|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Oct 15, 2014 15:22:31 GMT -5
Hi,
Yes, that is the default FSX grass polygons. Lovely, eh?
DXT1 custom ground textures do not display in FSX, as I remember.
|
|
|
Post by leutnantwerner on Oct 16, 2014 7:21:33 GMT -5
Hi, you guys got me by the balls, it is of course the underlying standard texture. The KLAX 1959 picture shows the original FS9 airport file (AFCAD) imported by ADEX, put a global exclude over the scene and exported it with ADEX to FSX. Most of the Fs9 landclass files don't show up right or causing weired effects, so I left them out. KLAX 1962: This 1962 scenery was made in a whole different approach. I create a new ADEX airport, taxiways, parkings and runways are *hand made* painted over an image of the original CalClassic scenery. Here I used a grass background texture. Also, it appears you are missing a ground texture that I created for Avalon. If I recall correctly, it is called asphalt_lot. The area near the terminal and the old Wrigley hangar is supposed to be degraded asphalt, not bare dirt. That same texture is also used in other sceneries, so if its not showing up at Avalon, it will be missing at other places, also. Thank you Mike, so this texture may be missing in my Fs9 installation too, I will change this. May be once upon the time we will get native FSX CalClassic scenery objects, textures and ai aircraft,- to fix the frame rate claim? Pls. don't beat me, I'm already on my way... Bernie
|
|
|
Post by Bjoern on Oct 16, 2014 10:40:54 GMT -5
May be once upon the time we will get native FSX CalClassic scenery objects, textures and ai aircraft,- to fix the frame rate claim? Scenery objects, libraries, aircraft, etc...can all be converted with ModelConverterX. With MCX' batch conversion mode, you can convert a whole bunch of stuff in a short amount of time. It might be worth simply giving it a try that and then doing a more specialized conversion of any objects that exhibit rendering bugs in FSX. Converting textures is not necessary as FSX reads most .bmp formats just fine. Using .dds textures in FSX is a wee bit more efficient though. DDS can even be used for models and objects made for FS9 in FSX. AI aircraft conversion is possible if you bring enough time and are willing to sacrifice any visibility-triggered objects like airstairs and prop disks. The process is outlined here: www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=Converting_AI_aircraft_to_FSX_with_Model_Converter_XNote: Any conversion done with MCX won't be as good as doing it from scratch, but it's better than havong no FSX native models at all.
|
|
|
Post by jacklyon on Oct 17, 2014 3:39:20 GMT -5
Good to know! The batch processing on MCX! It's an alternative.
Anyway, for my case i choose to continue work for FS91 for CC sceneries, i prefer make grow our CC World (in South America and Europe), than spend my time in convert process and the true it's i not have enough time to do both things these days.
With, of course, the (big) exception of my current project "Rhone Alpes 1960 for P3D/FSX", the next scenerys, and the others scenerys in progress, will be done all for FS91 native.
FS91 it's an old sim, yes, but work perfectly for our CC World, and more important, i use it weekly.
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by leutnantwerner on Oct 17, 2014 3:45:27 GMT -5
Before you will use the CC ai traffic at all you need to convert the traffic files into the FSX xml format. Otherwise you will not be able to see the naval traffic. I did the conversion but the FSX traffic compiler cried out loud about errors in the decompiled FS9 files. I would like to remember about a post of mine in May: Here the original link of the traffic files if needed: FSX_CC_AI_Flightplans.zipScenery objects, libraries, aircraft, etc...can all be converted with ModelConverterX. With MCX' batch conversion mode, you can convert a whole bunch of stuff in a short amount of time. It might be worth simply giving it a try that and then doing a more specialized conversion of any objects that exhibit rendering bugs in FSX. ... ... Note: Any conversion done with MCX won't be as good as doing it from scratch, but it's better than havong no FSX native models at all. I did this already with the CalClassic scenery object files, while fixing the FSX default transparency problem, that Tom mentioned whenever someone is talking about CC conversion. At least this is a beginning, maybe a little step, to push the mother of it all, the masterpiece of Tom's webside, "The California Classic Scenery" to those users who may have other priorities/feelings in our flight simulation hobby. Cheers Bernie
|
|
|
Post by Bjoern on Oct 17, 2014 11:15:21 GMT -5
At least this is a beginning, maybe a little step, to push the mother of it all, the masterpiece of Tom's webside, "The California Classic Scenery" to those users who may have other priorities/feelings in our flight simulation hobby. For me, it's trees and houses. That's why I'm using FSX.
|
|
|
Post by ejoiner on Oct 17, 2014 22:22:52 GMT -5
I will move to FSX the day that all the scenery here at CC is available for that sim, all the effects and other special things we do in FS9 are available for FSX, I can get over 25 fps with my CC AI traffic at 100% at KJFK and KLAX on my reasonably powerful computer (but not a monster), and it loads as fast as FS9. Not yet... Well, I held out for a full 5 years past FSX launch with FS9 for the same reasons. When MS decided to finally kill off support for XP, I got a new high powered PC, and decided to go FSX finally. For the most part, I am happy with it. I left some old planes I loved in the past to go forward with a new sim in a new environment. However, I am thinking more and more about P3D and the next thing. I generally am a slow adopter these days. I used to want every beta out there and did in fact beta test CFS, CFS2, FS2002, FS9, FSX, and many combat flight sims back in the day. Im pretty much done iwth that now. Give me something that just works. If I only lived in the classic propliner world for sims, and had the PC resources to run it then I would keep doing that for as long as I wanted. In fact, i still have my old XP computer which runs just fine and has FS9 installed and highly tweaked. Its just not plugged up right now. Good luck with whatever your personal decision is. Lots of good flying left in FS9 for years but your world will have some increasingly finite edges. I think what really sent me to FSX was when Manfred Jahns cool stuff was FSX only. .... my biggest regret was loss of FSNavigator.
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Oct 18, 2014 11:09:10 GMT -5
I believe there is now an FSNav for FSX? Is it not the same?
|
|
|
Post by Bjoern on Oct 18, 2014 11:56:39 GMT -5
I believe there is now an FSNav for FSX? Is it not the same? Is that a flight planning tool?
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Oct 18, 2014 12:10:09 GMT -5
Yes it is.
|
|
|
Post by Bjoern on Oct 19, 2014 11:51:33 GMT -5
Ah. I use Plan-G for VFR stuff in FSX. Works very well.
|
|
|
Post by zswobbie1 on Oct 20, 2014 1:39:33 GMT -5
There is a tool very similar to FSNav called FSTramp (www.fstramp.com. Very nice indeed, although not free, BUT will give you 20x sessions free!!
|
|
|
Post by milspecsim on Nov 4, 2014 11:48:19 GMT -5
I will move to FSX the day that all the scenery here at CC is available for that sim, all the effects and other special things we do in FS9 are available for FSX, I can get over 25 fps with my CC AI traffic at 100% at KJFK and KLAX on my reasonably powerful computer (but not a monster), and it loads as fast as FS9. Not yet... THIS! FSX is just too resource heavy. One of these days, (after I build the Haswell rig) ill try it again. Possibly the newest version of P3D.
|
|