Junkers Ju-52/3m - Page 4
Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 247

Thread: Junkers Ju-52/3m

  1. #76
    Hello Aleatorylamp,

    Do you remember seeing screenshots of my Dornier Do 17Z project before I put it on hold?
    Each Assembly only had one Group that was a 3D model. The other Groups were all just flat templates.

    I think you are now understanding what I was suggesting back then:
    Build a representative shape for each AF99 Group.
    Build each Group to as much complexity as you wish.
    Combine them into one model via SCASM.
    I know others have already done this.

    This should prove interesting in the long run with the recent programming I have been doing to calculate the VectorJump parameters based on a Glue Part from AF99. If I can make that work, then we don't have to deal with the silly Group Glue sequence that AF99 generates with all viewing planes going through the Origin.
    ....but to do this, I need a more reliable Development machine.
    I am thinking about trying a 5:4 Flat Screen on another old machine and run at 1280 x 1024.
    What kind of monitors do you all use?
    I just need to clear some space for it and that is not easy.

    - Ivan.

  2. #77
    Hello Ivan,
    I have a 19-inch (6:4) flatscreen that I make to work at 1024 x 768, and for some reason, it was in 16bit mode. I donīt know why, because the only reason was FS98, but that wonīt run now with the graphics card I have. Iīve just put it into 32bit mode - AF99 and AA still work...

    1280 x 1024 makes things too small. Perhaps a bigger flatscreen would allow the higher resolution. It would be more comfortable because you wouldnīt have to zoom in and out so much with AF99. A bigger monitor on my desk, which is tucked under and next to the stairs, would however be knocked onto the floor by peopleīs elbows coming down the stairs!

    When you were doing the separate Do 17Z builds, Iīm afraid that I wasnīt around in the Forum yet, but I understand the method you mean. If you use templates for the reference elements that are to be substituted with SCASM later, the AF99 manouevering space limit problem disappears. It would be much better than the full-build using simplified elements system Iīm using.

    Doing the glue templates in SCASM could be extremely taxing on the way my brain functions - I have a good built-in 3D graphic booster, but my abstract number/letter interpreter is only generic, with which I can just about manage mediocre Haiku and simple trigonometry.

    Thinking about the different ways in which AF99 and SCASM work, itīs apparent that you donīt get to see any AF99 glue elements in SCASM, but you get their result as an ordered sequence of the elements involved.

    Looking at the SCASM code for the animated co-pilotīs head, and then correcting labels after copying it to the unanimated one is one thing, but trying to understand it or write a new one myself would dehydrate my brain.

    Itīs a pity that graphic visualization is absent in SCASM. I daydream about a routine into which you could paste copied SCASM code elements, to get to see them in some order, but it still wouldnīt show glue!

    Nevertheless, your suggestion sounds very appetizing, and opens up new ground for building!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; January 18th, 2018 at 05:50.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  3. #78

    Seemingly absurd Jump

    Hello Ivan,
    I wonder if you would know the origin of a strange SCASM error message.
    I also donīt know how to
    substitute Jump instruction with insufficient
    range for a longer range Jump instruction.


    The error message says:
    -> destination ":L009CF0" out of range (33030), source line 1662
    Scasm compilation status: error(s) 1

    Line 1662 says:
    Jump( :L009CF0 )

    Investigating further, I tracked down label :L009CF0.
    It appears in line 4930, and is the middle of the listing
    for all the
    ShadedTexPoly parts of the left wing component, and is also
    called
    by a jump in Line 1706.


    It looks very absurd, and I felt like just deleting the jump lines and the
    seemingly ad-lib placed label. So I just did it and the model compiles and
    works perfectly.

    What would you rekon could be the cause of this this strange behaviour?
    A glitch in my AF99 construction of the left wing, probably...

    Hello Smilo,
    I know you arenīt so interested in the armed version, or in bombers, but as they existed,
    it is probably a good idea to supply one...

    Hereīs a couple of screenshots of the g4e armed transport in darker camo livery. I still
    have to darken and camo the wing textures, and put on the CA+JY registration of the
    fuselage of the Ju-52 that came out of the Norwegian lake in 1986.

    These could also carry 1100 lbs bombs - i.e. 10 x 100 lb, but they didnīt have the ventral
    "stew pot" where the bomb-aimer/ventral machine-gunner sat.
    Perhaps they eye-balled the bomb-release moment place to get a general sort accuracy.
    I think Iīll leave the bombs in the Dp files for this armed version, so this option can also
    be available to simmers.

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Night flier2.jpg  
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; January 18th, 2018 at 12:27.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  4. #79
    Hello Aleatorylamp,

    I would be very hesitant to do what you just did.
    Trying to sort out machine generated code (or what programmers call "Spaghetti Code") is always a chore and I hate it.
    I also presume that the compiler (AF99) knows what it is doing unless I KNOW that it clearly is wrong.
    Did you possibly add a large block of code between the JUMP instruction and its destination?
    If you did add something large enough and the target was barely within range of the JUMP, then it would cause this kind of error.
    This is one of the reasons I do minimal modification of the existing code and try to all my new procedures at the end.
    That way, when something goes wrong, you can do a quick comparison between the original MdlDisAs generated code and the version you are working with now and see the differences more easily.

    These days, even my changes for a Interior Virtual Cockpit are pretty minimal for code size inline.
    The Inline stuff is all just a bunch of Call32's to the actual additions at the very end of the original source file.

    If you want to retain this JUMP instruction, then you can add a new Label about half way in between the JUMP instruction and its target with a JUMP instruction there to take it the rest of the way.
    I believe that right after a Return statement is probably a safe place to add the new Label and JUMP instruction.

    Then again, you could be so close to the AF99 limits that there are internal errors now.
    Check out my FW 190 Revisited thread to see some silly things that can happen in that case.

    On a slightly different note:
    The biggest thing holding me up right now is the fact that I cannot get a mouse function to work with my compiled MS VC programs.
    If I could, that would open up a lot of possibilities.

    - Ivan.

  5. #80
    Hello Ivan,
    Many thanks for your views! Yes, I had inserted the more fully shaped crewīs heads and torsos, when the "normal Jump" turned into a "too long Jump". Previously I had inserted the Wheel structures that were 2D discs before, but probably before the Jumpīs origin. Iīll see.

    This Jump right into the middle of the left wing component parts (thereīs none in the right wing) must of course have already been present in the original AF99 generated code, with 148.9 % parts count, so your AF99 generated error idea will most probably be the case.

    Iīll try and simplify some more of the plane, to get the Jump to go away. It wasnīt there on the other two models, whose original AF99 generated code in fact had a higher parts count of 149.6% in each case.
    But, there are some differences in the build, so Iīll back-track. I prefer to eliminate the Jump at its origin than try to fix it with an in-between Jump (but thanks for that remedy too!).


    I seem to remember that the MS VC Program you are having the mouse problem with, is an Art or a Photo re-touching programme you intend to use for your texture work. What is it exactly so good at, that prevents you from using another more mousable programme?

    I use MGI Photosuite 8.5 generally (lines, cut and paste, simple brightening and darkening, and some special effects), Paint Shop Pro 4.15 for screenshots, and Photoscape for colour curves and more complicated contrast things. Then, I have never been able to cope with Photoshop and its layers.

    Also, funnily enough, modern freeware Art and Photo Re-touching programmes seemingly donīt give you a
    cut-and-paste-into-the-same-window option anymore. You need Payware versions to get that feature!
    Crazy...


    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  6. #81

    ...an AA artifact.

    Hello Ivan again,
    Iīve tracked down the origin of this mysterious and meaningless Jump
    instruction: It was not generated by AF99 at all! It isnīt in the
    un-animated code. Itīs an Aircraft Animator "artifact"!

    After your comments on machine generated code, or "spaghetti code",
    (I love to write spaghetti code in QBasic...), this Jump would fall into a
    category where the compiler (AF99) did indeed know what it was doing,
    but we KNOW that the AA compiler is clearly wrong. Am I right?

    In consequence, as the plane works perfectly, the meaningless Jump lines
    could probably best be deleted. For the moment, I just marked them out with ";".

    Itīs an interesting artifact though..., and the question still remains:
    Why did AA do this? The strange lines are not in the code of the other two
    models.

    Maybe itīs because of some AF99 quirk in this particular model that triggered
    the artifact in AA...


    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  7. #82

    Of ailerons and guns

    Hello Smilo, Hello Ivan,
    I had an extra problem through my own fault. The aileron
    animation went in the opposite direction, and it was happening
    on all three models, but I discovered how to correct it with SCASM,
    so now allīs well again after four and a half hours.
    Thatīs what
    happens if one doesnīt pay attention! I suppose completely re-SCASMing
    the three models would have taken even longer.


    A thought about CFS1 guns:
    I was thinking...I doubt whether the armed version of the Ju-52
    will be of any
    use to anyone in CFS1 without swivelling guns, so
    whatīs the point? Thatīs why Smilo is really only interested in
    unarmed transport / paratrooper versions.

    With one trainable dorsal MG and one trainable frontal 20 mm
    Cannon, one would
    at least stand a chance... I think Hubbabubba
    mentioned once that there was a
    CFS1 Plug-in that could do that,
    but it only works under Windows 98.


    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; January 19th, 2018 at 10:44.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  8. #83
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,775
    actually, the main reason,
    "Smilo is really only interested in unarmed transport / paratrooper versions"
    is because he was not aware of the the armed versions.
    i only knew about the ju52 used as cargo transports,
    paratroop carriers and, especially,
    the shiny version used to carry the fuhrer.

    yes, you are correct, there is a cfs addon
    enabling the firing back from bombers...lots o fun.
    it's called Tailgunner or, TG2.
    using it properly is an acquired skill
    and i must say, hubbabubba was deadly.
    you can find it on the FreeFlightSite utilities page.
    scroll down to Tailgunner;
    http://www.thefreeflightsite.com/Utilities.htm

    i may be mistaken, but, as i recall,
    there might be some DP file modifications required.
    if you're interested, maybe i can help.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  9. #84
    Hello Smilo,
    I see. Thanks for your clarification!
    If TG2 works with Windows XP, Iīd be really interested.
    Iīll get it and see if it installs. If it works on Win XP, it
    would be great to have on the Ju-52.

    On the model, I could even try to add two lateral firing guns
    from the back
    windows. Now THAT would be a great thing
    for the Ju-52!
    They say the 4 guns were good to protect
    the paratroopers
    before they had to jump.

    Also, the night-flier camo-colours are coming along quite well,
    even if slowly (almost line by line), so it would probably be a
    pity not to make an upload with them.

    Anyway - have you thought about whether youīd also like
    paratroopersīsilhouettes on the Spanish version?

    On the armed version, as itīs going to be a transport and a bomber,
    I suppose those silhouettes will not apply.

    OK, then! More, later.

    Update: OK! I got it and installed OK on Win XP, but I
    canīt see any extra
    TG2 options to try and test it in
    Quick Combat or Freeflight Mode.

    I suppose Iīll have to do something in Multiplayer to try
    it out, but
    Iīve never ever done anything there.

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  10. #85
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,775
    yes...tg2 works with xp, so, give it a go.

    as for the Spanish version with silhouettes.
    i would say, they are so subtle,
    no one would be the wiser if they were there.
    if that makes any sense.

    hey, why not put this guy in one?
    just kidding, sorry.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  11. #86
    Hello Smilo,
    ...or this one:

    OK for silhouettes on the Spanish version then!

    Do you think the Silhouettes are OK as they are, or
    maybe they are too subtle and would be better more
    pronounced - i.e. a little darker?

    About TG2: I understand that to test it,
    the only way would be in Multiplayer Mode?

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  12. #87
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,775
    actually, no. you can go into quick combat
    and let them come after you.
    aim with your mouse...be sure to lead the target.
    you will know it's working
    if the tracers follow your mouse movements.

    please, pardon the shameless self promotion,
    but, do you have my ar196?
    if so, check it out after you've installed tg2.
    i know it works with tg2.
    btw, it also has a copy of tg2 in the package.

    good luck, please, let me know how it goes.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  13. #88
    Hello Smilo,
    OK, thanks! I wasnīt aiming with my mouse...
    So, it should shoot at the opponent with everything Iīve got!

    Update: OK! I shot down my first opponent! It works! Itīs much more logical.
    Now, it will take some thinking as to how to get the side and rear views
    from the cockpit to get the guys by shooting sideways and backwards.

    OF COURSE I have your Arado. Fine, Iīll check it out too!
    Maybe that will answer my question in the updated paragraph.

    More, tomorrow then... Iīm off to sleep now. Good night!
    Have a nice afternoon and evening!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  14. #89
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,775
    that's great...glad it works for you.

    now, we get to test my memory.
    as i recall, when you pull the trigger,
    ALL guns fire, but, the only guns aimed
    will be those in the selected view.
    for example, in rear view,
    only aft facing guns are aimed.
    right side view, only right side guns are aimed,
    and so on and so forth.
    i hope this makes sense.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  15. #90
    Hello Smilo,
    OK! Thanks again!
    The problem at the moment is that the rear gun is still firing
    forwards. I have to check how I got it to fire backwards and/or
    sideways on the 1917 Staakens and Gothas. There is the swivel
    option in Dp that I must figure out better.


    Is that the reason for the enemy dot in the box on the upper left
    sometimes being red and sometimes being yellow?
    (I only have one enemy defined for now).

    I was also reading your Arado texts (they are much nicer to people
    than mine!), and I will try the hud-view.

    Interesting, this TG2 business! I hadnīt tried it out before because
    of
    misleading comments on a few sites about TG2 being incompatible
    with all OS later than Win98.

    New toys are always nice!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  16. #91
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,775
    i've never heard of tg2 os incompatibility issues.
    although, it's possible with the early releases.
    back in the multi-player days, i ran multiple machines
    with different operating systems and had no tg2 problems.
    that's as far as i'll go with it, just personal experience.

    in quick combat, choose two or more enemies.
    as i recall, you can cycle through targets,
    but, i can't remember the keystrokes to do it.
    yellow dots are aircraft within tactical display range.
    notice the red dot in the tactical display
    will change to the selected target.
    also, when track target is selected or locked,
    your vc view follows that target.

    thank goodness for auto pilot.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  17. #92

    AF99 & AA Limitations

    Hello Aleatorylamp, Smilo,

    From my own experience, generally with a Parts count below about 1175 of 1200, things are pretty reliable.
    Past that, AF99's chances of barfing are increased. Sometimes you can cram in more Parts, sometimes you can't.
    It isn't entirely predictable though the complexity of pieces of the model seem to have an influence.

    Many times, there is a weirdness in the model that may not be visible in all views as was seen in my FW 190A.
    The exterior view looked fine but I seem to remember a polygon extending to infinity from an internal view.

    With your quoted percentages of Parts used, I believe you are operating way too close to the limit of reliability for AF99,
    but as I mentioned before, it varies from project to project.

    AF99 also has its broken stuff such as Templates as shown in my P-38 Lightning Projects.

    Aircraft Animator seems to have even more broken stuff. I have never gotten some of the angles to work correctly.
    The animation of deployed Flaps is never retained and must be redone every time.
    The Propeller Arcs will accept 0.01 meter specifications but will only retain accuracy to 0.1 meter.

    There is probably more that I do not see.
    One of these days, I should probably check out what a "polygon extending to infinity" actually looks like in SCASM.

    MS VC - Microsoft Visual C / C++ is just the compiler I am using for building Gauges.
    The problem is that mouse functions do not work even with the SDK sample gauges when I used my MS VC compiler so I need to figure out why that is the case.
    This is the big hold up with building more interesting gauges such as an Autopilot and some custom Engine Controls and Fuel Selectors. Even Mouse-Over stuff does not work.
    If I can get the mouse functions to work in compiled Gauges, then there are a lot more possibilities instead of just indicator gauges.

    - Ivan.

  18. #93
    Hello Smilo,
    Thanks for your additional tips!
    TG2 seems to be doing fine, and Iīm working on the Dp gun options to maximize
    effectiveness.
    Incidentally, DP Editor wonīt work on the Virtualized Windows XP I have on the
    Win 8.1 laptop, but no matter, because I donīt often use it, except today that itīs
    a bit cold at the tower under the stairs!!

    Youīre right about the autopilot. I did notice that flying, aiming and firing is a bit much.
    Progress with the lettering and the camo on the e4g armed version is slow but sure...

    Hello Ivan,
    Thank you for your counsel. I wasnīt clear about the benefits of leaving a 3% safety margin.

    Question: Are there any specific things to look for on finished models to be sure that there no are hidden

    flaws due to extreme compilation too close to the limit?

    One strange thing that did happen on the version with the strange Jump, was that one of the times I saved the
    AF99 model, it was empty and gave an error message when I wanted to load it load it again, and I had to rename
    the file and then it reloaded. Apart from the strange jump in the SCASM listing there was also a section of 17 return
    instructions piled up near the end, that I deleted, of course. Wierd stuff, but the model seems to be OK.

    For the moment, the models are operating fine. Maybe I should attach the three models for a check?

    Good luck with the mouse and the C/C++ compiler! The projected gauges sound very good!

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  19. #94

    What Glue looks like in SCASM

    Hello Ivan, hello Smilo,
    I thought it was interesting to illustrate how SCASM implements Glue.

    Just using a rear fuselage section with 2 lateral firing machine guns
    glued to each side (poking out of side windows, as it were), uses
    the following AF99 sequence:

    - Fuselage Structure
    - Right Glue template
    - Right MG Structure
    - Left Glue template
    - Left MG Structure

    With this, we obtain the SCASM-generated code displayed below.

    The two glue templates cause 2 successive conditional sentences to
    be generated, involving the display order of the 3 elements involved.
    I have simplified the actual display of the three elements into one line instead of printing out
    the complete code of all the vectorpoints and shaded polygons involved.

    Incidentally, the code is reminiscent of what has to be written by hand in Ad2K!

    ;*** Start of Main Aircraft Code ***

    ;Calls aft fuselage and lateral guns.
    ;-----------------------------------
    :L00140E
    Call( :L001414 )
    Return

    ;Depending on view point, decides whether to call left gun
    ;or not, and do so before or after calling aft fuselage.
    ;-----------------------------------------------------------
    :L001414
    VectorJump( :L00142C m -32767 0 0 415.000000 )
    Call( :L001436 ) ;
    Call( :L001572 ) ; calls left gun
    Return
    :L00142C
    Call( :L001572 ) ; calls left gun
    Call( :L001436 ) ;
    Return

    ;Depending on point of view, decides whether
    ;to call aft fuselage before or after right gun.
    ;----------------------------------------------
    :L001436
    VectorJump( :L00144E m 32767 0 0 415.000000 )
    Call( :L00168C ) ; calls aft fuselage
    Call( :L001458 ) ; calls right gun
    Return
    :L00144E
    Call( :L001458 ) ; calls right gun
    Call( :L00168C ) ; calls aft fuselage
    Return

    ; Right side gun code
    ; -------------------
    :L001458
    VecPoints (8) + Shaded Color + ShadedPolyīs + Dummyjump + Return

    ; Left side gun code
    ; ------------------
    :L001572
    VecPoints (8) + Shaded Color + ShadedPolyīs + Dummyjump + Return

    ; Aft Fuselage Code
    ; ------------------
    :L00168C
    VecPoints (15) + Shaded Color + ShadedPolyīs + Dummyjump + Return

    :L00196A
    EndA
    ;;;End of Latitude Range

    I thought it was interesting to show how SCASM does it! These would be the steps to
    include 2 lateral machine-guns into the e4g armed transport/bomber version of the JU52.

    The next step would be to enable the extra machine-guns to fire at + or - 90 degrees in
    the Dp Editor. The rear gunner already exists, with his - or + 180 degree definition in the
    swivel guns, if I am not mistaken. It is a bit difficult to see if it works properly only using
    the Quick combat mode, but in theory it should be correct.

    This version of the real Ju-52/3m had an improved bomb-sight, that did away with the need
    for the cumbersome ventral "stew-pot" bomb aimerīs position, and the model had a provision
    for carrying 1100 lb of bombs which was used for "specific purposes.".

    Update: The only problem of putting in the two lateral guns on the model, is that the units recovered from the Norwegian lake, which is the ones that this model takes after, is that they didnīt have any lateral guns, although there was provision on the model. But then, those units at that moment, werenīt bombers either, but transports, but had provision to be such though!
    So itīs reminiscent of Hamletīs dilema... to put or not to put (the guns in), that is the question.

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; January 23rd, 2018 at 11:36.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  20. #95
    Hello Aleatorylamp,

    I am glad you are noticing that the AF99 Glue code generation is very reminiscent of AD2000.
    It SHOULD be because it is doing pretty much the same thing..... to an extent.

    AD2000 and SCASM are powerful enough to allow you to specify the EXACT sequence you want.
    AF99 because of the linear arrangement of its Assembly sequence is a pretty serious limitation.

    The parameters for the VectorJump call are what I have been working on recently....
    The problem I am still having is in determining which direction the normal to the viewing plane should face.
    It isn't a hard problem but there are other things going on that I need to work on also.

    By the way, your understanding about how VectorJumps work in place of Glue is correct for within a Group.
    It is not correct in terms of how the Groups are combined into the complete Assembly.
    You are describing how it SHOULD work and not how it really works.
    Try putting just one piece into each Group and recompile. The results may shock you.

    So far I am having no success with mouse effects on gauges.
    This is not a surprise because I really have no idea what I am looking for.

    My Ki 61-Id flight model is in the process of yet another minor update.
    The AF99 model could also use an update but still need a reliable machine.
    We shall see how it goes.

    - Ivan.

  21. #96

    Now only one part glued

    Hello Ivan,
    Thank you for commenting!
    As you say, the trial applied to a simple group of elements, a
    central element having 2 others glued to it, 1 left and 1 right.

    It was a bit difficult to explain in the short commented lines,
    and I didnīt mention that the display of one gun cancels out
    the display of the other, but the fuselage is always displayed.


    I realize it illustrates AF99īs limited sequencing capacity - i.e.
    a single left/right gluing branch-out from a central element, and
    that with SCASM it is possible to have additional branchouts after
    each branch.

    I suppose that the way to write such a sequence would be to include
    further VectorJump routines within an existing VectorJump routines.

    Your suggested trial for only one gun glued, in this case to the right
    side, has a much simpler sequence with only one condition,
    i.e. a single
    VectorJump routine. Here, depending on the viewing
    point, either the
    fuselage or the gun is displayed first.


    ;*** Start of Main Aircraft Code ***

    :L00140E
    Call( :L001414 )
    Return

    Depending on the point of view decides whether
    to call the machine-gun or the aft fuselage first.
    ------------------------------------------------
    :L001414
    VectorJump( :L00142C m 32767 0 0 415.000000 )

    Call( :L001550 )
    Call( :L001436 )
    Return
    :L00142C
    Call( :L001436 )
    Call( :L001550 )
    Return

    Machine gun code
    ----------------
    :L001436
    VecPoints(8) + ShadedColor+ Shadedpolyīs + Return

    Aft Fuselage code
    -----------------
    :L001550
    VecPoints(15) + ShadedColor+ Textured polyīs + Return

    :L00182E
    EndA
    ;;;End of Latitude Range

    Note: If the gun were to be glued to the left side, there would be
    a
    minus signin front of the first of the VectorJump parameters:
    VectorJump( :L00142C m -32767 0 0 415.000000 ).

    An interesting exercise!
    It is easier to understand in small chunks, so this would be Step 1
    of a possible tutorial, and the previous post would have been Step 2!

    Further good luck with your mousable gauge manufacture!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; January 24th, 2018 at 01:10.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  22. #97

    Strange AA Artifact eliminated.

    Hello Ivan, Hello Smilo,
    I managed to clean up the AF99 build of the armed version that had
    the strange "artifact", to re-build the SCASMed version without it.

    There was a redundant, badly placed glue-glitch left over from a building
    change, and as soon it was gone, the resulting AA-caused "artifact" in the
    SCASM code was also gone. The model looked clean enough before, but
    now I KNOW itīs cleaner!

    For the moment, for the sake of accuracy, Iīll leave this night-camo, armed
    model just with dorsal machine-gun and frontal cannon, corresponding to
    the ones recovered from the Norwegian lake. Also, it will be a transport, like
    the ones that were transporting some cannons and supplies to the Norwegian lake
    where the Germans were putting up a base, but they
    were attacked by suprise
    when they landed on the ice-covered lake. Later, when the ice
    thawed, the planes
    sank.


    Then, in order to have a sideways-firing model, Iīll make a separate "gunship"
    version, this time with the 830 Hp engines. Thereīs a photo of one, also in
    camo-colouring, which Iīm trying to decypher the registration number for.
    This model will then be the bomber with 1100 lb bombs.

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  23. #98

    4 guns on Auntie Ju.

    Hello Folks,
    I managed to put in the two lateral firing guns I wanted for a Ju52/3m e7g "Gunship", as it were.

    The two structures go on the fuselage sides between wing trailing edges and tailplane,
    but gluing them to the aft-fuselage sides was not a good idea, although SCASM accepted it,
    because there were bleeds with the inner-wing and flap when seen from the top.

    So, I grouped them in Inner Wing left/right with a glue template between them and the flaps,
    which in turn were at the end of a glue sequence with inner-wing and wing-root.

    This worked fine, and SCASMed well too. The model looks clean and works well.

    However, despite working with a 145.6% parts count (1165 parts) AF99 model, 10 parts
    below the "recommended safety margin", there was once again an AA "Artifact", a strange,
    two-step Jump, right into the middle of the left wing again, but this time without there being any
    reason for it in the AF99 listing. Needless to say, I just scrubbed it, and everything works fine!

    Now Iīm trying to get Dp Editor to do its job for the side-guns, and I have to see about what
    registration number to put on, and perhaps Iīll do beige-green camo textures for it.


    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  24. #99
    Hello Aleatorylamp,

    As I was saying earlier:
    The actual Parts limitation before a project starts to misbehave is not very predictable.
    I find with my own projects and building style that 1175 of 1200 Parts generally doesn't cause problems
    but sometimes the limit is higher and sometimes it is lower.
    Or perhaps the problems are already created and just not apparent yet.

    - Ivan.

  25. #100
    Hello Ivan,
    Yes, I agree - that seems to be the case.
    This time I havenīt been able to track down a visible cause,
    but there are no "damaging" effects on the model, so at least
    the model can be used.

    As regards how glue sequences are handled, I also understand
    that one thing is where an element actually appears in the SCASM
    listing, and quite another is how often and where it is called from.

    This only possible to understand by tracking the Calls for a given
    part, and compare the pattern to how others are called.

    Just after the *** Start of Main Aircraft Code *** there is a large
    chunk of code over 1000 lines long, that just does Vectorjumps,
    Jumps and Calls, before actually drawing anything, and to try to get
    a general picture of what is going on is of course impossible without
    detailed analysis.

    When you think that the way in which this kind of automatically
    generated "Z"
    Buffer actually works was created by someone,
    even if it is not as
    perfect as the modern "Z" Buffers contained in
    later simulators, it is
    still quite an amazing feat. Those guys really had
    an extremely high
    3D visualization capacity!

    Anyway, right now Iīm following the built-in Dp Editor instruction lines
    to make the lateral guns fire sideways and the rear one backwards,
    (with TG2 installed), but it is difficult to see the results, because
    apparently they can only do it when there is actually an enemy to
    fire at.

    Now Iīve got 4 different models together - letīs see if I can get a few
    into the dispatch department. The unarmed ones will be quicker to finish
    as there are no guns to fire!

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

Members who have read this thread: 0

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •