Lockheed Constellation (new developer)

[dzignguy]

Hi,
I am new to this forum. I am a retired architect and have started doing a full scale 3D digital model of the L-049 -L-749 Constellations. I have been an AutoCAD user for many years in my profession and have recently moved over to MAX for more dynamic modeling and visualization presentations.

I am also an old pilot that flew for many years and had to hang up his wings due to a health condition. As a kid the one airplane that fascinated me most was the Lockheed Constellation. I had the fortune to travel with my grandparents several time to Europe on a KLH Connie and a TWA Super G. My Uncle was a pilot for TWA and flew the New York to London route first in L-749's and later in a Starliner. So my first aircraft development will be the early Constellation.

I have actually modeled most of the exterior of a L-049 Constellation with animateable landing gear with steerable nose gear, control surfaces, flaps and gear doors. Im just starting to model the engine and starting the texture work. Any way to make a long story short I want to take this model and some subsequent models into MSFS and possibly X-Plane. I can model but I have no idea what is needed to get this thing ready for FS2002-2004.

I understand UVW mapping and have done texturing for architectural visualiztion but have no idea how FS2002-2004 maps. Any pointers here will be helpful to say the least. I am in the process of taking my High poly model into GMAX and getting it more consistant with a low poly model. Can someone tell me what the limits for poly and texture sizes are in FS? I'm shooting for under 4000 polygons for the model but dont know how easy this is going to be since my current model has in excess of 20,000.



Anyway, I will be glad to share my files with anyone that shows true interest and qualification for this project. This will be a freeware aircraft when done. I already have the high poly model in GMAX and am about two days away from having a low poly model ready. Any help or advice will be appreciated.

John

BTW I plan on texturing at least 5 liveries for my early model Constellations and will eventually do the Super and Starliners as well.

[Firestriker]

John,

If your model is 20,000 polys you well within any limits for FS2002. Some like the Meljets are approaching the 100,000 mark. Real frame rate killers on low and medium range PCs.

If you are using 3dsMax all you need to get your model in to FS2002 is the Panda X file exporter. Then you can compile to a *.mdl (flyable vehicle) or *.bgl (scenery object) using the Makemdl.exe compiler from the SDK.

Texturing is not to bad... start small and work your way up. The main thing you have to remember is that textures need to be square and divisible by 4 for the most part... 4x4, 16x16, 32x32, 64x64, 128x128, 256x256, 512x512, 1024x1024. Also keep them simple at first, by that I mean 8bit, 256 color bmp format. As you become more accustomed to working with them you can move up to the more complex types of files and will learn what is used where and how they function in the sim. Just remember, you CAN'T use 24bit bmp files in the sim.

Lou

[dzignguy]

Lou,
Thanks for the good info. I went and downloaded the Panda X exporter and it seems to do exactly as advertised. Nice stuff!

I have been doing architectural visualiztion for a number of years so I have a very good grasp of UVW mapping and texturing but was kind of unsure of how MSFS handled this issue. Thanks for your explanation!

I also am still a little unclear on smoothing and how MSFS handles that. I have a number of options in MAX as to how I handle smoothing. However I'm not clear as to how those options will effect the way the model is rendered in the 2002-4 versions of MSFS.

I slightly understated the size of my detail model. 600,000 polys and climbing, as I dont have all exterior features done yet. The engine model could be that much and more before I finish. Additionally, I havent even started on the interior yet. On the good side, the low poly edition is now down to around 34000 and there is more room to reduce further. I will use maps instead of polygons to show some less important features like wheels, hinges, vents, scoops, doors, links, nuts bolts, etc and landing gear detail. A reduction of another 20% or more.

BTW, the one advantage I see that Gmax has is the ability to colaborate with those that dont have MAX. MAX 5.1 is far more advanced but Gmax is a great tool for the flight simulation groups. The quality of models available since it's inception has grown measurably. And to those that think the Gmax route is cumbersome.........Just try and do a great model in X-Plane's Plane Maker and one knows that theres got to be a better way...........That system needs a *.max or *.dxf import filter BAD!
You can sure tell there are a lot of left brained people in charge of that system!

Thanks again for the pointer to Panda!

John

[xfeed]

Sounds interesting! What I would recommend, since you have Max5.1 with all the modelling/texturing tools, is to use texture baking. Take your high poly model, nicely unwrap it and render to texture using Max's advanced lighting (or radiosity if you like). Then you have a superb texture which you can apply to your low poly model. Using this technique I would estimate your polygon count to be as low as 25000 or so and the Connie would still look great.
Check for following keywords in Max's online help: "texture baking", "render to texture", "advanced lighting", "skylight", "unwrap uvw".
That should get you going. ;)

[dzignguy]

Firestriker:
Great project! I like that bus! At least you can get yours to appear in MSFS. I'm not even close yet! Oh well thanks for the encouragement I will keep on pluggin till it goes. My current model is going to have to stay Hi detail and I am building a new Flight Sim model more in the Greg Pepper Style of work. I have flown several of his GMAX aircraft and they all work very well so if I get anywhere close I'll be happy. A couple of more days and I'll have it ready to start plugging in a mdl file.

XFeed:
Very good idea, I'll give it a try. We actually tried to load the low poly model last night and it is throwing so many errors that I think there is a problem with the way I constructed it. I really want to learn all of this process from front to back so I wont gripe about having to do a new low poly model. I'm familiar with texture baking and how to unwrap UVW so that isnt a problem for me. I just dont have a good knowlege of how MSFS does the mesh smooth if any at all and if it will use my smoothing groups as it is in the file. This information is real important to me as it dertermines what strategy I use to make the model.

I'm a real fan of the Sub division (SUB-D) method of modeling but I have a real suspision that this is not useful in MSFS. If I'm wrong please correct me. None of the GMAX models I've seen, that were done for MSFS, are compilations of mesh objects assembled into an aircraft. Not bad, just a little more crude than I expected..........In any case thanks for the reply and useful pointers.

[xfeed]

Well, the SUB-D helps insofar, as if you stick to the rules for Sub-D (only Quads), your model will look just fine in COF.
I just went through the (somewhat painful ;)) process of modelling in Max5 for COF. Usually the errors (I believe you refer to the errors when using MakeMdl) fall in two categories:
1. fatal: a) when two vertices are colocated (weld before you export)
b) when you applied scaling to an object (use "affect object only" and then "reset scaling")
2. non-fatal: The faces look flipped in COF. This happens when you mirrored an object. Use "Reset XForm" and then collapse to editable Poly.
That's all there is to it. After following the rules to avoid these two problems everything should turn out fine. ;)
Some more ideas:
Smoothing groups work fine. Multi-/Subobject materials work fine. Composite materials don't, like everything that is dependent on Alpha-Maps (except for the props). So better solve windows by geometry and assign another mat-ID to them.

[dzignguy]

Martin,

Great answers! Ok, first, pardon my ignorance but COF? Anyway, Most of the errors were solvable. However, at the end I kept getting fatal errors and I can only say that they were probably due to scaling during part of my original construction of the fuselage and wing areas. Another problem was the mirror porblem if you dont use the modifier from the drop down list instead of the tool bar mirror. Didnt remember that one until Tom Gibson brought it up via Email.

I know I can do the Sub-D fairly accurately except that it's implamentation in MAX is a little quirky and you end up doing square corners in a way that requires more polygons if your just going to use smoothing groups and not go for the nurms smoothing in Mesh Smooth. Since that doesnt appear to be part of FS8 or 9 it seems to be easier to go the other route. I just finished a fuselage and wing assembly by going the simpler route and I cut polys by 60%. If I'm wrong please get me squared away...... :) Thanks again! This disccourse is very helpful!

john

[xfeed]

COF = a Century Of Flight
If you check the error log of MakeMdl it pretty accurately describes the problems: if you see something like "colocated" you need to weld vertices, if it complains about "has scaling matrix without animation keys..." you need to reset the scaling.
I can't follow what you mean by "square corners" that require "more polygons". What I meant is, that you don't use Sub-D for the models, just ensure that your basemesh follows the same modelling principles as if you would lateron apply an iteration or two of MeshSmooth over it and it would still look ok. You are right, Sub-D isn't supported by FS9; your models appear as in the Max viewports.
Regarding polygon-count: possibly I'm a bit picky here, but as far as I can see a lot of models use too many of them. Especially with the superb texturing tools of Max there often is no need to solve minor details by geometry. I would consider anything above 10K as high-poly and unnecessarily detailled for in-game application. ;)

[dzignguy]

Ok, let me see if I can explain this. When I model with the anticipation of using one or two iterations of Nurms Mesh Smooth via the Mesh Smooth modifier there are several things that need to be done to keep extruded holes, such as gear bays, etc. from having rounded corners. I realize that there are other strategies to model these features but it you want one, homogeneous part, there are hoops you have to jump through, mesh wise, to get square corners to look square. This is if they are "mesh smoothed" via the pull down modifier. I'm sure from your responses that you understand this reality....

Anyway I have a picture of the first trial load of the bard fuselage/wing/empenage assembly in FS8. I have no idea what's going on but I have an idea that the symetry modifier and some of the techniques I used to extrude poly's in this model are causing this problem. What do you think? At least I know my Connie is going to fly someday soon!

http://webpages.charter.net/dzignguy/images/connie2.jpg

Best Regards,
John

[dzignguy]

Martin,

Great Bonanza! Excellent strategy on your poly placement. What's the total on that beauty? I have learned so much from other modelers wire frames. They are just like a puzzle but if you study any of them enough, you can pick up a little hint here and there and eventually you get better and better. Your Bonanza has some really nice ideas for me. Thanks for the display! I love to model and for years I kept to just solid modeling architectural structures but now that I've ventured out into this organic, and mehanical world things are so much fun again!

Ok, I have a problem with doing what you describe with that particular model. It is a revised edition of a much higher poly, detailed model done over the last couple of months and this model's stack was colapsed before moving into Gmax. Fortunately, I have many iterations of the model during the building stages, before the collapse but they are still way tooooooo big. 400,000 polygons without the meshsmooth. This of course includes all the Windows, control surfaces, landing gear, wheels, doors, cowls, cowl flaps, gear bays, doors and many more features. Taking this back to a low poly model is not feasable because the strategies I used here will cause me more time to rework than I can build a new MSFS model. The other advantage is that I learn more and more each time I do a rework. Sometimes I get bored and then the project is set aside. However, the Connie is a very dear project for me and I'm not even close to that point yet.

I have tried turning the normals on faces and and rebuilding other areas that were wierd. The image above is one that I had worked on for hours before I even got that to display. I started with just a few polys here and there so that I couldnt even recognize what the heck it was.

I am almost back to the full fuselage, wing and empenage assembly with only 3000 polygons and I will start testing it today to see If I have it figured out. I will post what I get then. Thanks so much for the suggestions, it helps alot.

John