FU3 package authors

[agtim 0]

and here a short list of all challenges for FU3 :-wave agtim

[agtim 0]

Now I have generated 8 lists and updated the plane list (now 122)Size is too large here, have uploaded all lists in 1 zip in the library. :-wave agtim

[Guest R_Driscoll]

I suggest that we don't rearrange the avsim library, but simply pin a post to the top directing people where to look for downloads. Such a list could be updated easily and would allow future development of the forum and library.Using agtim's pdf file for challenges, I've put together a sample of what we could do, simplifying the information (note the AVSIM forum deletes white space so formatting is difficult):CHALLENGESRegion: (not known)P51 Challenge

[Guest R_Driscoll]

I spent a lot of the weekend trying to construct a better version of the UKS modelmip.tag database. Its slow, because I have to check each package for all models, then all models for all mips. Without agtim's little programs it would be impossible, but it will still take me some time. A quick check with one airport of a partial rebuild did not show an improvement in framerate - in fact it seemed that having so many models outside the database slowed the framerate. At this point I think the idea of having each package self-contained is NOT a good idea, and that we made the right choices with UKS in going for the large database inclusive of models as they were made. That is, it is better to have the models inside the database, despite the hassles with upgrading. It would be better to spend the effort on making an automated update program instead.This seems different to what was said on this forum before, and I understand people wanting to make each package self-sufficient. Maybe it works better for Seattle/San Fran, since packages there use few new models. If I included all models used in my packages, they would be bigger downloads than Ansgar's 747! I don't think this is a good idea.So I suggest making updated versions of the models databases for each region, linking this to a download (as suggested in previous post), and re-releasing packages without the models. All you would need is a message at the beginning saying "Requires models database xxxx (link)".And as usual probably the best is a compromise - new models can sit quite happily outside the database, and rebuilds need only be done if a large number of new models comes along.RobD.

[Guest effyouthree]

Rob,"So I suggest making updated versions of the models databases for each region, linking this to a download (as suggested in previous post), and re-releasing packages without the models. All you would need is a message at the beginning saying "Requires models database xxxx (link)". "This wouldn't work for either of us - I create packages to show-off new models and you create new models for all your packages!Maybe, the answer lies in between. Certainly for UKS, as many models are unique to the area, THOSE models should be in the database, together with all the 'generic' LGS stuff already ported across. At some stage (once per year?), someone re-compiles it with the models added recently. We could do the same for the other regions too.I just can't live with the concept of creating packages only using existing models :-roll It would also discourage everyone (including me) from contributing models :-( What we DO need is a simple utility that does the mipfile rebuild from a GUI interface, allowing people to add models to their own databases when they receive them. As you did Fixmip, do you think this is easy? I envisage that you would open it, select the database to be edited (which would then show you a list of models and mipfiles), then select the models & mipfiles to be added in another pane and hit 'Compile'. I know this can be done from a command prompt but there must be a better way for others to use!You could also add the ability to check for the right mipfiles being present - simply read the first part of the binfile to get the texture names, truncate the extension and search for the mipfile name in the source folder. If not found, show an error message and halt the process (to prevent one from compiling the tagfile with a missing mipfile).Actually, I just thought of a usefule checking utility - something that disassembles the tagfile and checks that all required mipfiles are there, using the above method.So, anyone up for some programming? I'm a bit busy building bridges and aircraft right now ;)Regards,**************Jonathan Point**************"I'd rather be down here wishing I was up there than up there wishing I was down here"

[Guest R_Driscoll]

No, I don't want to stop people making new models! - that's not what I meant. I'm certainly against anything that limits people from making new models, and I think most people would agree that to save framerates, the original LGS models were made a bit too sparsely. So I have no problems with people releasing new packages with new models in any way they like, with the new models just being shoved in the GEN / LITEMAPS directories. But what I would find a bit difficult with UKS (well, I HAVE found it difficult already) is re-releasing the old packages as self-contained units with all models provided, because of the sheer size of the resulting packages (literally bigger than Ansgar's 747 release package). You would end up downloading some models many times as I reuse them in multiple packages. So take your pylons packages - if there were 10 packages using the pylons, would each package have to be self-complete? In the UKS case, the total models size is too large.So I think ideally, we should make a link (like the Challenges one I put up before) pointing to a current best version of the database, and below the link, pointers to packages that may contain new models not in the database, but are complete with the database. So you would download the modelmip.tag for the region, download the package, copy new models into the directory, and it should work straightaway. Every so often, we rebuild the database to include newer models. And basically that's what we're doing now, except that we don't have it organised in a way that is easily accessable by newbies.I have always thought that there was very little effort by this community put into making scenery models, and that has very much disappointed me. When Captn Bazza started making them, I was very thirsty for even the stupidest models (castle, dragons, old ships) that he put out, because no-one else was bothering. And I think making good models is far more complex than most people think - I have lost track of the number of times people have said to me - let's make a little city here, with castles, streetlights, every major building etc - and then been disappointed that I didn't drop it in there email the next day! People put big efforts into other aspects, and assume that making models is a 5 min job at the end of the package. Its the other way round, and I have done both. So I certainly am not against development of new models, and we still have plenty to do, eg the DSF series that should be replaced.And after all that, I think we're saying the same thing! A main database for each area, updated occasionally, clearly linked for newbies. Possibly packages should reference the version (eg link number or year) of the regional database they are based on, and all databases be backwards compatible!.Despite this, I don't have strong feelings either way (after all, I put in many hours over the weekend to try and find a workable solution for UKS with standalone packages, and will keep trying if that's the consensus). I don't want this to stop us getting our house in order. That's my 2c worth.Your next point was to write a program to do this. YES!! I would love this. I don't know how to build the modelmip.tag though - I simply use the existing programs. But it might be possible to run those programs from within a supervisory windows based program. So I will look at this. Probably agtim will beat me to it ...RobD.

[Christopher Low 5,339]

Robert,Your comments concerning the time required to build models is a good one. In fact, every time that I see something else that I would like to add to the SanFran 2005 pack, I worry about whether I should ask Jon to build it or not ! As he says, he already has plenty on his plate.However, Jon also makes a good point regarding using existing models for new packages. I am having that very problem with respect to small buildings for marina packages. I end up using "house5" for the vast majority of these, because I am not aware of any other models to use that are of a similar size, or simply seem appropriate. If any of you know of any models that could be used for small buildings at places like these, then please let me know ! They would need to be buildings ONLY (ie. not including other stuff "stuck onto the side", like cars, gardens etc). Alternatively, if anyone fancies creating a handful of models for this type of package, then feel free to start building ! Buildings with "witches hat" style roofs (four hips converging at the peak) are quite common for "marina HQs", but a nice combination of buildings with terracotta or grey roofs would be great :-)It would also be useful to be able to remove existing models from a region, but in a confined area. I am thinking here about the sail boats that exist at the Pier 39 marina (San Francisco, near Fisherman's Wharf), Emery Cove marina (this is on the east side of the bay, just north of Alameda), and also Pillar Point harbour (next to Half Moon Bay airport). I would really like to be able to remove the sail boats from these locations.....but ONLY these locations (without having to manually remove them using FLED). This would allow me to create new marina scenery packages at these locations.Any ideas ?Chris Low.

[Guest R_Driscoll]

Find me a photo of what you want and I'll build it, no problems. Also, the Cardiff houses would add some variety - they are based on actual English houses but may be close to what you want. Or if not, possibly they could be renamed and retextured. So send me a pic and I'll send you the model (simple houses shouldn't take too long so long as you don't want the doorbell rendered in 3D!).I guess I'm advocating leaving the avsim library untouched, and producing a post guiding people to links rather than culling the whole library. Any thoughts?RobD.

[Christopher Low 5,339]

Robert,OK, thanks. That will take some of the pressure off Jon !I will send you some screenshots of various marinas that I would like to include in SanFran 2005. These should give you an idea regarding the sizes and types of buildings that I am looking for.I thought that you would be far too busy with the UKS region, which is why I did not ask you in the first place. Your help is greatly appreciated.Chris Low.

[Guest juvat2]

I agree with RobD on his library idea.JimB

[Christopher Low 5,339]

The problem with leaving the library untouched is that there will be lots of excess garbage in the system (and before the forum wolves pounce, I am referring to multiple versions of the same add-on, and NOT any personal opinion of anyone else's work). In my opinion, any old versions of planes/scenery packages/compilations etc. really should be removed, if for no other reason than to "clean the place up". It would make the library smaller, tighter, and easier to navigate.Maybe it's just me, but I find it annoying that the FU3 file library is in such a mess. Robert's pinned "guide for newbies" is certainly an exceptionally good idea, but I still think that any stuff that isn't required really should be deleted.As an example, I have been having a look at those 63 entries attributed to Hennie Van Rooyen, and I have determined that at least 17 of those could be removed.I am not suggesting this because of some personal desire to see other people's work removed. You only have to remember how much stuff I have personally uploaded over the last four years (and then note that I currently have only ONE entry in the entire library) to realise that I am not making this suggestion for selfish reasons. I would simply like to see a tidier and more organised system.What does everyone else think ?Chris Low.

[Guest Robert_S]

Isn't anyone going to mention Pink Floyd? :-hmmmExcept me? :-)[table][tr][td valign=top]http://www.avsim.com/other/usaribbon.gif[/td][td valign=center]Bob "FlyBert" StilesAVSIM Moderator[/b][/td][/tr][/table]"Don't stall on me, I have to soar!"~Richard Harvey, 1/21/2003

[Guest effyouthree]

Bob,Good to see someone finally caught on ;) It's funny how the name of a song or a phrase from a song's lyrics can become part of one's everyday language! I use this one a lot at work and most (younger) folk pay no heed - as though it's an accepted saying.When I picked my daughter up from her last day of primary school, I found myself muttering some lines from Alice Cooper and was quite surprised when someone standing next to me burst out in unison!To be truthful, I didn't think Rob would get it because he doesn't come across as someone who wasted their youth on... those things that we enjoyed so much! That's probably why he's a professor and I'm juggling ladders in a multi-national ;)Old rockers never die - they just lose their timbre :-lolRegards,**************Jonathan Point**************"I'd rather be down here wishing I was up there than up there wishing I was down here"

[Guest R_Driscoll]

I Don't get it.I still don't get it.Something to do with axes?HEELELLEPPPPPPP

[Guest effyouthree]

Rob, Sorry, I'll bring you up to speed..."Careful with that axe, Eugene" was written by Waters, Wright, Mason, Gilmour (Pink Floyd). Originally titled "Murderistic Women" and performed live on John Peel's famous BBC radio show, the song was officially released about 1968 as a single (B-side). It was also released again about a year later as "Come In Number 51, Your Time Is Up". Pretty bent, eh?I (and many other people I have met) say it when someone is about to do something that cannot be undone, as a last-ditch reality check!Now you've got me going, here's some extremely relevant lyrics from "Point me at the sky", released 1968 and in fact the A-side to 'Careful with that axe, Eugene'. I think you may begin to see some connections, between the songs and what we're doing here...---------------------------------------------------------------------"Point me at the Sky" by Roger Waters, 1968Hey Eugene This is Henry McCleanAnd I've finished my beautiful flying machineAnd I'm ringing to sayThat I'm leaving and maybeYou'd like to fly with meAnd hide with me, babyIsn't it strangeHow little we changeIsn't it sad we're insaneLaying the games that we know and in tearsThe games we've been playing for thousands and thousands and thousands and...Jumps into his cosmic flyerpulls his plastic collar higherLight the fuse and stand right backHe criedThis is my last goodbyePoint me at the sky and let it flyPoint me at the sky and let it flyPoint me at the sky and let it flyAnd if you survive till two thousand and fiveI hope you're exceedingly thinFor if you are stout you will have to breathe outWhile the people around you breathe inpeople pushing on my sidesis something that i hateand so is sitting down to eatwith only little capsules on my platePoint me at the sky and let it flyPoint me at the sky and let it flyPoint me at the sky and let it flyAnd all we've got to say to you is goodbyeIt's time to go, better run and get your bagsIt's goodbyeNobody cry, it's goodbyeCrash, crash, crash, crash, goodbye... ---------------------------------------------------------------------I love this line:"And if you survive till two thousand and fiveI hope you're exceedingly thinFor if you are stout you will have to breathe outWhile the people around you breathe in"Well, we did, I am, and he wasn't kidding :-lolThat's the music history lesson for the day :-waveRegards,**************Jonathan Point**************"I'd rather be down here wishing I was up there than up there wishing I was down here"