Rypley's Hangar
-
just some small tips or info.
beign on DX for normals and in tangent color space is the thing for normals and BMS. blender is on OpenGL by default iirc.
high poly model on the high-low poly workflow doesn’t need uvw unwrap or mapping at all at least with substance painter (hope it’s the same for blender).
Using substance painter , again without actual knowledge on blender texturing, is quick, it helps with some anomalies or errors to be discovered in the transition and baking the basic maps from PT (PT=substance painter) also helps alot to find such hidden issues or have a great result.
The negative on the high-low poly workflow, is more time on the model and very good organization in order to be able to make changes if needed afterwards so not to search in a mess and mostly important to have a clean project as all this work will pass to BMS eventually and someone else in the future might have to deal with your model, so it must be clear in order to find his way in that.
using the High-Low poly workflow gives a great potential for more detailed models while you save triangles. But it introduces an important factor which is Texel-density. This is even without the term known to artists but with this workflow it comes even more important. So you might save tris in the model but in the UVW real estate you need more pixels, so your uv-islands (parts of the uvw of the 3D part) you must make them bigger , or increase the resolution or brake the texture from 1 to many. Here kicks in TexelDensity. This can assist if used correctly to determine Texel Density for your model parts and separate them to texel density groups and have an acceptable for u result without for every part going back and forth to fix things and maybe at the end to have to redo everything from scratch and save time.
Another important thing has to do with non English creators that use their native language to name parts in the 3D model.
So please use English and easy to understand names, example not “the upper thing” or “leva” or “changer” or whatever native word besides English.
If u ask well what we do with multipart objects? easy “piston-main” “piston-main-1” “piston-main-2”. I know it sounds harsh but besides future guys will also help you on a very complex model. -
@qawa any words on this?
I mean for the F-16A pit not for the workflow. -
You have teached me how to use PT, and I still not using Blender… so what you recommend to Rypley is the best! … our BMS community will have a perfect F16A, so I can abandon my idea of converting a half-built, incomplete cockpit, and I would need permission from the 3D modeler to distribute it… I can’t reach him anymore via email… At the moment I’m dedicate my time to a new project for 4.38.
The work Rypley is doing is wonderful, I open this thread every time to see his progress !
Rypley… if you need material photos, manuals, or anything else feel free yourself to send me a PM !PS: I finished editing the post now !!! lol
-
@Arty said in Rypley's Hangar:
just some small tips or info.
beign on DX for normals and in tangent color space is the thing for normals and BMS. blender is on OpenGL by default iirc.
high poly model on the high-low poly workflow doesn’t need uvw unwrap or mapping at all at least with substance painter (hope it’s the same for blender).
Using substance painter , again without actual knowledge on blender texturing, is quick, it helps with some anomalies or errors to be discovered in the transition and baking the basic maps from PT (PT=substance painter) also helps alot to find such hidden issues or have a great result.
The negative on the high-low poly workflow, is more time on the model and very good organization in order to be able to make changes if needed afterwards so not to search in a mess and mostly important to have a clean project as all this work will pass to BMS eventually and someone else in the future might have to deal with your model, so it must be clear in order to find his way in that.
using the High-Low poly workflow gives a great potential for more detailed models while you save triangles. But it introduces an important factor which is Texel-density. This is even without the term known to artists but with this workflow it comes even more important. So you might save tris in the model but in the UVW real estate you need more pixels, so your uv-islands (parts of the uvw of the 3D part) you must make them bigger , or increase the resolution or brake the texture from 1 to many. Here kicks in TexelDensity. This can assist if used correctly to determine Texel Density for your model parts and separate them to texel density groups and have an acceptable for u result without for every part going back and forth to fix things and maybe at the end to have to redo everything from scratch and save time.
Another important thing has to do with non English creators that use their native language to name parts in the 3D model.
So please use English and easy to understand names, example not “the upper thing” or “leva” or “changer” or whatever native word besides English.
If u ask well what we do with multipart objects? easy “piston-main” “piston-main-1” “piston-main-2”. I know it sounds harsh but besides future guys will also help you on a very complex model.Thanks for the recommendations Arty, I do appreciate them, Will do on the last tip so my posts become clearer
PD: yes, you do need to UV unwrap on blender to bake normals, tedious but it helps to already have the means to do a rough sketch of the model’s silhouette in a small file so i get to know ‘what is what’ when I’m on PT or PS.But I’ll try the workflow with PT as the normal baker to see how it goes, maybe I can even paint the models and import them to blender with textures already, I’ll have a go at it.
@qawa said in Rypley's Hangar:
You have teached me how to use PT, and I still not using Blender… so what you recommend to Rypley is the best! … our BMS community will have a perfect F16A, so I can abandon my idea of converting a half-built, incomplete cockpit, and I would need permission from the 3D modeler to distribute it… I can’t reach him anymore via email… At the moment I’m dedicate my time to a new project for 4.38.
The work Rypley is doing is wonderful, I open this thread every time to see his progress !
Rypley… if you need material photos, manuals, or anything else feel free yourself to send me a PM !PS: I finished editing the post now !!! lol
Thanks!! Will definitely PM soon
-
This project is in progress but the day-to-day work affects a lot… Good things will come soon for the BMS community
w
-
Greetings to everyone! I am planning to announce an update regarding the F-16A No MLU Cockpit. Together with my friend Ripley, we have collaborated on launching a beta version 1.0 of the cockpit in the coming weeks. However, a crucial requirement for the aircraft is the design of special avionics.
The FCNP (FIRE CONTROL NAVIGATION PANEL) is an older avionics system that served a similar function until it was replaced by the DED. I am familiar with its operation and manual, but I lack the expertise to design a comparable system. I hope that explanation clarifies things.
I am open to anyone who can assist me…
-
Awesome! Looking promising
-
It’s gonna be awesome, just add some high-res PBR textures to the mix
-
@Xeno
Greetings Xeno, thank you. I’ll add a high resolution texture. Do you know someone who knows how to do digital avionics? -
ohh… sh… is happening!! thanks Ale (mi tocayo) looks hopeful…!!
-
@AlejandroFAV-0 As it was posted, correct cockpit is the first step, once it’s there it’s a matter of finding BMS dev who’d be interested in doing F-16A avionics pack. I’m not in the team to tell you who could be it be, but AFAIK @tiag was doing L16 implementation, so maybe he could direct you to the ppl you could talk to. IIRC @chihirobelmo did at least some work on F-15, so he could be another person you could consider contacting.
WRT texturing, guys take a look at PBR techniques, 4.37u4 is gonna bring. Ability for all surfaces to have their own smooth/rough level, scratches and chipped paint done with normal-maps, no baked-in fake gloss/reflection on textures, that would be a game-changer.
Guys I wish you luck, I’m a big fan of this project since Rypley posted first message on the old BMS forum.
-
@Xeno Correct, the correct cabin is now done… My Friend Ripley is improving the work much more and we are personally working to make a beta…
Work takes up a lot of time in this regard.
But avionics is very important and the truth is I am not interested in putting a common DED like the updated blocks, it would not be correct if we wanted to talk about F-16 simulation, I thank you for your help @Xeno I hope someone you mentioned helps me with regarding this problem -
Finally a pit from the community!
There is no way to integrate a pit with new avionics without being in the team.
It requires a short loop on comms.
Said that, since I love cold war planes I can suggest internally that you join the dev team to finish this pit with us. A couple of things to clarify up front though:- The model will be handle over to BMS, stored in our servers, and we can modify it as we want in the future. Do you have any issue with that?
- I am not a fx guy, and I am more into how it “works” than how it “looks”. But I can def tell you that your textures/model still need some hard work (including PBR) to get into the standard of our new pits. Are you ok with that? Do you have time in the next 6 months for that?
- And finally, all switch/knobs logic implementation requires time. When started, it will take simply take time and it would be bad to simply halt in the middle. To give you an idea, the F-15 took three coders working every day (complete new avionics and switches) for about 4-5 months with Qawa to get what we have in U3. F-16A has many switches in common to -C, so potentially less work. So, I am asking you if you are willing to pull this over, it will be a commitment for the next half year or so. Do you have that endurance and time available?
Please post several pics of your latest pit in the best resolution you can.
-
@tiag I have no problem sharing it with the community and I am open to receiving any help…
I can commit to this avionics but the handling of manuals and books of extra information provided by the Lockeed of the aircraft cannot be by this means because these documents are clearly signed by the USA Air Force to a specific country and I do not want problems with that. That is why the commitment to information management must be mutual… I have the time to fulfill that cockpit.For the rest I can help you with the operation of this…
I will send you the images
-
@AlejandroFAV-0 Anyway…
https://publicintelligence.net/u-s-air-force-f-16ab-flight-manual/
Everything is here for manual…
The goal anyway os to make a USA standard F-16A cockpit, and not some export variant for a first release.
Radium
-
@RadiumIt’s really not what it seems… with a flight manual you can’t make a good cockpit and that’s it…
Specific manuals are needed for each avionics, especially FCNP avionics (which you won’t find on the internet), it would be a shame to add a DED there.
It’s really not what it seems… with a flight manual you can’t make a good cockpit and that’s it…
Specific manuals are needed for each avionics, especially FCNP avionics (which you won’t find on the internet), it would be a shame to add a DED there.
This is not a special export variant… this is an avionics tool until the MLU update was designed and the DED was added
-
@AlejandroFAV-0 I just meant that everything is available online. I know what is a flight manual, don’t worry for that. Everything can be found on internet.
If I said : The goal anyway os to make a USA standard F-16A cockpit, and not some export variant for a first release. it’s because F-16A of your country may not be exactly the one that was in service within USAF. So, Better not be influenced by non aircraft US manuals, when possible.
-
@AlejandroFAV-0 nice work! Since it is a cockpit and people will have to read dials and such, are you gonna make textures readable? though it does look mighty familiar…
-
Hello,
https://www.cgtrader.com/free-3d-models/aircraft/jet/f-16a-block-15-cockpit
I guess it’s yours ? isn’t it ?
If so, this means that you can’t transfer the property of this model to the team upon the demanded terms…
Also, this model would still be retrievable, through a .bml file within BMS DB.
Although it’s clearly not illegal to reuse this cockpit, it was not honest to present it as your work, because it was obviously not. Knowing that, we now can’t use it.
Nevertheless, I believe that you just misunderstood the terms of the license. Free to download does not means free to use as we want to !
Radium
-
I guess this is what we call intellectual honesty…