Coming Soon RAAF Base Macrossan

L

leroy10

Members +
Hi All,

Here's some sneak peaks of the one the bases I've been working on. It's ready for release along with a few others as soon as the outhouse server is finished.

Cheers :ernae:
Lindsay
 
...............:ernae:.beautiful blending lindsay:ernae:
 
Hi All,

Egypt, wait until try to take off & land from Macrossan. The runways consists of only the blended VTP1 texture nothing else, well kind of nothing else so it's a little bit bumpy once you get up a bit of speed. :jump:

Cheers :ernae:
Lindsay
 
Looks real good!
But why don't you lay down some dirt or mat strips with FSSC?
The reason why we could not use those in combination with blended textures before (flickering textures) is no longer valid with vtp1. Now you can combine all techniques also used in fs2002/2004 to create "photoreal" airports.
Using strips/taxiways also increases pixel detail; the VTP1 layer is very coarse and blurry; makes it hard to find the strip from the cockpit when you are taxiing.
And to top it off, a runway can provided the correct bouncy-ness depending on the chosen surface.
 
Hey SdC Redux,

The bumpy ride is all part of the fun. :jump:

I'm using an FSSC invisiable runway and the taxiways aren't really meant to be well defined. I'm trying to emulate the dusty dry Australian bush were you'd be lucky to get a taxiway at all, or if you did, it would be there one day and the bush or dust would claim it back the next.

I'll plant plenty of trees to keep people on the right path if they go taxing around. The other bases I've have as part of the package all have the normal style dirt runways with VTP1 blends.

Cheers :ernae:
Lindsay
 
Hi Lindsay

Nice dusty bush airfield ,with a bumpy ride I think we will really feel the mood :bump:........"coarse and blurry" exactly the effect wanted.
The 8bit vtp1 seems to be less detailled than a dxt3 classic mask ,dxt3 mask that need a flatten with fssc to work ,but the vtp1 don't need to be flattened and it's possible with that to make with this option some WWII "coarse" airdromes..
for example, make a runway starting at alt 100m:jump: ,in the middle at 95m :jump: :jump:and take off :jump::jump::jump:at the end at 110m, like they were often in many summary WWII airfields.

Thanks :ernae:

JP
 
Hi All,

Raveena, Macrossan is located south west of Townsville. There was quite a concentration of bases in the area back then. Macrossan was mainly used for stores and I think only a couple of fighter sqaudrons were ever based there.

JP, That's exectly the type of effect I wanted to achieve.

One thing I will need to do is include a flatten when I release the package because depending on what mesh people have installed is depending how bumpy the runway will be. Anything under LOD10 shouldn't be an issue but.... just in case i'll include one as an optional extra.

I have custom LOD14 DEM, yep that's right LOD 14. :icon_lol: for that part of Queensland and with that much elevation detail the bumpiness get's a little out of hand. LOL :jump:

Cheers :ernae:
Lindsay
 
Hi Lindsay

I think lod 9 (76m out of 90m ) is the maximum useable in cfs2 , no need more ,Higher lod will take DD space and eat fps for nothing ,here from the Jim Keir's slartibartfast manual ,he explains that clearly about the resolution mesh in fs :
"
.........
If you scan the FlightSim-related internet file libraries you’ll probably come across huge mesh files which are described as 9.6m or 19.2m data. This sounds great, but (quite apart from the fact that FS2004 won’t display any detail less than 38.4m!) are they really that detailed? Try loading some into TMFViewer or LWMViewer. Details can’t be generated from nothing, and if the data has been forced to a higher LOD it’s usually very visible. This just wastes diskspace and memory, and slows down the sim. While squeezing 76m BGLs out of 90m SRTM source data is acceptable because the next option is 152m and would be a large data loss, anything more than this is wasteful and misleading.

...."

Have you planned some Gmax multi lod jumping Kangoroos ? :sheep:

JP
 
Hi JP

I'll need to run some more tests but LOD 11 shows in CFS2 but anything higher doesn't appear to be displayed. The BGL still has all the data but CFS2 won't display it.

When changing the max vertex levels from 19 to 21 in the cfg file you will notice something if you add LOD12 and higher but again I need to run a few more tests to see exactly what this does.

The srtm and dem data for Australia isn't the best so regardless what LOD level you use the detail is going to be poor. As for frame rate hits, I can't say I notice any, I can run FSX with most of the sliders up so I can really boost up CFS2 with eye candy and still enjoy flying around with good FPS.

No plans at present for a gmax kangaroo but I have thought of adding gmax designed suicide bombing Koalas, or drop bears as we call them. They drop out of the trees and attack when you least expect it. :icon_lol:

Cheers :ernae:
Lindsay
 
Hi lindsay
An other thing about the result on the ground with the mesh lod9 for these I've worked is how they have been repared ,fill the data hole etc....
recently Cpt Teannel sent me mail because he could not download the Afnor mesh at SOH (today it's OK ;)),so I've sent to him the old beta straight_mesh lod9 that I've used for the Afnor beta test ,lod9 I've done using Blackart to repair the height files (1*x1* sized) ,srtm dem, before to compile them as bgls .
http://www.terrainmap.com/
SRTM DEM Repair using Blackart

Last year I've tried an other way using geotiff (5*x5*) MicroDem to repair convert as BIL and with slartibartfast compile them as bgls.these way allow to work on largest areas and I've compiled two Lod9 mesh bgls sized as fs lod5,946190m and 947190m.
here the very instructive Rhumbaflapy's CFS2 Mesh thread
http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=7623
yesterday I've tried this old mesh Detroit_Gibraltar_LOD9 because I've already noticed some differences on the rock between the two treatement here four screenies that show clearly
the two first pics show the Rock with the 946190m make by slarti
look the circle the cliff fall directly in the sea
twe two last pics show the same with Detroit_Gibraltar_LOD9 you can see the protuberence on the cliff and at the end I've put on it a Bunker .
the both set are good but the old is finally the most accurate historicaly also because in real ,exactly where is the bunker,there is the St george tower (alt 415 m) with ,I thing ,some defensive heavy Guns.

I didn't knew how terrifics was the koalas ....brrr...it's really scary

JP
 
mariereid said:
Can't wait to try it out, It looks Fantastic!:ernae::jump:
Click to expand...

What ? ...the gmax designed suicide bombing Koalas ?....me too:jump::applause:.

icon10.gif


JP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top