Helicopter cattle mustering

J

jeansy

No longer active
Ive modified the Just flight R44 to suit the average Northern Australian needs(ie mustering cattle) If you own a copy of the Just flight R44 pack and you would like a copy, I can send you a the 2 MDL files only so you can fly solo without any doors like most Northern Australians do

while its a R44, R44s and R22 are the most common helos used for this task

Ive saved these mdls in the p3d v2 format, so Im not sure if it will run in FSX, but you can try your luck

if you havent seen heli mustering before I suggest you check out these links, heli mustering is the highest cause of helicopter related deaths in Australia, and you will see why

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbMudWaYeXo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWxAbTUk8bw

2017-6-26_22-5-55-258.png.53e35d85b9c445c4edfc3c4e432e5cd5.png
 
Yes please, I'm interested.

Also, it would be GREAT if there was some way of making cattle mustering into a mission in P3D...
 
Dangerous Beans said:
Thats very cool jeans, thanks for the mod.
I dont suppose theres any chance you would consider doing the default R22 ? pretty please :)
Click to expand...

sadly ive tried the R22, the only one you cant remove is the left door to be removed as its apart of the main shell, please trust me as I wouldve posted it already

and the bell206 wont left you remove the front left door or glass from all the doors in the vc model
 
For the B206, what about the ERS B206? I believe it already has a no-doors model included.
Just a thought. I get so few...
Pat☺
 
jeansy said:
sadly ive tried the R22, the only one you cant remove is the left door to be removed as its apart of the main shell, please trust me as I wouldve posted it already

and the bell206 wont left you remove the front left door or glass from all the doors in the vc model
Click to expand...

OK thanks anyway jeansy.
 
PhantomTweak said:
For the B206, what about the ERS B206? I believe it already has a no-doors model included.
Just a thought. I get so few...
Pat☺
Click to expand...

The stock 206 has a revised HD paintkit with all new bump mapping and better specs, where the ERS is a FS2004 port over
 
I only fly in VR these days (Oculus Rift) and although its not noticeable on a monitor the scale of the default B206's VC is off. In VR its like your the size of a 5yr kid flying it.
 
jeansy said:
The stock 206 has a revised HD paintkit with all new bump mapping and better specs, where the ERS is a FS2004 port over
Click to expand...

The ERS is not a FS9 portover. It was native FSX format and had bumpmaps.
Or am I confusing with another model ?
 
Daube said:
The ERS is not a FS9 portover. It was native FSX format and had bumpmaps.
Or am I confusing with another model ?
Click to expand...

it was the original owen hewitt fs9 model that was upgraded to FSX standards, its also the base model for the old FS9 dodosim

You can add bump and sepc maps quite easy if you acquire the source code which G has been able to

99% of ERS models are updated fs2004 models with added fsx features giving them new life

the difference between the HD update for the stock fsx 206 and G's updated Owens B206 is quite noticeable

Im not having a Go at George, i praise him for the work that he is doing give old classics a new lease on life , however they are port overs none the less
 
I don't mean to be argumentative, but I just looked up the ERS B206 over on Hovercontrol, and the write-up for it says this, in part:
The FSX native conversion of Owen's 206 includes 18 different model configurations, reflective glass and liveries, new rotor blur style, bump and spec maps, and much more.
Click to expand...
Doesn't that mean, as it says, that it's not just a portover, but that it's now an FSX native aircraft? Or am I missing a nuance here?
I'm am frequently wrong about stuff, so I just want to make sure I'm not talking out my tail about this stuff :D
Hope this gets it all squared away.
Pat☺
 
PhantomTweak said:
I don't mean to be argumentative, but I just looked up the ERS B206 over on Hovercontrol, and the write-up for it says this, in part:

Doesn't that mean, as it says, that it's not just a portover, but that it's now an FSX native aircraft? Or am I missing a nuance here?
I'm am frequently wrong about stuff, so I just want to make sure I'm not talking out my tail about this stuff :D
Hope this gets it all squared away.
Pat☺
Click to expand...

I dont see it as being argumentative, as you confirm exactly what I said

the 25 odd years of playing with this game/sim there have been numerous phases used, one of the earliest I learnt was "port over"

A lot of developers used to use that phrase a lot in the early days, however they have seemed to backed off in recent yrs none the less its was a huge phase from fs2002 to fs2004 and again with fs2004 to fsx

It was explained to me in the early days of flight sim websites a port over was a model from a older platform thats "ported over" to the newer platform and if possible updated to meet the new standards

The term "imported" was when a model that was for a older platform and just dropped into the newer platform if it worked it was a bonus if it didnt bad luck

I can understand why developers dont like using the word "port over" these days because it makes their product sound old and people tend to avoid it

The term "port over" can be considered a insult in the eyes of some, however none the less, if it wasn't initially produced and introduced to the current sim and or its has been upgraded to current standards to me its a portover by the explanation that it originally was outlined

however the term is slowly changed since fsx as p3d, steam use the same use the same modeling format, so a fsx model these days that now work in p3d devs are now replacing the word with "updated", which in all fairness is relatively true as its not really a port over

But for the purposes of marketing, you wont see on a product page this model is a port over from fs2004 but rather this model has been rebuild from the ground up with FSX features.

Again I stick with what was explained to me when the term was widely used and accepted and what I read on the early days of flight sim websites and with online development discussions in the late 90s
 
Last edited:
Another interesting discussion.

I had without any research, always assumed that a "portover" was just a copy and paste
and perhaps a couple of tweaks to make it work.
I always assumed this because whenever I had heard or read the term used, it was to
describe a copy and paste and I never questioned it.

It seems that I was entirely wrong, this is the definition I found.

"To port over" is to take a software module, such as a program, library or interface and
re-implement it in a language, platform or other environment with which the original
implementation was incompatible, allowing the feature set of this module to be available
to developers or end users in the new environment.

This is usually a little more involved than a company offering different versions of their
product that are compatible with different operating systems; often, the developer of a
port is not the same person or group that developed the original. As such, the term implies
a certain amount of "reverse engineering", where the original product is examined to
determine its function and inner workings, and this knowledge is then used to re-create it.
Click to expand...

I understand this to be the same as Matt proposes.

So a "portover" in this context would be the conversion of a native Fs9 model to a native FSX model.

It can be seen from the posts before Matt's that I was not alone in this misunderstanding.

Doesn't that mean, as it says, that it's not just a portover, but that it's now an FSX native aircraft?
Click to expand...

I am sure that we have all downloaded aircraft that have been declared for FSX, only to discover that
they are not "portovers" at all but simply Fs9 models with a few tweaks.

Nothing to do with this subject, but P3Dv4 will catch them all out, it no longer supports Fs9 aircraft models,
however careful the attempt was to disguise them as FSX models.
 
That "port over" is the only Bell 206 I have working in P3D 4. Eagle Rotorcraft Bell Jetranger III, from Hover Control.
LOL
Sue
 
I think it's just a matter of names.
For the FS community, "port-over" means an FS9 aircraft that is used, without any modifications other than textures (alpha channels), into FSX directly.
An FS9 model that gets recompiled into FSX native format, even if the 3D model is not modified or enhanced, is not a port-over.
Milton's aicrafts used to be port-overs until they got properly recompiled into FSX native format. Now, although they still have the same 3D models as in FS9, they are not "port-overs" anymore.
Just a simple clarification.
 
Daube said:
I think it's just a matter of names.
For the FS community, "port-over" means an FS9 aircraft that is used, without any modifications other than textures (alpha channels), into FSX directly.
An FS9 model that gets recompiled into FSX native format, even if the 3D model is not modified or enhanced, is not a port-over.
Milton's aicrafts used to be port-overs until they got properly recompiled into FSX native format. Now, although they still have the same 3D models as in FS9, they are not "port-overs" anymore.
Just a simple clarification.
Click to expand...

you can try call a horse "a four legged car that eats and craps hay" at the end of the day its still a horse

the precedence was set back in the FS2000-FS2002 days regardless if its not a originally design for the platform its been introduced its a port over
 
I have to agree with Matt.

It seems that what has happened is that the incorrect use of the term "portover"has been used so often that
it has almost become the norm.

It doesn't make the norm correct and does indeed lead to much confusion.

It seems that for some people the horse has become a mouse and the mouse a horse.
You can still only ride the larger of the two, whatever you choose to call it.:smile:
 
Thanks for all the info, all! I appreciate the help. I understand the whole thing a little better now. A little, anyway :dizzy:

In any event, the ERS B-206 works very well in FSX, so I'm guessing it will in P3D as well, whatever you want to call it. To me, this horse is a horse, of course, of course :encouragement:
According to Sue, it do, anyway.
I didn't mean to stir up a hornet's nest. I hope I didn't offend, or upset anyone. If I did, I apologize.
Have fun all!
Pat☺
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top