MAIW Nellis Air Force Base

[thetford569]

Hey,

If you didn't already know, MAIW has released their Nellis Air Force Base package. I have been using MAIW AI Traffic with no problems in FSX and I'm sure there are others that have as well. This new package has a very detailed Nellis AFB scenery with it that includes the Thunderbirds hangar. This got me thinking since we have Jim's great T-birds hangar that he gave us for free to place that I would try and replace their less detailed hangar with his. To my surprise it wasn't that hard and I was able to put his hangar in the scenery. I also deleted the tree objects from the MAIW scenery as they weren't quite displaying right in FSX. The scenery and package seems to work fine in FSX so far with the exception of some autogen shrubs growing on the outer ramps. The main ramp is free of shrubs however and the detailed scenery makes up for this problem. Anyway I now have a great Nellis AFB with Jim's hangar to tide me over until a pure FSX version arrives...I've attached some screen shots below. I am in the process of getting permission to share the modified files because I'm sure others will want to do this as well.

Brandon

[NoNewMessages]

Hey,

... The scenery and package seems to work fine in FSX so far with the exception of some autogen shrubs growing on the outer ramps. ...

Hey, :icon_lol:

Those bushes s/b easy to eliminate. If no one else volunteers before I finish up my reinstall I might try to whip a file out to get rid of them. Or if you're brave and adventurous, SBuilderX would clean that up in a jiffy, so long as you have the SDKs installed., which it sounds like you do?

[Felixthreeone]

Brandon,

I am extremely glad you have managed to get Nellis working in FSX with minimal problems and issues....get in touch with MikeJG regarding the files you refer to...I don't see it being a problem....

[Peter SWE]

I just logged on to ask if anyone knew of a AFB with mil AI and found this thread right at the top.

I hope that you get permission to upload this. :applause:

[Felixthreeone]

Actually I just saw Dan's reply in the MAIW forum....which was a no-go....

[NoNewMessages]

Actually I just saw Dan's reply in the MAIW forum....which was a no-go....

The MAIW forum is not available at this time, so I'll have to check later to see the comments.

[thetford569]

I'm in contact with Mike regarding the fixes for FSX. My original post over there was taken the wrong way and I'm going to work more with Mike after the holidays. Hopefully he will be able to make the necessary mods to make this more FSX friendly and to use Jim's hangar. Just to be clear over here as well the designers did an outstanding job and there is nothing wrong with their rendition of the t-birds hangar. I just think Jim's is more detailed and liked the option of using it with the Nellis scenery. I know others would probably like that as well.

Brandon

[thetford569]

Just an FYI I've talked to Mike and I am going to work with him on some of the FSX issues after the New Year. My goal is to include a file for using Jim's Thunderbirds hangar and to fix the autogen issue with trees showing on the ramps.

Brandon

[GatorFlyer]

Any news on making this more FSX friendly?

[MIKE JG]

I have not heard from Brandon since he made his last post on this subject.

I can't really tweak if for FSX without the help of someone who actually runs FSX to tell me what they would like to have tweaked.

Still willing to do it, but someone needs to tell me what needs to be changed for them to make it better for FSX.

[falcon409]

I went ahead and downloaded the package, since it seems to have stalled for a bit here. To be honest, aside from a quirky landclass file, (which can probably be done better), I didn't see much wrong with it as is. You can see from the screens that the fps is taking a big hit, but unless you have the source code to recompile for FSX. . .WYSIWYG, there are a LOT of buildings and objects. . .every one of them taking their share of the fps down a bit.

I did try a photo image ground texture, but as you can see, while most buildings look close, there are a lot of things that don't line up perfectly with the image and there's no easy way to correct that aside from moving every single building.

I also converted the AFCADS to FSX format and all of those look fine to me. Having said that, I am not an AI person. Don't care about it, don't care to know anything about it. If I were to keep the scenery, I'd add some static aircraft on the ramp and go on my happy way, none the wiser. So, I don't have a clue whether what I did in the conversion to FSX screwed anything up that would hinder AI traffic. For me, the ramp and taxiways "look" correct and that's all I care about.

Note: the first and last shots are the photoreal ground textures in place. . .the middle two were shot right after the scenery loaded for the first time. . .the blue areas you see in the back ground in those two shots are water, I assume due to the landclass. I plan on adding my own landclass and deleting that one.

[Merlin216]

That looks really good, except for the frames. I like the photo real addition.

[falcon409]

That looks really good, except for the frames. I like the photo real addition.
Thanks, I don't have a very hi-end computer and a lot of the hardware/memory I use is not the fastest or the best, so these fps are comparable to what I get if I fly around New York City with everything turned up. I also know that all those objects, compiled for FS9 are doing their part to keep the frames low on my system as well.

[falcon409]

I'm continuing on with the work on Nellis. I may find that everything I'm doing is for nothing because I won't be able to release it. . .but hey. . .I'll have a nice version of Nellis for personal use. I have found Instant Scenery bgl's that are allowing me to realign buildings and other objects with the satellite image, but it's a very slow process as you can imagine. The only problem I've run into is that where there were groups of buildings as part of a complex, that's how they were compiled. . .as one large group rather than individually. Problem is when I try to align them with the ground photo, they don't all match. . .I can get one or two correct but then the rest of them don't match. Oh well.

The streets are another little headache and I haven't decided what to do there yet. They are all off about half the width of the street and I can't just move the entire street system because they're done in AFCAD and I can't select all of them without selecting 20 or 30 cement pads that were placed for buildings, etc. I may just delete the entire system since the photoimage streets are of a high enough resolution to hold their own.

Anyway, it's coming along. The fps are going to be low for the reason I mentioned above but nothing can be done about that, at least for middle of the road systems. The high end junkies will probably not see as much of a hit.

Back to work!:salute:

[MIKE JG]

Well with proper credits given to myself and John Stintrom as the original scenery authors, we might make something work. It looks pretty cool with that high res photo background!

I did the original placement using the BlueSky Las Vegas photo scenery which is of a much lower resolution, that's probably why many of the buildings are off a bit. And yes some of the buildings are done in groups for better fps so there's not much you're going to be able to do about that I'm afraid.

I made this scenery before I knew the secret to using scenery LODs in FSDS. I may make a version 2 that incorporates LOD's and proper draw distances. It would be better on FPS than the current version is.

BTW, I have no idea about the water, I used a desert land class file to enhance the local area. The water would be something that FSX put in there, and there certainly isn't any water or lakes of that size anywhere near the base.

[falcon409]

Yep, those groupings are a real bear but I understand why they were done that way and I'm just working around all that. I started adding autogen vegetation. Lots more to ad to it, but the pics show that it at least fills some of the areas not populated real heavy with buildings. I may try some default buildings just to fill if they look right.
Off to bed!!

[Merlin216]

Just keeps on getting better. Congrats to you and the original scenery makers for creating and editing this base. I hope you decide to release it anyway falcon. If only we could work out getting some more frames. Either way, it would be incredible to have that in sim.

[NoNewMessages]

Yep, those groupings are a real bear but I understand why they were done that way and I'm just working around all that. I started adding autogen vegetation. Lots more to ad to it, but the pics show that it at least fills some of the areas not populated real heavy with buildings. I may try some default buildings just to fill if they look right.
Off to bed!!

I know it may be considered the unthinkable, but with the level of detail from the original package (and that does impress me!) that the photo work might be "nudged" ever so slightly to better align to the work present?

And back to the comments by Mike JG, LODs aren't the primary concern in FSX scenery, but the amount of texture calls made for the objects. I'll have to download the package to see how the texture sheets are set up, but consolidation there will be of more help than LODs. LODs work for FSX scenery, with a odd tweak or two, otherwise they are not used.

[Bjoern]

And back to the comments by Mike JG, LODs aren't the primary concern in FSX scenery, but the amount of texture calls made for the objects. I'll have to download the package to see how the texture sheets are set up, but consolidation there will be of more help than LODs. LODs work for FSX scenery, with a odd tweak or two, otherwise they are not used.

I second that. Texture consolidation achieves far better results as LODs.

[MIKE JG]

The scenery was designed with that in mind as much as possible. But you are limited to 1024x1024 sheets for FS9. I understand FSX allows 2048X2048 texture sheets. That would help quite a bit.

On my modest FS9 setup I get about 25 fps consistently without any AI traffic added in. At least on my end, it's the AI traffic that drags the fps down.

[Bjoern]

I understand FSX allows 2048X2048 texture sheets. That would help quite a bit.

Even 4096, but that format is not viable for everyday use except if you want to walk away with a "HD texture" trophy... :d

[lloydc130]

Loaded Nellis in FSX, followed all the conversion instructions, but most of the buildings and reventments etc are all black. It's like there are missing libraries. Does anyone know what I might be missing?

Thanks

Lloyd

[Shylock]

Sounds like the textures aren't loading. Did you put them into the correct folder?

[Roger]

As it is a port-over from Fs9 the textures probably won't show if you are using Dx10 preview mode. Have you tried switching to Dx9?

[thetford569]

Sorry I've been quiet on this subject and out of touch with Mike. I have had zero time to mess with any of this let alone even fly FSX. I was able to get Jims hangar in place and got rid of the trees on the ramp which was good enough for me. After that I jus haven't had the time. If a better FPS version is made with a provision to include Jims hangar that would be great!

Brandon

[lloydc130]

Running direct X9.0c

I thought I had installed it properly. I followed the instructions. Any suggestions on how I can double check if the files are installed correctly? I posted this over on flightsim.com, and someone suggested that libraries from other packages might be required, but didn't say which ones. They also suggested I post over here.