Jump to content
Mathijs Kok

Aerosoft A318/A319/A320/A321/A330 Professional Preview

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, nealmac said:

 

Yes you make a fair point.

 

To put things in context we have 2 scanners. One of them cost us €45000 if I remember correctly including all the paraphernalia (target spheres, tripod etc) and the registration software for joining each scan together. However we also have a smaller handheld scanner which cost about €5000 and that would be the one that would be ideal for a job like this as it can get all the hard to reach areas that the big one on a tripod can't reach. The big one is more suitable for large open areas where the level of detail isn't critical.

 

The beauty of a laser scan is that it can be converted into a low polygon mesh and imported into 3d Studio Max (or whatever modelling software Aerosoft use) and they will have pretty much everything modelled although it would need to be tweaked to suit.

 

Basically I would see a handheld scanner as a very worthwhile investment. Of course I could be wrong.

 

Not to mention, that they would need to separate the individual pieces of the cockpit from the mesh in 3DStudio MAX afterwards. Since I'm fairly certain, that each button and switch, are modeled individually, it would be quite a job, to separate them. I don't know, how a scanner would import the mesh, but if it's one complete 'chunk', the mesh would need to be split up into the single pieces - like buttons, switches, control-pedestal, screen assemblies, control-sticks etc... 

I don't know, how 'The Magician' Stefan, works and builds the cockpits, but I would assume (I've done my part of 3D modeling in 3DStudio Max myself) that the individual pieces of the cockpit are modeled separately - mainly for the purpose of maintaining overview, but also (again, I would assume) it makes it easier when applying textures for the individual parts of the cockpit.

Share this post


Link to post

As 3D-Scanners have not a complex brain like a human being, they only create point clouds which are assembled logically to meshes by the connected software. For organic things with irregular surfaces all over (f.ex. human models) or large monolithic shapes like cheap contemporary architecture (boring) that is a beautiful thing. In both cases you can reduce the geometry to become usable in realtime applications. In case of our cockpits it is more complex: you have parts shadowing others, very small details and you have to get the maximum detail from the minimum of geometry. That 3d scanners cant solve this and it still needs the human moment. Also the textures you can aquire are often not the optimum as they are already in a special lighting environment (which only suits a certain time or non at all) and the detail will be suboptimal due blurring or perspective distortion. So the best case is in my situation to get some hours in pit with cameras and a measure tape (a second guy is good to hold the other end of the tape in many moments), measure thousands of distanes samples, making thousands of photos which means that it has to be done sometimes for 8 hours nonstop at any given time of day. Such chances are hard to get and you have to use them! The precession i get with this way is very near the original. I think actually that we get the most correct 3d model beside the original construction blueprints of the A330. Also the pure visuals of each surface area is handled piece for piece and recreated for the flightsim engine. And that whole work of course also applies for the outer surface of the aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Stefan Hoffmann said:

As 3D-Scanners have not a complex brain like a human being, they only create point clouds which are assembled logically to meshes by the connected software. For organic things with irregular surfaces all over (f.ex. human models) or large monolithic shapes like cheap contemporary architecture (boring) that is a beautiful thing. In both cases you can reduce the geometry to become usable in realtime applications. In case of our cockpits it is more complex: you have parts shadowing others, very small details and you have to get the maximum detail from the minimum of geometry. That 3d scanners cant solve this and it still needs the human moment. Also the textures you can aquire are often not the optimum as they are already in a special lighting environment (which only suits a certain time or non at all) and the detail will be suboptimal due blurring or perspective distortion. So the best case is in my situation to get some hours in pit with cameras and a measure tape (a second guy is good to hold the other end of the tape in many moments), measure thousands of distanes samples, making thousands of photos which means that it has to be done sometimes for 8 hours nonstop at any given time of day. Such chances are hard to get and you have to use them! The precession i get with this way is very near the original. I think actually that we get the most correct 3d model beside the original construction blueprints of the A330. Also the pure visuals of each surface area is handled piece for piece and recreated for the flightsim engine. And that whole work of course also applies for the outer surface of the aircraft.

 

Thanks for the detailed explanation, Stefan.
(I think, that what I was trying to explain too...)

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, Pedriko said:

Guys, please, do like PMDG, who allows you in MCDU remove these pilots from Exterior View.

I don't even find that on the MCDU

----------------------------------------------

Anyway i'm so excited for the A330!

Regards,

Wibi

Share this post


Link to post

The attention to detail when it comes to geometry and texturing seems to be pretty much spot on in this A330. I have no doubt this will become one of my favorite aircraft once it's released. Loving the 319 to bits already.

Share this post


Link to post

As 3D-Scanners have not a complex brain like a human being, they only create point clouds which are assembled logically to meshes by the connected software. For organic things with irregular surfaces all over (f.ex. human models) or large monolithic shapes like cheap contemporary architecture (boring) that is a beautiful thing. In both cases you can reduce the geometry to become usable in realtime applications. In case of our cockpits it is more complex: you have parts shadowing others, very small details and you have to get the maximum detail from the minimum of geometry. That 3d scanners cant solve this and it still needs the human moment. Also the textures you can aquire are often not the optimum as they are already in a special lighting environment (which only suits a certain time or non at all) and the detail will be suboptimal due blurring or perspective distortion. So the best case is in my situation to get some hours in pit with cameras and a measure tape (a second guy is good to hold the other end of the tape in many moments), measure thousands of distanes samples, making thousands of photos which means that it has to be done sometimes for 8 hours nonstop at any given time of day. Such chances are hard to get and you have to use them! The precession i get with this way is very near the original. I think actually that we get the most correct 3d model beside the original construction blueprints of the A330. Also the pure visuals of each surface area is handled piece for piece and recreated for the flightsim engine. And that whole work of course also applies for the outer surface of the aircraft.

Holly s...!! All this plus many, many hours of work plus priceless passion and thinking the final satisfaction the simmer will get, once have the whole product for less than 100€... Gracias Aerosoft!!!!

Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post

Have we drifted a little off subject here?. Can we get back to the A330 please.

Regards.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, ColH said:

Have we drifted a little off subject here?. Can we get back to the A330 please.

Regards.

 

Excuse me, but ... how is a discussion regarding the creation of the A330 in 3DStudio MAX, getting off topic?

Share this post


Link to post
vor 4 Stunden , ColH sagte:

Have we drifted a little off subject here?. Can we get back to the A330 please.

Regards.

Better "drift away" for some posts and learn something about the development of such birds than ask about "has it this switch modelled" or "is that engine available - why is it not" besides of "when will it be released" or "the FSL bus/PMDG has this and that...."

Share this post


Link to post

You explained yourself very nicely Stefan. Yourself and KingMusjo raised good points about reasons for modelling certain elements of the cockpit separately and to be honest I never even thought of it. While all this is still possible with a scanner, there would still of course be an element of human intervention.

 

However, you're doing a fantastic job and you obviously know what you're doing. I hope you don't see my thoughts as being critical.

Share this post


Link to post

Developers, would you ever considered doing a Boeing with high level simulation like your Airbus but not bankrupting like PMDG. If so, would you do a 757/767 as there are not many of these on the market.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Trevor11350 said:

Developers, would you ever considered doing a Boeing with high level simulation like your Airbus but not bankrupting like PMDG. If so, would you do a 757/767 as there are not many of these on the market.

Please use the proper forum for requests.

 

The topic is

Aerosoft A330 preview. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, Ivan Lewis said:

Holly s...!! All this plus many, many hours of work plus priceless passion and thinking the final satisfaction the simmer will get, once have the whole product for less than 100€... Gracias Aerosoft!!!!

 

 

Less then half that actually (at least that's the plan now).

 

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, Ivan Lewis said: Holly s...!! All this plus many, many hours of work plus priceless passion and thinking the final satisfaction the simmer will get, once have the whole product for less than 100€... Gracias Aerosoft!!!!

 

 

Less then half that actually (at least that's the plan now).

 

Warning: gettin' in love with Aerosoft [emoji7]

Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, Mathijs Kok said:

 

Less then half that actually (at least that's the plan now).

 

Well that is good news, you have at least one sale here. It is really fascinating to get a glimpse inside the development process, and the amount of skill it takes,  I have been following the thread for some while, and it as been an eye-opener for me.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi guys,

I just want to ask a question if there will be a V1 callout by the computer (not the FO).

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not quite sure whether there actually is a "V1" computer-call on Airbus aircraft?

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, CRJ900 said:

I'm not quite sure whether there actually is a "V1" computer-call on Airbus aircraft?

 

There is, just let me find out whether ours had it.

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Emanuel Hagen said:

 

There is, just let me find out whether ours had it.

Thanks for letting us know, emmanuel. Will wait for your reply. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks! By the way - the sound of those Trent 700's is just too damn good.

Share this post


Link to post

Dear developers,

i just want to ask if you guys are considering putting an EFB in the flightdeck?

thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, francis16 said:

Dear developers,

i just want to ask if you guys are considering putting an EFB in the flightdeck?

thanks.

 

Uhm, may I ask why you want this?

 

This topic comes up regularly (already asked and answered a couple of times in this thread alone) and to be honest, I really don't understand why people are so caught up in having an EFB integrated into the VC. Captain Sim already did this with their 777 and it was next to useless. The problem with it was, (at least in my opinion) that it was too small and the idea of constantly panning to view it, while trying to fly the plane, made it very difficult - if not impossible - to use effectively. If it could be made as a pop-up, then maybe it could be useful, but in that case, I'd rather have a stand-alone application for the job.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm really looking forward to this one. I've purchased your A320\321 and love it. If it's anything like your other Airbus, it will be a winner. 

 

Keep up the great work, the modelling looks amazing.

 

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, KingMusjo said:

 

Uhm, may I ask why you want this?

 

This topic comes up regularly (already asked and answered a couple of times in this thread alone) and to be honest, I really don't understand why people are so caught up in having an EFB integrated into the VC. Captain Sim already did this with their 777 and it was next to useless. The problem with it was, (at least in my opinion) that it was too small and the idea of constantly panning to view it, while trying to fly the plane, made it very difficult - if not impossible - to use effectively. If it could be made as a pop-up, then maybe it could be useful, but in that case, I'd rather have a stand-alone application for the job.

Hi kingmusjo,

thanks for the insight! I do understand now. Instead of an EFB, if its possible to request an OANS (on-board airport navigation system) on the PFD. But i think its too late since aerosoft has already started on this aircraft. Probably in the future updates. 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...