Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Peter Lürkens

CumulusX!

Recommended Posts

0.4 works oke under VISTA and FSX in full screen mode.

But when FSX is in windowed mode and cumulusX is not minimized and on top of the FSX-window, the FSX-screen stays black. Only when I move the CumulusX-window to outside the FSX-window, the scenery was visible again. So in windowed mode, I can not maximize the FSX-screen in combination with CumulusX on top.

And I got an error when I closed FSX before closing cumulusX. (errormessage was something like: "CumulusX doesn't work correctly anymore and has to be closed down")

Bert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But when FSX is in windowed mode and cumulusX is not minimized and on top of the FSX-window, the FSX-screen stays black. Only when I move the CumulusX-window to outside the FSX-window, the scenery was visible again. So in windowed mode, I can not maximize the FSX-screen in combination with CumulusX on top.

And I got an error when I closed FSX before closing cumulusX. (errormessage was something like: "CumulusX doesn't work correctly anymore and has to be closed down")

If you have an NVIDIA card, then the first might be a well known driver issue. Settingg antialiasing in the driver control panel to 2x (in my case 4x also works mostly), rather than "Application controlled" usually helps.

The second one is new to me. Usually the CumulusX reports that the connection is lost and remains on the screen.

best regards,

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter,

Okay, I got it to work. The problem was on my end. I did not have FSX Service Pack 1 installed. I thought for sure I had it installed but I was wrong. :embaressed:

I flew around SOAR Ranch on my favorite SOAR Mountain and the lift was where it is suppose to be. It just is not strong enough nor does it extend high enough. I am only able to get to about 12,000 ft. I should be getting to 16,000 ft. to 17,000 ft before topping out. I am sure these lift conditions are adequate for many parts of the world, but not for the Andes. This part of the Andes are made up of very tall volcanos and peaks rising high above the Andes crest exposed to the onslaught of very strong westerely winds with no obstructions to windward. The rule of thumb in this part of the world is to get high and stay high. To do otherwise is suicide.It can be hundreds of miles between roads or airfields. No landable terrain in between.

This is looking very promising!!

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thought I'd chime in, I'm on XP with SP2 and FSX with SP2. I'm on the laptop right now so I cannot give my computer spec's.

Also just wanted to let you all know I'm heading out of town tomarrow for a few days, so I won't be able to test at all until I get back. I wish I could have tested CumulusX04 on my computer before I left, but it didn't happen.

This morning I thought I was getting funny readings flying in the Harris Hill NY area. I thought it was possibly due to what I was flying (FS2004 paragliders/hanggliders in FSX). My time was cut short so I didn't have time to try the glider that I normally fly to see if it had the same effects. This was with CumulusX032.

sf4JC

EDIT: My computer is a 2.19 GHz Athlon 3500+ (single core), 2GB RAM, 512MB ATI Radeon X1300 graphics card, on a WindowsXP SP2 system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am only able to get to about 12,000 ft. I should be getting to 16,000 ft. to 17,000 ft before topping out.

Hi Don,

I'm glad to hear that finally you made it, and I'm happy that eventually it was not a real bad one. I learned a lot through it about references, dependencies, the general assembly cache, project configuration and so on.

Could you tell me the position where you think that lift does not extend sufficiently and which slope-data set you are using? Your mesh is FSGENESIS, I think. Currently CumulusX uses 50% of GND elevation as the lift layer thickness, i.e. that if you soar over a 4000m high mountain, lift should extend to 6000m MSL, not polar sink considered. CCS2004 has a default layer thickness of 500m only, so do you simply screw up the lift layer thickness scalar?

best regards,

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could you tell me the position where you think that lift does not extend sufficiently and which slope-data set you are using? Your mesh is FSGENESIS, I think. Currently CumulusX uses 50% of GND elevation as the lift layer thickness, i.e. that if you soar over a 4000m high mountain, lift should extend to 6000m MSL, not polar sink considered. CCS2004 has a default layer thickness of 500m only, so do you simply screw up the lift layer thickness scalar?

best regards,

Peter

Hi Peter,

I call this peak SOAR Mountain. The coordinates are:

Lat. S 37 deg. 27.89 min.

Long. W 71 deg. 24.89 min.

Elevation 11,464 ft.

slope data set.....ccs_soar_ ranch _andes_sa_4x4

Wind is set at 270 degrees at 24 knots

Max. height reached in FSX about 12,000 ft.

Max. height reached in FS9 about 16,500 ft. to 17,000 ft.

Mesh for both sims are FS Genesis 76 M mesh

The CCS2004 settings for FS9 are:

Slope Lift Strength Scaler- 3.0

Slope Height Scaler- 5.0

Cheers, :smiles:

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The CCS2004 settings for FS9 are:

Slope Lift Strength Scaler- 3.0

Slope Height Scaler- 5.0

Hi Don,

see, what you mean after trying myself today. Indeed, I recognize this mountain also not very promising for this wind direction. Here comes also in the limitations of the current approach, both of CumulusX and CCS2004. Both are building narrow pillars of lift only depending of the one tile exactly beneath the aircraft. Sou your lift strongly changing even when high above the ground. The general structure of the mountain is superposed by the fractionalisation of the surface and gets lost. I have an idea how to dealw ith this, but it takes careful consideration, to avoid an FPS killer.

The settings which you choose for CCS2004 are highly unrealistic at the end of the day, since they produce 3.5 times more lift than the windspeed is. As the initial slope layer thickness of CCS2004 is independent from the lift situation, you factor 5 produces a layer of 2500 m. I did number of investigations this afternoon to compare CCS2004 and CumulusX behaviour, in particular to check for compatibility issues, when FS9 and FSX join online by FSINN, for example. The biggest difference at this time, is that CCS2004 reduces sink to 50% of the lift if wind is coming from opposite. CumulusX ist staightforward here, which can bring you in enromous trouble when you jump over the ridge and you are not high enough. My personaly experience here is too limited, since in RL I avoided this situation thoughout (don't like to play with my life).

As of know the differences are big enough that it won't coincide good enough, most probably. Additionally, I found some minor bugs in CCS2004, so the tiles are in effect shifted by half a unit to southwest, and wind is evaluated in magnetic direction, rather than true-north. Still this influence is not too big. There are some peculiarities in FSX wind data anyway. So the decision how to proceed is not easy. I think I prefer following my own line, since this offers more roomn for future improvement, than being bound to compatibility. It think also, that now, that we have a gliding tool for FSX, gliding can gradually change over to the new platform for the most.

best regards,

Peter

post-176-1194032590.gif

post-176-1194032600.gif

post-176-1194032618.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Peter,

I suspect the lift conditions I created in ccs2004 would be more appropriate for 50 knt to 75 knt winds as in real life but in a virtual world I enjoy it more if I don't have to buck such strong head winds. After all I am flying in a virtual world and I like to take advantage of such luxuries. LOL

I get very good lift where indicated on map.

I really hope you will provide some way for the user to edit the lift conditions in Cumulus X as is possible in CCS2004 for us dreamers.

Please, :respect: :respect: :respect:

Don

post-461-1194040218.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tonight I started at "SOAR RANCH" at 12.000ft and wind set to 270 and 24Kts and flew for about 2,5 hours up north and without the help of thermals or slew-mode I could stay all the time between 6.000 and 10.000ft until I reached the edge of the slo.files. How I loved doing that. So no complaints from my side (for now hehe).

Bert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everybody,

here comes a new CumulusX with a CCS compatbility mode and scalars for slope layer thickness and strength. Thes scalars are not available in normal mode and supplied only with interoperability with CCS2004.

best regards,

Peter

Edit: Attachment removed because of final release

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter, I got to download and install CumulusX04 Friday morning and run for a few minutes. As expected, it loaded transparent and I liked it. BUT, it was having a huge drain on my FPS, so I had to run it minimized. Which I was okay with I guess since I know it's working, but I also liked seeing what kind of info it was reading underneath me. It really probably doesn't matter since it's mainly for debugging purposes, but I just thought I'd tell you just in case it has an impact on the final program.

Also, from the graphs above describing the differences between CumulusX and CCS2004, is there still an adaptability to have persons running Fs2004 w/CCS2004 and FSX w/CumulusX together in the same session as long as each person knows the sim the others are using as to not to get into a paralyzing situation? I mean, can a group of people be running different sims in the same multiplayer session for fun without very differing circumstances? The reason I ask is, I'd like to start using FSHost again since it allows users in FS2002/FS2004/FSX to be in the same multiplayer session. Maybe I should look into FSINN?

What does everybody here use for multiplayer sessions, FSX Multiplayer, FSINN, or FSHost? or what other free services are there?

sf4JC

PS. What did you mean in your last post about possibly running CumulusX, CCS2004, and FSX at the same time? or Did I totally miss what you were saying? Are we to run them both with CumulusX05?

EDIT: Nevermind, I think I know now what you meant. So now, my question is, in the future, will it possibly be possible to run a contest with both sims together in the same contest? Maybe have "handicaps" or something to level the racing field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For some stupid reason yesterday the .datfiles didn't convert to 'slo-files in CCS2004, but tonight they just did (started CCS2004 without FS2004).

Bert

For all VISTA-users: if you want to use CCS2004 to import .datfiles and convert them to .slo-files, launch CCS2004 with administrator-rights. Otherwise the .datfiles will not convert.

Bert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have an NVIDIA card, then the first might be a well known driver issue. Settingg antialiasing in the driver control panel to 2x (in my case 4x also works mostly), rather than "Application controlled" usually helps.

The second one is new to me. Usually the CumulusX reports that the connection is lost and remains on the screen.

best regards,

Peter

Peter, I don't think the Nvidia-card is the problem. Running other programs together with FSX don't give me the same problem. I think the cause is that the CumulusX-window can only be maximized or minimized. Most programs have also a button for setting the windowsize manualy. I think in that "manual-size"-mode, the FSX-window will not turn black.

And the second problem I can't reproduce. So I must have done something stupid myself the other day. So let's forget that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What does everybody here use for multiplayer sessions, FSX Multiplayer, FSINN, or FSHost? or what other free services are there?

EDIT: Nevermind, I think I know now what you meant. So now, my question is, in the future, will it possibly be possible to run a contest with both sims together in the same contest? Maybe have "handicaps" or something to level the racing field.

Quite a while ago I did a few experiments with FSHOST, yet this is merely a server software which at that time doesn't require a client software at all.

Later I switched over to FSINN/FSD, fairly broadly used in the VATSIM community. There is a free server hosted by FSFDT/MCDU and there is in addition the APS server from FFVVV (which is currently under maintenace, I just discovered). The second requires a registration. Both come along with Teamspeak servers.

Actually, the latest release 0.5 of CumulusX support a "CCS Compatibility" mode, in which the lift profile and strength should be almost identical to CCS2004, so that is the mode of choice when joining with FS9/CCS2004 players. There remain slight differences, because of the dependencies of CCS2004 on FSUIPC, even there are differences in behaviour between FS9 and FSX.

Yet, on the longer run, I expect that the world will migrate to FSX. At the time, I can hardly see, a advantage for one or the other, at least in compatibility mode. CumulusX might be a bit more challenging, mainly because of the uncrestricted sink.

best regards,

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What does everybody here use for multiplayer sessions, FSX Multiplayer, FSINN, or FSHost? or what other free services are there?

sf4JC

Dirk and I flew several times together in FSX-multiplayer sessions. A glider session in fsx multiplayer is like honey. When there is a host who flies a glider, in no time several other gliderpilots join in. Sometimes there is a session were simmers use their microphones, in other cases they communicate in the chatbox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A glider session in fsx multiplayer is like honey. When there is a host who flies a glider, in no time several other gliderpilots join in.

Yes of course, had it on my mind, but forget to mention it. Yet it has no cross-platform support for older releases. In the past I found it not very stable and frequently lost connection. Hat it become better?

Cheers,

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes of course, had it on my mind, but forget to mention it. Yet it has no cross-platform support for older releases. In the past I found it not very stable and frequently lost connection. Hat it become better?

Cheers,

Peter

If you take only the sessions with the green status, they are quick stable. The reds are giving me headaches sometimes, but not always, though.

By the way, 0.5 runs okay. Just flew LOWZ-LOWI wind east 16kts. Quite a bumpy and tricky ride it was. Didn't try the new features.

Bert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the meantime I found a small new bug.

With the new lift profile you will get a lot of trouble to get away with dunes and the like, nearly at MSL. Lift is really too limited then. Expect a new minor version soon.

No issue as long as GND is higher than 200 m. The rule is: The less GND is above MSL, the closer you have to stick to it. It should be reasonable for most geographic conditions.

best regards. Peter

Edit: Forget about it. Minimum layer decay constant is already in and set to 500m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Peter,

I tried out CumulusX05 and everything seems to work fine. I maxed out the scalers and made the following observations. The slope strength scaler seems to be identical with the one in FS9. The height scaler howevber seems a bit weaker than in FS9 CCS2004. I spent almost 1 1/2 hours over the summit of SOAR Mountain coaxing my glider to 15,500 ft. I have no trouble getting 16,500 ft. in FS9. I bring this up as you were mentioning the advantage of having the two sims performing in similar ways. There seems to be about a 1000 ft. difference between the two sims for some reason. 15,500 ft. height however is adeqate and may be more realistic than you might suspect.

I have uploaded a felm clip showing a soaring pilot flying in slope lift on the windward side of of Volcun Lanin which lies on the southern boarder of the "soar_ranch_andes_sa_4X4" lift files.The vulcan's summit is 12,220 ft and it rises 8,485 ft. above its base.If my calculations are correct this clip shows the pilot climbing at amost 1,000 ft./min or 300 M./min. at almost 14,000 ft. (1800 ft. above the summit). I don't kniow at what altitude he topped out at but I would assume it was several thousand feet above the summit. Time the altimeter and do the math and see if you come up with anything close to my figures.

I have also enclosed a couple of photos of sailplanes soaring the summit of vulcan Villarrica, also on the boarder of the "soar_ranch_andes_sa_4X4" lift files and about 27 miles N.W. of Vulcan Lanin and close to the town of Pucan, Chile. Vulcan Villarrica's summit lies at 9,335 ft. and rises 5,758 ft. above its base. I think the pilot taking the photo looking down into the vulcan's crater must be several thousand feet above the summit. Note the nice thermal source (molten lava) inside the crater. I don't thnk Vulcan Lanin has molten lava inside its crater but I am not sure. So much for the many soaring manuals that say that you can't find soarable lift on a "cone". :whistling:

Cheers, :smiles:

Don

Please help SOAR conserve bandwidth by right clicking and

"Save Target As". By saving to your hard drive you can watch

any time you choose. Thanks!

http://www.virtualsoaring.org/temporary/filmmpeg1.mpeg

post-461-1194221490.jpg

post-461-1194222235.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter, I noticed a potential problem for the casual user. I noticed this a while back, but didn't concern me all that much, but when I hit pause, I still get verticle movement (both up and down depending on position to slope maybe. I'm also not exactly sure if it came before or after Acceleration/SP2. Can anyone varify this, or is anybody else noticing this?

sf4JC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but when I hit pause, I still get verticle movement

Yes, affirmed. I know it but had other preferences til now.

I will deal with it later on.

best regards,

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I first thought it had something to do with the way I was moving my head with FreeTrack v2.1, but then I didn't use it and I still saw the movement. Then I didn't now whether it started with Acceleration/SP2, and whether or not to uninstall to see if the problem went away.

sf4JC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then I didn't now whether it started with Acceleration/SP2, and whether or not to uninstall to see if the problem went away.

Stop!!!! Never touch a running system! Don't care about this bug, if it is disturbing, just switch off "Slope lift" during pause or slewing. I'll take care of it.

Anyway, it's nice to hear that it works with SP2 either.

regards,

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, I've been thinking about making a thread with basic instructions on how to convert the slope files for use with CumulusX!. I just don't want people to think it's a whole big process to make them .slo files.

I discovered something while converting more files today again, and it goes a whole lot faster. With the .DAT files in the IMPORT folder of CCS2004, start CCS2004 and press the "Exit and Launch Cross-Country Soaring" button without having FS2004/FSX running. Then just wait for the confirmation message(s) to end. The last message you see is a message saying something like CCS2004 could not connect, then close it. THAT'S IT!

Can anyone else confirm that this method works, cause it saves a LOT of time. Also just so Peter knows, and the rest of you all too, I've got a little over 3500 .slo files in the CumulusX! folder with no ill effects yet.

sf4JC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can anyone else confirm that this method works, cause it saves a LOT of time. Also just so Peter knows, and the rest of you all too, I've got a little over 3500 .slo files in the CumulusX! folder with no ill effects yet.

I confirm that. Thought, I had it included already somewhere, but apparently forgot it. Good idea with the thread, because it reliefs me from manualling and allows me to spend more time on features.

best regards,

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...