On the legacy importer, once you have clicked the Import button an extra set of tabs appear, select the Runway one and select all elements.I have no idea what you mean?
This should create a runway.flt file that tells MSFS to start the engines when you begin a flight
Pretty sure I have instruments in DaveG's Mosquito (and Beaufighter) - are they covered by white circles?
If so it's just a transparency issue again.
I should be home tomorrow and can post the fix I used.
Cheers
Keith
My Mossie & Beau both have fully modelled instruments so they should work fine. As Keith had said, it's probably the glass texture over the instruments that's the problem.
Edit:
Works fine here. Make sure you convert the "gauge highlight.bmp" to dds though.
Last edited by DaveWG; December 6th, 2020 at 10:46.
This Mossie looked great before, but now looks better than ever in MSFS.
I agree!
jk9450
You can find most of my repaints for FSX/P3D in the library here on the outhouse.
For MFS paints go to flightsim.to
Dino's great FSX/P3D jets ported over. Still working on getting the HUDs to work in either.
It worked for the Liberator!Originally Posted by keithb77
On the legacy importer, once you have clicked the Import button an extra set of tabs appear, select the Runway one and select all elements.
This should create a runway.flt file that tells MSFS to start the engines when you begin a flight
Pretty sure I have instruments in DaveG's Mosquito (and Beaufighter) - are they covered by white circles?
If so it's just a transparency issue again.
I should be home tomorrow and can post the fix I used.
Cheers
Keith
jk9472
but for the Mossie I still have to find the right conversion
jk9489
You can find most of my repaints for FSX/P3D in the library here on the outhouse.
For MFS paints go to flightsim.to
I would like to convert the XF-92A to MSFS use. Can someone help point me in the right direction? I'm quite lost in all the conversions/tools. What are people using. Perhaps a dedicated thread about converting might be useful. I can start one if needed...
MACH 3 DESIGN STUDIO
Heatblur Rivet Counting Squad™
Use the MSFS Legacy Importer by TheAlx from https://www.nexusmods.com/microsoftf.../117?tab=files
There are lots of tutorials about but at the base level it's very simple.
For best results you need an FSX-native model with 3D gauges (ie not GAU and not XML)
Supersonic flight doesn't work BTW.
Cheers
Keith
Be aware that the legacy importer doesn't convert the models, so they are still in fsx format. You won't be able to have pbr textures, also the bump maps don't work.
Thanks guys. I guess there's no point then...I lost the PBR converted model I made when I lost my HDD prior to my new build and Milton (I believe) is only working in FSX at this time. Plus the VC uses .gau gauges and not 3D gauges....and the whole thing is XML coded. lol.....oh well..that beauty will have to be relegated back into the annals of history...again! Was fun while it lasted!
MACH 3 DESIGN STUDIO
Heatblur Rivet Counting Squad™
Fear not! You can still convert your aircraft to MSFS format, and your XML code will still work - however a quick buzz through the converter won't be possible. Conversion to gLTF isn't too horrendous though, and creating Lvars for your custom code using the new "modelbehaviors" method in MSFS is tough to learn but once you get the hang of it things come together pretty quickly. I see no reason why you couldn't bring this beautiful bit of work into MSFS - just seeing all that metal surely would be reason enough
I wish I had enough time to finish writing everything I sta...https://www.facebook.com/DC-Designs-2156295428024778/
That is great news! But I'm no coder! I will gladly do the texture conversions though. I made the originals and still have all the original PSD's. But I'm not skilled in the model or coding department.
MACH 3 DESIGN STUDIO
Heatblur Rivet Counting Squad™
So looking at this "tool" it appears beyond my pay grade....not sure how it's supposed to be used? I would love to work on this project with someone who has more technical knowledge on how to bring it into the sim. I can work the textures after that. But this is great news that it can be done.
EDIT: This is where I'm start making the winking plea for wizards like those who hang around here...gman, century series, bomber... you know who you are! Who doesn't like pro-bono work for an early heavy metal jet!? LOL.
This would actually give me a chance to make new normals for the bumps.
Last edited by Mach3DS; December 8th, 2020 at 12:45.
MACH 3 DESIGN STUDIO
Heatblur Rivet Counting Squad™
Whilst waiting for the Goose
I only got one shot of the Flight Replicas P-40N, I was having too much fun. It ports very well, with some minor glass issues, but I've never had such a squirrelly, or more realistic takeoff and landing. It felt ALIVE!! And I had to "fly" this thing from taxi to shut down, just like the real deal.
Also got my beloved Hellcat in the sim. It has a droopy elevator, and can't get rid of the bombs, but otherwise does okay.
So the question is... with all these legacy imports is there a reason for devs to
a. Make dedicated models of the models already converted for PC users ?
b. Bother in making dedicated models at all if people are converting legacy models over for PC users ?
reason I ask is you never see screenshots of the interiors. ( dedicated or legacy ) It seems to me, that is the way MSFS is being used, as a showcase of exterior models with a nice backdrop. That's not to say that there's anything wrong with that just it's a bit odd. Currently I think most devs would agree that the MSFS workflow is fine and dandy, but differs so greatly from ESP based workflow that it is adding double the time to dev time.
I'm sure this will trigger someone out there, so this post was not aimed at anyone in general it was only a comment on the current community climate and am genuinely interested in peoples opinions on the need for dedicated models for PC.
Legacy conversions are toys at best and have many many issues, so yes plenty of reasons for Devs to update and complete native conversions.
Also legacy conversions don't get all the new bells and whistles like interactive checklist and PBR, so a native will always look better.
However there is also a significant quality difference between default FSX and default MSFS so that requires additional work for anyone doing native conversions. They take longer then the 30 mins it takes to do a port over. I've been working on the Goose native conversion for over a month now and I have an initial release I want to get out for Christmas but still so much to do until a final release.
Quality takes time.
Converted portover planes are full of quirks, they don't get the MSFS flight model, they have sound issues, etc.
I wish everyone wasn't as mercenary about rivet-counting native MSFS planes so we could get some true ports of FSX classic. I'd be okay with lower-res textures and more basic detail to fly some true ports (IE: 3D model processed in MSFS tools, MSFS flight model, but not the same level of visual fidelity as a from-scratch MSFS plane) of classic 50's jets, etc.
But having tried the automatic converter on some FSX/P3D favorites, having an automated portover being possible in NO way affects my desire for a real MSFS version of that plane. I don't want to deal with repeating sounds, broken switches, inaccurate flight models, and all the other cruddy experience stuff that comes from using the portover tools to bring in FSX models.
Sorry should have clarified the statement a little. Or add to it.
Say a dev is looking at making a westland lysander.
That dev currently has 2 branches to take. ESP ( fsx <> p3d materials are a thing but not as big as totally different game!! ) or MSFS.
Now if the community as a whole seems to be ok with lower resolution models that are meant for ESP based games then why would that dev make a dedicated version ? ROI being what it is, a fsx port /FSX native / P3d native development has to be the better bet in the PC space.
@DennyA : I'm confused by ports and portovers. A port to me is FSX MDL > GLTF without touching any source files. A portover is the same. When you say " true ports of FSX classic" are you talking about the source files being modified and output directly to GLTF? That makes it a dedicated model or at the least a hybrid doesnt it ?
Sure is tough to work out what the community expects nowadays!
Community expects planes that work.
Ports or port-overs, call them as you wish, don't work.
They more or less move in the new sim, they can even look quite good, but they don't work, they miss instruments, gauges, modules etc... which makes them unusable most of the times, excepted for screenshots.
jk9806
jk9802
jk9803
jk9809
jk9811
regarding Pilto's question:
what a developer makes is up to the developer of course. Me, I would love, for instance, to have this B-24 (portover from Flight Replicas) with all the bells and whistles, animations and what have you, in a native MSFS model. It would be an instant buy for me. Not so for P3D/FSX, I would never buy it, since I do not plan to go back there. As long as there is no native MSFS B-24, I'm perfectly happy flying this portover, even more than flying the other fully native aircraft than come with MSFS, since I'm not interested in tubes or GA. But hey, that's just me.
So I would say, yes, develop native MSFS models, even if a port is already available, as long as we're talking warbirds (or aircraft with large radial engines..)
You can find most of my repaints for FSX/P3D in the library here on the outhouse.
For MFS paints go to flightsim.to
Splitting hares, I'd say the FR Liberator and most of the pics posted here, are imports (done with the Legacy Importer solely for personal use) rather then port-overs where someone has done actual texture conversion (to GItF or whatever) and custom gauges/sounds/fm, with a view to some sort of publishing.
Imports are definitely stop-gaps, though some stop-gaps in the real world lasted for decades.
That said, the VC of (eg) the Liberator is pretty **** good, the gauges work with just a couple of glitches than can be smoothed out.
Looks better to me than in P3DV5... FR have themselves published VC screenshots on their FB page.
Radio/autopilot/switchology has to be done via the keyboard until (if) Asobo reinstate keypresses for legacy models.
Sounds are better now, I don't get repeating sounds anymore.
I did actually buy the Lib to use mostly in MSFS (and the DC4 and the 109) but that's just me.
Mostly imports are for those aircraft that will take a long time if ever to be released as MSFS native, not forgetting the Microsoft ban on visible weapons for an aircraft to be listed on the MS Store (where most sales will occur).
Cheers
Keith
Last edited by keithb77; December 18th, 2020 at 09:36.
I fully support OzWookie's comments. Straight ports from FSX are easy but heavily lacking in pretty much everything. A full conversion, with necessary improvements, takes a long time - three months for my F-15 Eagles so far, and they're not quite finished yet. More complex aircraft would of course take even longer.
The results are worth it though. I see no real difference between the thousands of purposefully freeware-developed aircraft for FSX, and the ports now appearing in MSFS: for those who have limited finances or simply don't want to pay, ports provide a welcome change to the sim's stock aircraft. A fully native aircraft though is, in comparison, worth its weight in gold, just as it always was, and will be sought out by fans of that aircraft type. The more there are, the more choice there will be, and the more users who will come to our hobby when they find out their favourite aircraft has finally arrived
Members who have read this thread: 6
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks