Jump to content

robert young

  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

275 Excellent

About robert young

  • Rank
    Robert Leonard

Profile Information

  • Gender

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

3,254 profile views
  1. OK Thanks. I will investigate further. Regards, Rob
  2. Hi Simbol, Sorry to trouble you again. I installed a great AI package from Orbx (for Australia/New Zealand AI). FSReborn has recognised all the aircraft in that package which I've separated into 2 groups: GA and Commercial. The "Scan and configure" command loads these aircraft in the database perfectly with no errors reported. However when I go to preview mode all the other groups load aircraft and lights as normal, but when I click on either of the two new groups when in preview a scrolling message pops up in red fonts: "Exception 22". The preview loads but there are no aircraft to be seen. If I click on the other groups everything loads ok. Any suggestions please?
  3. That's a great idea and very prompt support for new FSReborn users. BTW I have now put back in the OCI effects the logo and taxi lights so now everything is perfect! Best Wishes,
  4. Hi Simbol, SUCCESS!!! I removed all the OCI effects and bingo - the navlight splashes are gone in 90% of the AI. There are a couple of rogue AI but I can remove those manually. Your tip for removal of the OCI effects is worth its weight in gold. (Maybe a note to new users in the next version?). On a personal note, I know very well the toll excellent support takes on your well-being and health. I did 95% of RealAir support, every day including Christmas Day and all public holidays, for several hours a day, for 18 years, and it does have a significant impact on personal health, so I truly appreciate your support. I apologise for my earlier frustrations. Best Wishes and Thanks Again.
  5. OK, will do. Thanks again for your outstandingly good support!
  6. Hi Simbol, Thanks for your very comprehensive reply. I am most impressed by the detail and trouble you took. On the Skyforce shader backups, I can assure you that they are not an issue. I have disabled their backups anyway from the beginning for exactly the reason you described. I have a pristine copy of the ORIGINAL P3d V4 shaders. Skyforce is completely disabled. After assigning the vast majority of AI to their individual groups the "Default Global Fleet" is now only showing a tiny handful of aircraft - smaller aircraft like logan air or Isles of Scilly skybus.. I had assumed that once I assigned a group of AI to their user created groups then in "apply settings" the default Global will not interfere with them. I assumed in any case that one should not remove anything in any programme described as "DEFAULT" as I reasonably understood the word "default" to mean important to retain. But I think you are saying I should remove the Global Fleet in case this is a bad influence. On further observation I can now see evidence that my settings are being shown. However the big issue is those outrageously huge and frankly really naff splashes of over-the-top red and green circles under almost every AI aircraft. They make the whole effect look like a cheap game rather than a sim and in 45 years of involvement in aviation I have never seen these hideously exaggerated circles of light under any aircraft. Thanks for the great tips about removing the default AI fx. That's very useful. I well understand about the cached fx and also the embedded effects within MDLs. We used to do the same thing in our commercial aircraft products. It looks like those large splashes are being caused by the AI configs and fx over-riding your settings. I can see where these light splashes are being produced. In almost all the nav red and green fx, both the AI and yours, there is an emitter/particle with very large X dimensions followed usually by pure red or nearly pure green, and no Y dimension. This is likely the emitter creating the red/green splashes. I assume when I move the sliders to get rid of the splashes, that produces a numbered fx file with those dimensions reduced, but as you say, the AI default lights seem to be over-riding these edits when reloading the sim. I take your point about issues like the commented out fuel tanks etc. I do understand that you are not responsible for them. Nevertheless these params seem to be creating a confused mess of conflicting commands and again, I'm going to have to hack my way through hundreds of aircraft cfg files to get rid of the stuff I don't wish to see. Thanks again for your generous help.
  7. Thanks Simbol. I'm in the UK too and yes it's rather late so many thanks for taking the trouble. I do have SkyForce, but it is currently not active and I have backed up the original P3d shaders which I regularly reapply almost every day. The key here to pontificate is that your great textures and fx DO work in Preview mode, so quitting your app and restarting P3d should show exactly the same effects I am seeing in preview mode. There should be zero difference. I still think I must have done something that on reflection will become obvious - something I have missed.
  8. Hi SImbol, Thanks for your kind and prompt reply. Please be assured I would not be questioning your methodology if the settings were working for me. Before getting into email support may I please check a couple of things that trace the steps I am taking because I might have missed something obvious :) BTW I am using Alpha India Group's one click OCI installer. First, I cannot find a way of saving or exporting each group of AI aircraft (AIB, FAIB, TSR etc) into ONE MASTER export file containing all the individual groups. So after assigning similar AI to a group I name the group, load it into preview then tweak the sliders. When happy with the sliders I then SAVE or "export" that ONE GROUP.: I then create another group then name it, load the group into your scenario and tweak again, then save the group and so on, until five or six GROUPS all have been exported to their individual saved/export files. Now HERE is the crucial bit. I then RELOAD each group one by one to make sure my settings have been correctly "remembered" then click on each group in the app's drop down window menu and indeed the sliders all change to preconfigured settings exactly as I set them. Now, I click on "APPLY SETTINGS" and I can see a dialogue pops up confirming your app is applying strobes, navs etc etc for each loaded group and the black slider of the "apply" box moves to the right until all the settings appear to be safely saved and ready to launch. According to your instructions I then quit your app and quit P3d v4 then start P3d again.This is maybe the step I am missing. When I click "apply" can you please confirm the "apply" IS applying the settings for ALL the individual groups which are now displayed in the drop down window listing each group. In other words am I definitely "applying" ALL of the mutliple group settings, not just one? If that is the case, for some reason I can clearly see that when reloading the sim and for example going to Gatwick at night with 100% TRAFFIC, I see 50-70 aircraft, but ALL of them are displaying lights completely different from those I have previously set. For example I all but eliminated the nav light "splash" while editing the sliders before saving, but upon loading the traffic there are massive round circles of nav light splashes on the tarmac. This goes way beyond the eccentricities of the way P3d handles lights. It is obvious my slider settings are being ignored, because even the strobe types are completely different from the ones I saved then "applied". Clearly I must be missing a step. I double checked the addon.xml and your app is most definitely present. I checked all your folders and everything is as it should be. So why am I seeing almost exactly what I preferred when in Preview mode, but when starting up the sim after "applying" the settings am I not seeing what I set at all. I do realise that P3d and FSX have flaws concerning sizing and distance (I am a retired sim aircraft developer of over 22 years experience and that included a lot of editing of fx files). There must be something I have failed to do. Can you please advise? Thank you for your help which is appreciated. (My system is a bog standard i7 with 16 gigs of ram and Nvidia 1080ti graphics with 1900-1200 LCD monitor. I have run and designed for P3d and FSX for many years and I am certain that this has zero connection with my system, but I appreciate you have to ask.:))
  9. Hi Simbol, I'm pretty familiar with how effects (fx) files work and I can see the way this product has been constructed. In some ways it is impressive and has a lot of potential. But after spending three days trying to get this app running to satisfaction I'm at a loss. I followed every single instruction to the letter, and I'm running in your "expert" mode. The first issue I see is that after separating each AI designer-aircraft (FAIB, TSR, UTT etc) into groups then running preview mode to modify the effects, and after saving (exporting) each section then making sure when I "apply" effects the programme finds each group and confirms that it is indeed applying all the effects as I specified for each group, I then restart P3d V4 and I see nowhere near the effects I modified while in preview mode. I double checked this by being careful to note which AI aircraft belonged to which group. The first thing that does not translate is as follows. In preview mode I assign a LARGE effect size to the red/green nav lights, In "global" mode this does nothing whatever to the size of the lights, but it does when editing in GROUP mode. In group mode I slew in front of a known AI aircraft in the group and set the following: Navigation Lights Section ---------------------------------- Effect size: HIGH ( this does make the red and green nav lights larger, especially when slewing back some way. Dynamic Light Size. In effect this actually does not alter the size but it makes the red/green nav lights show in aircraft approaching from a distance. The higher this setting the further away the nav lights come into view.. With the slider midway the nav lights do not show at all until the aircraft on approach is quite close. So this control is not really size oriented but distance oriented, although I can see that size to an extent will translate to distance. I keep the Dynamic Light Intensity as low as possible without being disabled. That is because this slider creates the most garish, hideous, ridiculous, huge bright circle of apparently reflected light on the apron, taxi and runway surface. I acknowledge that this ludicrously over-done effect is also partly the fault of the default settings in the AI aircraft design, and is present by default without FS reborn. However with this slider kept to as low as possible without disabling it, in preview mode those huge red and green circles are at least kept to a realistic minimum. The texture colour intensity is kept high in order to keep the red/green nav lights as vibrant as possible. Please note, I realise in normal circumstances the colour intensity slider for example makes the ground "splash" of a given strobe very bright, but with the Dynamic Light size slider well to the left the colour intensity slider does not make things "bigger", as you describe in your pop up and red coloured note. It makes the colours more intense. In preview mode this shows up quite well. But after saving (exporting) this setting then applying it, then running P3d V4. The nav lights do NOT show as I adjusted them. In fact they appear as tiny, barely discernable pin points, not the large globes I set in preview. But there are still HUGE circles splashed lights on the surfaces, even though I most definitely turned them right down in preview. So, in other words, what I am setting appears fine in preview but does not show anything like the same after quitting the app and restarting P3d v4. Why is this so? Moving on to the Beacon lights ======================== With the beacon lights it is the opposite to the nav lights. This time I set quite modest adjustments so the beacon is smallish and the splashes of red light also restrained. After "applying" this tweak, in the sim the red splashes are in the order of three times the intensity. STROBES ========= There is a fundamental problem here. I don't think you have built enough leeway into the sliders. You allow an enormous PLUS range but not much negative range. Indeed the sliders do not allow me to tone down the strobes beyond a certain point, so they complete eclipse any other light when viewed from a distance. Even with the strobe sliders at minimum, I still see a very large orb of flashing light when the Ai are at a distance on approach. (I realise this is partly an issue with P3d lights/ distance). However in preview mode you CAN see the red and green nav lights when the aircraft is on approach. I cannot see ANY red/green nav lights after appying the settings then watching aircraft when reloading P3d. The strobes overwhelm the nav lights until the AI have landed and come close to my location, even with the strobe slider well to the left. LANDING AND TAXI LIGHT ====================== On all but the dimmest and smallest settings, from a distance the landing lights show (on approach) as a horse-shoe shaped bright ring around the lower cockpit area. This is clearly because (looking at the landing light image files), you've applied an over-bright vertical/elipse section of brighter light within the beam texture which I assume represents the source of the landing light. The effect of this is to over-dominate the actual beam, and create a way over-bright shape which over-lights the engine nacelles and produces at a distance a distinct and rather unrealistic "ring" of light around the low nose of the AI on approach.. When up close this is not so bad, but looking at an AI aircraft on approach from say 1 to 3 miles away, this horse-shoe shaped bright light completely overwhelms the overall lighting and looks most ungainly. Some observations and suggestions ============================ If somehow I have messed up I'm open to hints at what I can do to get a better experience with this app. Meantime, I hope you don't mind if I mention something that occured to me immediately on running your app. Why have you provided only a very small range of SETS of textures? I do understand that standard FSX/P3d textures come as a four point texture matrix accessed by UV params. But there was no need to restrict the user to a fixed set. I cannot mix one light within one set and combine it with another light in another set. For example the " cool" star shaped strobe works very well on my screen, but the accompanying red and green nav that goes with the "set" do not, because the "cool" nav lights appear without colour and look washed out. Rather than restrict the user to a very small set choice, it would have been infinitely more flexible to offer a range of variables by copying one set but with a different combinations, or providing individual nav/beacon/strobe textures which can be selected and mix and matched with other individual textures. That would multiply the range of options five fold without much more work from you. Why have you made huge numbers of separate effects files for essentially a group of virtually identical aircraft? (One Airbus A318/319/320/321 has almost identical types and brightness of lights as all the others within a given AI designer's fleet). Clearly you do not want or expect a user to meddle with your settings, but in any case, why not make ONE global fx file (or several global fx files for each slider setting) that apply to a range of similar aircraft? The way you have applied hundreds of individual fx files for each individual aircraft, even using the precise same model, means any tweaking requires hacking through endless numbers of identical fx files. I know you don't want users to tweak your fx files and I wouldn't attempt this except for the issue I have with lights not showing as they did in preview mode. I confirm however that before writing this I installed an untouched app and the results are still the same as described above. I can see you've put a lot of work into the shader fx files and I congratulate you for that. It must have been quite a challenge. However, I feel the implementation of your great idea lacks refinement in execution. It is not expensive, but it is payware and I feel you could do much more to give the user more flexibility and a better range of options. I couldn't see any mention of the dreaded "fuel" tank or "lights always on" in your notes. I'm wondering whether these entries in the aircraft cfgs are contributing to what I am seeing? Since a significant number of AI designers are using the fuel tank/lights always on params it would be helpful for an explanation of how to overcome these rather unfathomable parameters. I'm hoping there might be a rational explanation as to why the settings I'm making in preview mode are not translating to the sim. The slider settings most definitely work ok when running in preview with your pre-selected scenario in P3d V4. But when I "apply" all the settings they are not showing later when I quit your app and restart the sim. By the way I have tried starting with default then configuring all three options: Standard P3d, HD with a monitor of 1900-1200 and 4k. The result is exactly the same with each. I confirm I am not running any shader addon while running your app and have already reset the standard P3d V4 shaders, run the sim, then quit, before running the sim again after applying your textures and fx. Why would the effects show as chosen in preview but not later when reloading P3d? Thanks for listening and I apologise for the length of post. Better to get all the issues described in one go!
  10. I'm interested in the concept of dividing the fuel flow params into three parts and I did not know that was possible, but I suspect the result will be very similar to using one param. As I recall (it was quite a few years ago now), you can very easily ramp up the turbine response but unfortunately the core coding of the FSX/P3d prop turbine is that it results in gross over speed of the propellor and out of control N1 particulary on start up and initial take off acceleration (if I recall correctly). So the problem is not getting the engine to respond quicker, but to stop getting overspeeds. I spent literally months and hundreds of hours adjusting the relationship between several params in order to get as quick a response as possible without overspeeds. If it wasn't for the start up routine, which is extremely sensitive to prop and engine overspeeds, the overall response times could have been shorter. Once you have taken off and speed is around 120 knots or greater, you can abuse the throttle levers and not much will happen, but on the ground shoving them forward fast will lead to an overspeed. Sadly the original Turbine Engine tweaker way back at FSX release time forgot to add sufficient numbers of params to control all of this. The key params in the aircraft cfg that combine to influence the response time and subsequent overspeeds if not tuned carefully are as follows: Propeller Diameter Propeller MOI (inertia) Prop_tc (time constant) minimum on ground beta beta max and min fuel flow gain There are a few more but the above are the important ones. These params all interact and you have to find the sweet spot between over-sluggish response and over speeding prop especially on the ground. One big influence is the throttle condition lever which by FSX default starts the aircraft in high position. You need to get this lever back to idle condition or the overspeed on start up will be more likely and taxiing can get out of hand. That all said, the delay in response is not a disaster, just a little slower than ideal. Taxi tip. I use the beta and reverse range to do most taxiing.I tuned the throttle beta/reversers so you can gently pull them a little backwards of idle to give a little bit of reverse. That contains the forward movement much better than braking. BTW one thing I regret is the wheel brake settings. Unfortunately the differential_braking param appears broken in both FSX and P3d. So you have to adjust the general or toe brake scaling to clamp down on the oversensitive directional control with typical rudder/brake pedals. You need to get the scale well down (0.5 or 0.6) to stop the twitchy steering but then you will have less braking power, which is not too much a problem given the powerful beta-reverse throttle control. Hope this helps!
  11. Not sure about that, but it should have better potential than the current single wing lift in FSX and P3d which you have to cheat in order to promote a wing drop or spin. The problem is often however that the more complicated the core flight model the more fiddly it is to tune because you might have many basic params that clash with each other. That's why I'm sceptical about the claimed multiple lift points. It might end up being better to have just two on each wing - outer and inner, for the sake of elegant simplicity.
  12. That's very true, and different instructors have a different opinion, withering or otherwise, for the same student. I remember working to re-solo a glider way back when I'd had a break of a few years. I had two instructors the day I was sent off. The first tore my flying and circuit to shreds. A few minutes later I went up with a CFI who remained utterly silent for the whole flight and I thought "here goes - another disaster". I flew the exact same profile, speeds and approach. Upon landing I expected another list of put-downs, but he said: "that was near perfect - off you go!" Yet another instructor criticised my downwind speeds, complaining that I was incapable of maintaining exactly 60 knots. I impertinently suggested maybe the trend was more important than the second by second speed, and asked him to demonstrate. His speeds were all over the place, and far worse than mine. You have to be lucky to find a decent instructor who isn't programmed to rip you apart at every opportunity, but maybe things have got better nowadays.
  13. OK thanks. Best to say who you are talking about to save confusions!
  14. Not sure who you are talking about here. I got my PPL in 1973 and have flown around 30-35 aircraft types up to when I retired from powered flying in 2006 but then took up gliding and flew a further 10-15 different types of glider.
  15. Regarding Flight Models, all the stuff about multiple aerodynamic points on the wings is frankly Public Relations and is unconnected with whether aircraft fly "accurately". Accuracy in this context is not so much about how many coefficient centres of lift are present, but how the overall connection between the stick and aircraft behaviour plays out. You can have ONE point of lift or aerodynamic wing behaviour that could work beautifully or you could have a hundred of them and if you tune them badly you might as well have none. The thing most people do not grasp about flight modelling is that you have two rather conflicting pieces of information. One is the behaviour of aircraft in STILL air and the other is the behaviour of aircraft in a turbulent, moving airstream. The two are almost completely different. I don't have that many hours but over the course of my flight model tuning career I have been invited to fly a large number of different aircraft, or at least be in a right hand seat while someone else flies. What comes over strongly is that the tiniest little aircraft CAN fly incredibly elegantly without any turbulence. I've been in many gliders, tail draggers and club aircraft that can fly as smoothly as an A380, provided there is no turbulence. The accusation that FSX and P3d aircraft "FLY ON RAILS" is a complete myth. Designing a sim aircraft that bucks and weaves in zero wind is not authentic. It depends how much turbulence, wind changes and pressure changes over the wings are present. In still air almost any decently designed aircraft WILL fly "on rails", in the sense that every stick input is entirely predictable. I've flown gliders in early morning and late evening that might as well have been a glorious flight in an A330 in a benign approach to a balmy mediterranean paradise, but I've also witnessed a 737 approach to Kefalonia that was a nightmare of frightening proportions. Both are possible depending on turbulence, NOT the flight model. The other factor is stick force. Anyone who has piloted a winch launch in an ASK 21 glider or similar will know the large back stick forces required to fight the winch cable's desire to keep the nose down. This is the most regrettable part of flight simming for small aircraft: Force feedback is now not the fashion which means sim flyers can yank back a stick to full deflection effortlessly and then complain that so-and-so aircraft can get to 6g too easily. Without stick force restraints, many sim aircraft can become very twitchy in pitch and regrettably I have already seen from videos how twitchy the FS2020 aircraft are. The tell-tails are the tiny movements alpha-programme pilots are apparently inputting and the over-reaction I have seen from the flight models. The fact is that a real aircraft does not act like an uncontrolled pendulum. Nor do they buck up and down to modest inputs. I once was taken up in an Extra 300 owned by the late Mungo Amyatt-Leir, at the time owner of Flight 1 Europe. We flew on a glorious day over the beautiful Sussex coastline and he generously let me fly a good part of the flight. I was amazed by the stability of the Extra. Despite having enormous ailerons you could fly it like a huge airliner with subtle inputs, all of which were perfectly weighted and balanced. There was no instability, and the stick forces were so perfect that you could elect to fly a passenger-safe elegant maneouvre with perfect harmony or you could choose a savagely quick roll or loop with incredible speed. Both were possible because the Extra has sublime characteristics. There was no hint of bucking or weaving. There was no ridiculously unstable pitch. There was no elastic-band spring-like reaction. The nose stayed where you put it. Coming back to FS2020, I think you will find that the flight dynamics will be rather conforming to claimed mathematical or PR-lead publicity. This will not mean the core flight model will be either good or bad, but open to interpretation by others. But for now, be sceptical about those "multiple lift points". The visuals look stunning and I'm concentrating on those. Flight modelling is not a function of PR or announcements in promotional videos. I am pretty sure that the flight modelling will be as flawed as it ever was in previous versions.And NO, X plane is not really any better. Large, high inertia aircraft are quite easy to model. The litmus test is in small aircraft.
  • Create New...