Rypley's Hangar
-
@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…
-
End of the thread I guess
-
@Rypley said in Rypley's Hangar:
I believe I’ve achieved a decent amount on details, but what do YOU think? should it have more? Please let me know.
(do keep in mind that this is just the plain model with a material asigned to distinguish everything.)I already was wondering, how it looks so different to the pictures @Rypley posted. Did you even work together with him @AlejandroFAV-0 ?
-
So we have to wait 'till @Rypley himself comes up and clear up the situation.
For now it’s safe to assume posts by @AlejandroFAV-0 have little to do with Rypleys work.
I find it a bit sad, because it leads to mistrust to other that may come and offer genuine contributions. -
That’s why we are picky and will remain picky on 3D models…
Hard to see what is legitimate from what is fraud… -
@Xeno Nevertheless, he Alejandro said :
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
That was pretty crystal clear…
Radium
-
@Korbi
Yes, and the model shown was used as a 3D base but with personal license, since I purchased a copy for educational use. Ripley is doing the detailing but we are moving forward little by little, that is why I have requested tik nik (FCNP) for error checking in future releases. -
You can call me ignorant or anything else you want, it does not strikes me at all.
Beta version has a very clear definition : *beta testing is the next phase, in which the software is tested by a larger group of users, typically outside of the organization that developed it". It means that what you show is by far very close to what you want to release.
When a game or an addon is under beta, the final release will be mostly based on this testing build. It’s not my definition, it’s a world’s consensus of all IT development groups.
It still does not explain why there is two cockpits (the first one by Ripley, and the second, that you far more than mostly reused from a third party source. Both are obviously, and you don’t deny it, totally different models.
So, no need to be insulting or anything : everyone here is mislead by this project, especially because we all waited for Ripley’s known as legitimate F-16A cockpit.
Btw, you obviously know who is legitimate here or not. Better to keep calm on this topic.
Radium
-
Alright, things got hairy around here so let me state the facts crystal clear:
- Yes, I am working with Alejandro, as he has connection with the air force for further developing.
- Yes, the cockpit that he is releasing is to be strictly a beta with no purpose of being integrated into the BMS core, rather act as a booster for those who can code, present the opportunity to code the avionics of the older model.
- No, again, this is not my model, because I am still working on it and it will be the final model, The collaboration presented is related to help with 3D modelling questions and general 3D design help.
- I completely understand the devs position on to not implement or have anything to do with it because free to use licenses doesn’t equal to complete reign over the model and I do believe Alejandro should’ve said that from the very beginning that the model is from a third party developer
- I’ll still understand your decision on the future of this project based on this answer as most of the BMS devs have decades of experience on management and have criteria on what should be done from here.
Hope this clarifies this situation.