Michael2
-
Posts
531 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Michael2
-
-
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_RgCt--z5DFjWF__yrqAAw2CxY1PoWT6/view?usp=sharing
Try this. I had a setting wrong with the previous one.
-
I posted the link above in this thread. It's right there and working.
-
No, the installer isn't updated yet. That's why I made the file available. It's easy to download and put it in the folder.
-
My apologies. I copied a file from the P3D version to implement the auto FE forgetting that the FSX version uses a different variable for external air.
Until we replace the installer or add the file to the update you may download it from this link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_RgCt--z5DFjWF__yrqAAw2CxY1PoWT6/view?usp=sharing
Replace the file in Microsoft Flight Simulator X\SimObjects\Airplanes\DC-8_50\Panel\DC8_Loader with the new one. -
I will take a look at this.
-
I really like the Aero Mexico one. If time were unlimited, I would have made it as a default livery.
-
You're very welcome!
-
1
-
-
Hi Donald,
In the screenshots you sent me the problem with the L seems to have gone away. And when I load your texture, I don't see it either.
I do see the issues created by the texture mapping of the one door. Most liveries don't have text or other complex graphics over the door, so this wasn't spotted before.
Here is a new model that should solve the problem: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sriojpM1IqWOKcYwZBXLalNLDKzMdTGd
It goes in the model.cargo folder. Unless some problem arises with the new model, it will be added to the next update. Anyone can try it, but it's best to back up the old file first.
-
Meant to say "can you make the livery available to me?".
-
If you make the livery available to me? Then I can see exactly where the problem is.
-
I'll try again. I don't object to your pointing out defects. Criticism will in most cases help to improve the product. But I don't appreciate the way you do it. What purpose does it serve to antagonize me on a personal level?
And for the record, I have never stated that this product is better or worse than any others. As the developer, I don't regard it as my role to make such comparisons.
I can see the same alignment issue on your livery as my own. Because of the way the way the textures were mapped, there will always be a 1/2 pixel misalignment. You can't paint around it because a hard line cannot be shifted half a pixel in photoshop, at least to my knowledge. The texture mapping was done along time ago, before any liveries were painted and it is not practical to change it now.
-
17 hours ago, domm said:
you do not teach me anything about painting (texture creation), but I never dared to give texture with such flaws.
And it's up to you, and not me to make a real effort to see the problem:
So the worst paint kit you have ever seen was not entirely useless for your purposes after all. But I can't judge the alignment of your stripes from the screenshot.I have no problem with legitimate criticism of the product, but to be honest, I don't much care for the tone of some of your posts. It is possible to offer criticism in a more civil manner.
-
2
-
-
The paint is all in layers that can be made invisible or deleted in photoshop. There is a single layer with only shading, if that's what you want. The paint kit is complicated because the fuselage is typically divided between paint and bare metal and the dividing line is different for each aircraft. Some layers are only intended to show on bare metal, so many adjustments must be made for each livery.
The misalignments where the fuselage textures join were created when the model was texture mapped -- it's too late to correct now and to my mind not a significant issue. We are talking about 1/2 a pixel. Here is a high resolution screenshot of a new texture I'm working on that shows the seams -- you have to make a real effort to see the issue:
-
They had some of the pre-turbofan ones, I guess they would be 30 or 40 series. They also leased a couple of 62s. No 50 series, but maybe someone will do a "what if" texture. If they had flown the 50 series I would definitely have made a default one.
-
This man is a machine! I certainly can't crank them out at this pace.
-
1
-
-
A note to painters:
The paint kit contains a file called VC_general.dds. It got in there by mistake and you should take it out before you upload your texture packages. It's likely an older version of the file in the main texture folder.
And if you download a texture pack, just take it out.-
1
-
-
I'd like to see a Braniff too. I was going to make one myself, but never got around to it.
-
Thanks for doing this. I had given up on this aircraft due to the flawed FBW modelling. I can now land it properly and it's back out my virtual hanger.
-
From the tables I looked at, it looks like the FMC is giving the VREF speed as VAPP. VAPP should be VREF plus five knots plus a wind additive. So I am adding at least five knots and setting the approach speed manually and that seems to work better.
-
I've been disconnecting the AP at 1000' rather than five hundred so as to have a better chance at recovering from the nose dip, but perhaps I should try as Paul suggests and intercept the glide slope manually.
I have found a table of A320 reference speeds as well as an article on how VAPP is derived from VREF and I will look at that to see if the FMC or whatever you call it in an airbus is giving me an appropriate speed. If it is, then I will go into the aircraft.cfg file and start tinkering with the flap lift.
Thanks for all the suggestions.
-
Does anyone else think that at reference speed, or really any speed the flight control system feels appropriate for a given flap setting, the pitch attitude necessary to maintain the glide slope is too high? I find myself at times with as much as 10' pitch during an automated approach and am crossing the threshold with more nose up pitch than would seem reasonable even after the flare. I confess I do not no at what attitude the real aircraft flies on approach, but what I seeing with the Aerosoft product seems improbable.
The problem is aggravated by the nose pitching down on turning off the autopilot on approach. The momentary nose dive puts me a full dot below the glide slope and in getting back up to it, with the sluggish autothrottle response again results in an excessive nose up attitude.
It seems to me that there is inadequate flap lift in the flight model. Will there be anymore updates to the Airbus X in the near future?
Other aspects of this product are very impressive -- the 3D modeling, the landing lights, textures, frame rates, etc.
-
Just bumping this topic. This looks like an impressive product, but I can't justify buying it without the lead-in lights working. Has there been any progress in resolving this?
Replacement file to get air start working in FSX
in Douglas DC-8
Posted
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15oRlJpjt4aI3soOuTk__S4XtM-rpJmJG/view?usp=sharing
This new link should give you a replacement DC8_ground_interface.xml file. It goes into the DC-8_50\Panel\DC8_Loader folder. If someone can confirm they are able to download the file and that it fixes the problem that would be great.
The old link broke I guess because I ran out of Google Drive space and had to go to a paid subscription.