Moving a VC panel

[gera]

FSX is made to be flown with VC panels, at least I think so, specially since I use two 19" monitors. Extending the 2D panel 38 inches is just a no no....so I have tried to move a VC panel from one aircraft to another but have had no success.....does anyone know how to do this????...Thanks

 

[Brett_Henderson]

You can't move a VC panel. The VC is an actual model.

With old FS9 models, it's an intregal part of the entire model. With true FSX models, the interior model (VC), is seperate, but not entirely interchangeable.

For example.. if you replaced a 747 interior model with a LearJet interior model.. I will work, but you reference point would be all wrong. Where you'd sit while in the VC would be a distance from the model's center. Obviously a 747 cockpit is much further from the center, than a Lear.

 

[Roger]

I switched a Pc7 vc with a Pc9 just to see if iot would work...and it did. I haven't yet worked out how to get the right exterior views because they seem to be built into the vc textures.

 

[gera]

I switched a Pc7 vc with a Pc9 just to see if iot would work...and it did. I haven't yet worked out how to get the right exterior views because they seem to be built into the vc textures.

Roger how did you do that?

 

[GeorgeM]

Roger how did you do that?

I'm not Roger, nor do I play him on TV, but I wrote a post that detailed how I did it here:

http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=121&topic_id=448271&mode=full

Note that this will only work if both models are native FSX so my attempt with the King Air failed, but the same method did work with two native models.

As Roger pointed out, you'll need to more or less match the textures of the two models, at least for the parts you can see from the VC. And hope there are no name collisions in the texture names.

 

[Bone]

Assuming they are both native FSX, can you cut and paste a VC into an AI bird?

 

[GeorgeM]

Assuming they are both native FSX, can you cut and paste a VC into an AI bird?

Yep, I just tried it. I put the Carenado Cherokee VC in the default AI Cherokee. Pointless, but it worked. It would need a bit of tweaking to be truly usable, but it can be done.

 

[SkippyBing]

For example.. if you replaced a 747 interior model with a LearJet interior model.. I will work, but you reference point would be all wrong. Where you'd sit while in the VC would be a distance from the model's center. Obviously a 747 cockpit is much further from the center, than a Lear.

You can get around this by altering the figures in the [View] section of the Aircraft.cfg. The main problem is that the parts of the airframe you can see from the cockpit are actually part of the VC model, rather than the external one so in the Lear/747 example you'll see Learjet wings not 747 ones. Strike Fighters has a better way of doing it where you can say which parts of the external model are visible from the cockpit view in it's equivilent of the aircraft.cfg.

 

[Brett_Henderson]

You can get around this by altering the figures in the [View] section of the Aircraft.cfg.

Correct.. that will put you IN the cockpit.. but you're still at the wrong point of reference.

Example.. if you just put the Lear VC in the 747 without altering the [View].. when you load the 747.. you'd have to pan around behind you, to see (whatever it was you could see from there) the VC.. Even when you alter the [View] to put yourself in the "seat", you'd be flying a 747 from a "seat" that would only be as far forward from model-center, as a Lear. Like,, if you pulled up to a hold short line from the VC.. and then switched to spot-view.. half of that 747 would be out on the runway..

 

[gera]

I'm not Roger, nor do I play him on TV, but I wrote a post that detailed how I did it here:

http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=121&topic_id=448271&mode=full

Note that this will only work if both models are native FSX so my attempt with the King Air failed, but the same method did work with two native models.

As Roger pointed out, you'll need to more or less match the textures of the two models, at least for the parts you can see from the VC. And hope there are no name collisions in the texture names.

Thank you sir.....I will give it a try..:ernae:

 

[SkippyBing]

Brett, I realised what you meant after I browsed to another page! I'm currently using the Bombardier as a proxy external model for my next project as I'm starting with the cockpit which obviously initially gave me the same problem.
Last night's drinking is not helping today's posting!

 

[GeorgeM]

Correct.. that will put you IN the cockpit.. but you're still at the wrong point of reference.

Example.. if you just put the Lear VC in the 747 without altering the [View].. when you load the 747.. you'd have to pan around behind you, to see (whatever it was you could see from there) the VC.. Even when you alter the [View] to put yourself in the "seat", you'd be flying a 747 from a "seat" that would only be as far forward from model-center, as a Lear. Like,, if you pulled up to a hold short line from the VC.. and then switched to spot-view.. half of that 747 would be out on the runway..

When I did the Cherokee swap I noticed that the viewpoint appeared to be referenced off the external model, but I didn't think through the ramifications of that (and I'm sober! ). Is there a convention for choosing a reference point when creating a model? If so, if you were doing a swap between similar planes you might have a good chance of it being close.

 

[Brett_Henderson]

Brett, I realised what you meant after I browsed to another page! I'm currently using the Bombardier as a proxy external model for my next project as I'm starting with the cockpit which obviously initially gave me the same problem.
Last night's drinking is not helping today's posting!
<!-- / message -->

LOL :ernae: If there is anything that could drive a person to drink, it's FSX modeling..

When I did the Cherokee swap I noticed that the viewpoint appeared to be referenced off the external model, but I didn't think through the ramifications of that (and I'm sober! ). Is there a convention for choosing a reference point when creating a model? If so, if you were doing a swap between similar planes you might have a good chance of it being close.

You were doing planes of similar size and dimensions.. so it wouldn't be that big a deal..

When you create a model , the model center (origin) is the center of that 'scene'. The convention is to make it 1/4 of the way back from the wing leading edge longitudinally.. obviously dead-center laterally, and then the vertical position should be about center mass (this makes spot viewing best, as it's the focal point for the sopt view)..

The VC (interior model), should be made to "match" the exterior model (as in, you couldn't see it if you merged the two projects in Gmax), because you want the the VC "seat" to be where it's supposed to be, relative to the rest of the model.

Where your view initializes in the VC, is determined by the [Views] paragraph, 'eyepoint' line.

Since all of this stuff has to agree.. and reference points in the aircraft.cfg file (lights, contact points, weight-stations, thrust points, control surface apexes, etc.) start from the model origin; sometimes offset by this line:

reference_datum_position = 83.5, 0, 0

The 83.5 means that all reference points will start 83.5 feet forward of the model center. Why some models (most defaults) are like that, is a mystery to me (I was told it has something to do with real aircraft reference datum, that was measured from the hangar door.. somewhere near the nose..lol).. it's like adding several math steps when creating an aircraft.cfg file.. I just make the model center and reference datum the same, by making the coordinates in that line, '0, 0, 0'

Where was I ? LOL Oh yeah.. the point is; too many things are tied to the model origin to allow for flexibility. The only way to realistically swap VCs, is to choose two aircraft of similar dimensions.. OR, if you have access to the Gmax source-file.. you can simply move the enire interior model, and re-compile..

 

[GeorgeM]

... the point is; too many things are tied to the model origin to allow for flexibility. The only way to realistically swap VCs, is to choose two aircraft of similar dimensions.. OR, if you have access to the Gmax source-file.. you can simply move the enire interior model, and re-compile..

Thanks for all the info. So it would seem that even if the models are close, there's a good chance that you'd end up with stuff like nav lights floating off of, or embedded in the wing when viewed from the VC. I guess the devil's in the details. :isadizzy:

Really though, except for my failed King Air experiment, I've never had a compelling need to do this. It's just interesting to see what's possible. I sometimes think that half the fun I get from FSX comes from tweaking and messing with configuration stuff; the old "if it ain't broke, fix it till it is" mentality. :d

Seriously though, I really appreciate all the good info I get from this place! :ernae:

 

[SkippyBing]

The 83.5 means that all reference points will start 83.5 feet forward of the model center. Why some models (most defaults) are like that, is a mystery to me

A lot of real aircraft have the reference point in front of the aircraft nose, basically it means no matter where you add something to the aircraft the maths for the weight and moment doesn't change sign which it would do if you had the reference datum at the 1/4 chord point (which is normally about where the centre of pressure lives). This means you're less likely to make a mistake calculating the centre of gravity.
Obviously if you've got lots of data from aircraft manuals etc. it makes sense to adopt the manufacturers datum so you don't have to do the maths yourself.

My question about FS modelling is why do we make the models in metric, and then write the aircraft.cfg in feet and inches?

 

[Brett_Henderson]

A lot of real aircraft have the reference point in front of the aircraft nose, basically it means no matter where you add something to the aircraft the maths for the weight and moment doesn't change sign which it would do if you had the reference datum at the 1/4 chord point (which is normally about where the centre of pressure lives). This means you're less likely to make a mistake calculating the centre of gravity.
Obviously if you've got lots of data from aircraft manuals etc. it makes sense to adopt the manufacturers datum so you don't have to do the maths yourself.

My question about FS modelling is why do we make the models in metric, and then write the aircraft.cfg in feet and inches?

Yeah.. that kind jibes with the hangar door thing.. out in front of the nose. Though you'll still have sign changes, vertically and laterally. As far as using manufacturer data.. you're gonna be doing math anyway; unless you build the model to EXACT specs (highly unlikely). I just use the Gmax screen when writing cfg files. The mouse-pointer coordinates are displayed at the bottom...

The metric thing is just where Gmax and MSFS butt heads. Make-model needs metric stuff... and the MSFS flight alogorithms need non-metric.

 

[Essex]

if you have access to the Gmax source-file.. you can simply move the enire interior model, and re-compile.

I don't think it's absolutely necessary to recompile to get the VC perfectly positioned, with the eyepoint unchanged.
The VC is in a fixed position relative to the datum, if we move the datum the VC will follow. Therefore what we can do is reposition the datum so the VC is perfectly positioned, then update the CoG CP's lights positions etc, etc.

We just need a program to do the donkey work. Anyone?

Alternatively, surely the VC position is just a few bits of data in the MDL file, if we knew the bits we might be able to edit them.

 

[ncooper]

Correct.. that will put you IN the cockpit.. but you're still at the wrong point of reference.

Example.. if you just put the Lear VC in the 747 without altering the [View].. when you load the 747.. you'd have to pan around behind you, to see (whatever it was you could see from there) the VC.. Even when you alter the [View] to put yourself in the "seat", you'd be flying a 747 from a "seat" that would only be as far forward from model-center, as a Lear. Like,, if you pulled up to a hold short line from the VC.. and then switched to spot-view.. half of that 747 would be out on the runway..

I don't think that is the case, the
[Views]
eyepoint =
in the aircraft.cfg file is the key.

If you insert, for example, a 727 interior model into a Tristar and leave the eyepoint entry unchanged, you find yourself sitting several feet forward of the nose of the aircraft.
It seems that the references for the eyepoint are for the interior model,not the exterior.
To correct this, one simply copies the eyepoint entry from the donor aircraft over the receiving aircraft.cfg entry.

It isn't a very satisfactory result, as although one is at the front, one is then sitting at the height of a 727, not a Tristar.

As far as models go, as far as I can see, sitting in the interior of the hybrid like this, is exactly as if sitting in a 727, except that the outside looks like a Tristar, with all the inconsistancies that go with it.

On the other hand, if one used a DC10 interior model, which I eventually did, the height and all the other perspectives are just about right.

Regards,
Nick

 

[Essex]

My point is, in theory at least it should be possible to make it exactly right. Rather than just relying on the two models having roughly compatible dimensions.

 

[stiz]

holy mega thread bump batman!!