R & K Skyranch and Asplund Field

[Christopher Low 5,332]

Here are a few screenshots of the updated R & K Skyranch and Asplund Field airfields for Seattle 2004.1. The updated Asplund Field, showing the runway logs, and densely packed trees. Many of the original trees were spread far and wide, but I have tightened these up considerably. Now you really do have the effect of a narrow runway with tightly packed trees on either side. The FBO has also been moved slightly.2. Ready for take-off on runway 16. Note the huge logs that define the runway (courtesy of Robert Driscoll).3. The updated R & K Skyranch. This package has been completely rebuilt. Note the logs that define both runways, and the new log defined parking area in the distance. Trust me, these small airfield runway approaches are a lot easier with those logs there.I will post a few more screenshots as other airfields are completed.Chris Low,ENGLAND.

[Guest R_Driscoll]

Certainly the runways look clearer and its nice to have them properly marked out from the air, not just appearing at the last moment. But I think the logs look a bit too shiny, and possibly a bit thick.Some suggestions:1) make the logs less shiny (one less coat of estapol)2) make the logs a bit thinner3) use a few different logs for variety.Of these suggestions:1) its easy to reduce the log shine and requires no work on your part Chris - I simply work on the MIP a little, and the change will be automatic.2) if I make the logs thinner, you will have to unload and reload every log - which would take a treemendous amount of work.3) I can give you a new log or two for future work if you like. And there is the second smaller log in your object set already.Before I rush in and do anything though, what do people think? Any other comments?Rob Loghewer D.

[Christopher Low 5,332]

Robert,I like the logs. They make landing approaches really easy at these small airfields, and the logs themselves look very realistic. I still have a lot of work to do, but I am trying to finish these updates in time for inclusion on the PC Pilot cover CD. Anything that increases the amount of work (and by that, I mean having to rebuild packages that I have already completed) will reduce my chances of completing the work by the cutoff date.Chris Low,ENGLAND.

[Guest Quaxo]

Hm, I don't think I would be happy to land on a runway with such logs at the side... Some crosswind, a slip, or some problem with the gear, (or just a mistake) and you go crashing head-on onto a huge, heavy, hard log... Could easily ruin your day! :-)Cristian

[Christopher Low 5,332]

Cristian,Yes, I understand your point. However, Asplund Field has a particularly narrow runway as far as my "log defined" runways are concerned. Most of the others are considerably wider, and you do not get the same "closed in" effect when viewing from the cockpit. I will post a few screenshots to show you what I mean.Yes, this may not be something that would be recommended in reality, but I personally think that it makes the airfields look more attractive. Maybe I'm the only one though.........Chris Low,ENGLAND.

[Lars Peter 0]

Hmm.Glue and Duct-tape will once again be standard equipment onboardduring the flights.:-lol Lars Peter.

[Guest Quaxo]

Chris,Don't get me wrong - I like the logs, they're realistic and really nice (even though I agree that they look a little too "shiny", a duller brown color would be better...) and the airport looks much better now.As Lars said, it'll just be a matter of bringing some rolls of good duct tape onboard! ;-)Cristian

[Guest R_Driscoll]

We should get the bush pilots to comment here! Naji? But I have seen logs used for small strips before (at least the taxiways/parking bays). Certainly the visibility is improved! Chris, if I take off a coat of gloss , it will not affect your workload in any way. I will simply send you the new MIP, you copy it into your GEN directory, and Bob's your uncle. I've got the paintstripper here on standbye ready for your go ahead.RobD.

[Guest jonpoint]

Well, I dunno about this. To be honest, I don't like the large logs. It may make the runways easier to see but so do clearings! I couldn't imagine landing a glider anywhere near there! It doesn't look natural at all. I think dotted FLED lines look more realistic (white line-marking paint is often used for club days and fly-ins anyway), that's why I never really minded using them.This is also why I did my own markers, logs and tyres. From my own experience, you have to familiarise yourself with bush strips BEFORE setting down which may mean circling a few times (hard in glider...). My 'local' has nearly nothing! There's a fence all round and a strip of trees down the west side. Look for the hangar and line-up between the 'chocky blocks' beside it and the ones at the other end - easy :-beerchugBTW, 'my' chocky blocks (uploaded) are almost twice the size of real ones but I did that to make them more visible. You CAN fit a Stemme wing over them though!PS Chris, I'll resend the tractor tyre mipfiles to you shortly.PPS If those logs were real, they'd never be left to rot beside a runway. Each one would be worth $1,000s. In fact, were they hardwood (the shininess looks like Turpentine too), they'd probably fetch >$10,000 each for use as bridge/wharf piles :-eek You could sell a few and buy a new glider! So, mount them on 'dry feet' to keep the borers out...:-waveJon Point*************************(effyouthree@hotmail.com)*************************

[Christopher Low 5,332]

Oh dear, now I'm confused. I was hoping that these log upgraded airfields would be welcome, but it seems that my efforts have been wasted. Now I really don't know what to do......:-( Chris Low,ENGLAND.

[Christopher Low 5,332]

At least twelve of the airfields are not going to be flat enough for logs to be used, so it's possible that these will be left with dotted lines. I am considering what to do regarding Asplund Field. The runway is rather narrow for logs, and this may also apply to my upgraded Cricket Field. However, the latter can easily be made wider, but Asplund Field is limited in scope. I do like the logs at Asplund Field though........Trust me when I say that the majority of the "log upgraded" airfields have much wider runways than Asplund Field, and the view from the cockpit will confirm this. I forgot to post some screenshots last night, but I will endeavour to do so tonight.Chris Low,ENGLAND.PS. Maybe one or two beta testers could give me feedback on some of these "log upgraded" airfields..........any volunteers ?

[Hans_Petter 1]

Chris, the logs are certainly useful for marking the landing area. I'll have to agree with the others that they're a bit too big to be realistic and it might be a waste of precious redwood timber to leave them lying on the ground. However, this works well in a simulator. It's all a question of (absolute) realism versus usefulness. Hans Petter

[Christopher Low 5,332]

Hans,Thank you. A true supporter at last :-jumpy I agree that these logs are far too big to be a realistic representation of potential runway markers in reality, but you have stated a very important point regarding this being a simulation. I find these logs absolutely invaluable when making approaches to these airfields, but I concede that any amount of crosswind at Asplund Field is likely to require a great deal of piloting skill. Still, you lot are all experts now :-)I will probably increase the runway width at Cricket Field, since I am almost certain that the logs here are too close together. There is a huge amount of space to correct this on the western side of the airfield, so I might post a "construction site screenshot" this evening :-)Chris Low,ENGLAND.

[Guest R_Driscoll]

I don't think the white lines are any more realistic - I think in reality you would recognise bush strips by location, possible tree lines, the cleared field itself, key buildings attached to the airfield and possibly local features such as transmission towers, fencelines, small lakes or sand strips. The white lines in FU3 appear when you don't want them, don't appear when you want them, and don't even look like white paint. Possibly agtim's solution is still the best - a custom made overpaint as he did at Bembridge/IOW. But Chris, you have two sizes of logs now. I would suggest the following:Use a few large logs, eg for strip start/finish, and possibly for parking bays (this has a precedent, eg the very detailed LAGO something Field - I can't remember its name - it had logs in the planepark). Use a few of the smaller logs to mark the edges, but only a couple on each side near the bushline, blended a bit with other objects such as occasional trees.This might be a better compromise between reality and simulation. Of course, Jon's white markers would help a lot too - they are authentic (if a bit big? - I don't know what size they should be). Do you have these already, or do you want me to send you a set? And a made a couple of other types of markers - witches hats (called witch0.bin) and red/white marker sticks (called stick0.bin) specifically for this purpose - to mark edges. But they're too small to see while you're up there - they only help when you're down here. I'll send you the whole set for just half price.And yes, turpentine. That's why they're a bit shiny. I remember now.RobD.

[Christopher Low 5,332]

Robert,I am not sure that I want to start replacing the majority of the logs with other objects. I don't particularly like the look of the white markers or other objects....that's just a personal viewpoint, and is not intended as a criticism of the models themselves. I understand your point regarding a few large logs at the runway ends, and then smaller logs for the rest of the runway. I will think about this, but I am reluctant to change something that I actually like :-) I am sceptical about only using a couple of smaller logs on each side for the ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE RUNWAY. With respect to using a few trees to help mark out the runways, some airfields are located a significant distance away from the treeline....and I never add trees to a piece of terrain that doesn't look like it has a tree in that location.I hope that this doesn't sound like I am being stubborn. You must remember that I make these upgrades first and foremost for my own personal requirements. Once I decide that something doesn't look good enough, I have to make the necessary changes to correct it. The fact that I can increase the enjoyment of other FU3 users is a very big bonus, but making multiple copies of each airfield to suit different people's tastes would be a nightmare job !I will consider what you have said, but I must follow my own heart.Chris Low,ENGLAND.