects... not Library Objects. My examples were library objects. Generic buildings are generated at runtime... they are not MDL files from a Library.It may well be that the generic have a display problem as they are OLD leftovers from FS2000 ( or earlier ). I wouldn't use them.In another post, you wanted to know if these generic buildings could be made into Library Objects. No. But you can make simple Gmax buildings and texture them with the default textures.The object file I made was from Gmax made objects. If mapped with a texture, they'd look like masonry blocks, and could be made into a pier or dock. It only took me a few minutes to make these objects in Gmax, export them as MDL's, and compile them with BGLComp.Learn Gmax. Then you can make simple objects and components and texture them with either the default textures or your own. Simple objects are very easy.I don't use the old generic buildings, and don't really recommend their use. By the time you get the object looking right, and textured right, you could have done the same with Gmax, and avoided some isues ( like the one you may have discovered ).We could use large libraries of buildings. Residential, Small Business, Factories, Office Buildings.... No one has really tried this approach, to my knowledge. Even Gerrish's trees could be updated for FS9, and a tree-placer utility made to clump them in different configurations using generated XML code.Dick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Dick, this is very enlightening.My problem is that getting back to scenery making I've to learn everything again. I'm focusing on geographical data right now that's the reason why I tend to use the default objects to spice the redrawn landscape ! Well, I'll have to learn Gmax sometimes ahead I guess... Dominique

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am redoing Orlando Executive. I was able to find the building, both library objects and advanced buildings in the default scenery files. I cut and pasted the XML for these buildings into my file. I then moved the buildings to the correct locations. I also made a new circular advanced building which I placed within an existing advanced building with the circular top protruding from the square advanced building. I even moved it so the circular building was protruding at the corner of the square advanced building. The flight simulator didn't care where I moved the building and the two buildings were drawn.W. Sieffert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been placing Advanced Buildings in concatenation and nested within each other without any display problems.Perhaps Dominique could give us a more detailed example and explanation of the problem. It sounds very interesting.Best regards.Luis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bill and Luis. It's a clear cut case of me not proficent enough... I'll look into it next weekend.BTW what are "advanced" objects (compared to library onjects) ?Dominique

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Dominique,The Flight Simulator Development Team has looked for many different ways of populating the FS world with objects before they put together autogen (and even that is being extended with the new xml autogen - chicken shacks and utility poles!)Previously, they had very simple buildings - if you flew a few years ago, you would remember simple cartoon-like houses. For FS 2000, they came up with Advanced Buildings, allowing for much greater control of all the elements of the building. Here is a screenshot from Airport for Windows showing its creation window for this feature:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/90385.jpg(By the way, my screen resolution is 1024 x 768 pixels and I still cannot get the entire Airport options window to show. Just one reason why I use Derek's Flight Simulator Scenery Creator.)As for library objects, all other visual scenery in FS is this. The Design Team models special buildings (or vehicles, antennae, etc.) like the Panth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luis,Have you downloaded SceneGenX - http://www.airportforwindows.com/ . Build 23 is great! It is getting closer to Omega!!I started with Airport for Windows so have always been partial to it. I recently loaded FSSC to assist in troubleshooting a problem.I have basically abandoned AFW/FSSC for FS2004 with the advent of SGX. I find the XML much easier to read for troubleshooting purposes. Secondly, MS has promised to move ahead and not guarantee backward compatibility with old style BGLC/SCASM.I wonder if they will update the terrain scenery in the next version to XML or who knows.W. Sieffert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, William. I had been waiting until most of the problems had been sorted out, but shall definitely follow your recommendation and take another look.Best regards.Luis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this