Freight planes pak... fly me to the goods

[vilvoh]

1. Is it possible to make it slightly larger? it looks a bit like a Dragonfly buzzing around. 2.

I'm afraid that the size is the largest possible for helicopters at pak64 scale. I made a lot of test and If you paint it larger, it won't fit on the scale and will be larger than other bigger airships like the CL-44 or the ATL-98 Cavair. Perhaps it looks like a dragonfly by the shape it has when it's empty. When it's full, it carries a container, so it looks like a pregnant dragonfly..

Would it be difficult to make it behave like a Helicopter? as in vertical take off and landing. Please remember I'm clueless when it comes to programming, so I'm asking out of sheer ignorance.

This issue has been already discused here and at the archive. The conclusions we got were..

Helicopters which take off and land vertically would require new code,

but there's a ray of hope..see the following quote from Timothy.

However, if you are content to have them take off and land like airplanes (you could use a very short runway for them or something) then feel free to draw some  Often features in Simutrans come about because of people drawing things, if there are helicopter graphics ready, the coding is more likely to be done for them.

P.S: I've added new helicopters to the To-DO list.

[vilvoh]

The Mil Mi-6x series are finished. They are between the Chinook and the CH-54...a capacity between 19 and 23 units, faster and heavier than Chinook and CH-54. They're more expensive than Chinook but cheaper than CH-54, and they have a service period of 30-40 years from 1962 to 2021.

[Colin]

The Mil Mi-6x series are finished. They are between the Chinook and the CH-54...a capacity between 19 and 23 units, faster and heavier than Chinook and CH-54. They're more expensive than Chinook but cheaper than CH-54, and they have a service period of 30-40 years from 1962 to 2021.

Downloaded and installed. Many thanks, I will try them shortly.

[skreyola]

I downloaded the VM-T plane, but it doesn't show up in my hangar. Was there a config tweak required, or an updated version of the plane's pak file available? What am I doing wrong?
I know there are tanker planes (though commercial transport usually uses ships) in real life, at least the refueling planes, so taking off and landing with liquid cargo should be possible... but the VM-T is the only plane I have heard of in simutrans that does it.
Thanks for all the vehicles.

[vilvoh]

I downloaded the VM-T plane, but it doesn't show up in my hangar. Was there a config tweak required, or an updated version of the plane's pak file available? What am I doing wrong?

Check out If you're playing with timeline. It has intro and retire dates. If you've the timeline enabled, it won't be available before and after these dates.

Code Select Expand

intro_year=1981
retire_year=1990

I've tested it with v102.2 with pak64 102 and it works.

[skreyola]

Check out If you're playing with timeline. It has intro and retire dates. If you've the timeline enabled, it won't be available before and after these dates.

Code Select Expand

intro_year=1981
retire_year=1990

I've tested it with v102.2 with pak64 102 and it works.

Thank you. That was it. I feel stupid.

[Hagablabah]

1930 Gatwick terminal finished...no special night colors this time..

I went to get this one and Opera tells me it's corrupted. Could you reupload, please?

(everything you do is awesome, btw)

[vilvoh]

You were right. I've uploaded the zip again. Go to reply 101, and enjoy with the terminal...

[skreyola]

Hey, vilvoh, I am enjoying your goods aircraft immensely, but I'm having a little problem (at least when playing with them in Simutrans Experimental). They take 30000 loading time, which I'm told in another thread is the default and means that it wasn't set in the pak files of the particular aircraft. This shakes out to over 12 hours of game time, and I don't think it takes that long to load 15-30 crates.
Would it be difficult for you to put a more reasonable/realistic loading time in the pak files so the aircraft will load faster in Experimental?
Either way, thanks again for all the great vehicles.

[DirrrtyDirk]

The problem might be that this feature only exists in ST Exp., not in Standard  - and so far there's only one pakset supporting Exp.

[skreyola]

The problem might be that this feature only exists in ST Exp., not in Standard  - and so far there's only one pakset supporting Exp.

True. However, I was given to understand that a pakset/pak author could add a line to the definition that specifies a loading time. Perhaps the experimental version should have an option to make them load like in standard, or adjust the default loading time?
If nobody else makes supporting paksets, I'm going to have to stop using the Ex branch. Too many problems stemming from features that are crippling by default.

[Spike]

True. However, I was given to understand that a pakset/pak author could add a line to the definition that specifies a loading time.

Yes, but if compiled with standard makeobj, for Simutrans standard, it will still exhibit the same problematic behaviour in ST Experimental.

Only if the line is there and it is compiled with experimental makeobj it will have a different behaviour in ST Experimental. But IIRC suchlike pak files will not work in Simutrans standard.

So it seems, the author must add the line, compile twice with both makeobj versions, and offer both pak files ...

[z9999+]

If you felt default loading time is not good, that is your problem.

I don't know Simutrans-Experimental can adjust default loading time with simuconf.tab or not.

If it is possible, you can adjust by yourself.
If it is not possible, ask jamespetts to add such option.

[Isaac Eiland-Hall]

If you felt default loading time is not good, that is your problem.

I just want to step in and say, just in case it would otherwise become a problem: This sounds a little... abrupt to my ear, but I'm sure z9999+ completely didn't intend this. (That is, it sounds like it could have been abrupt, but I know it's not)

So in case anyone misunderstands, I believe I can say another way to put this is: "This is a feature of Simutrans Experimental, not of Simutrans Standard. Simutrans Standard cannot be expected to change for Simutrans Experimental; thus, this should be addressed on the Simutrans Experimental side of things"

And probably, since I took the time to write this, everyone will understand the original intent... but I thought: Just in case.

(For the record: I think the original statement sounds open to interpretation, but I know he was not being rude; I'm clarifying for those that might not realize which way to interpret it )

[VS]

Let me add some partially revolutionary information

1) AFAICT these planes are not part of any pakset, only addon, so talking about "sets supporting exp" is not entirely accurate.

2) Their sources should be available (complete) on g.s.c in the respective folder, since Vilvoh was really nice and actually put them there. The logical step is to grab all that material, modify to suit your needs and bake an exp-compatible version.

3) The level on which forward compatibility (exp→standard) works is the sources and nowhere higher in the chain. Thus the situation is somewhat painful for authors as they have to make two versions themselves, or expose everything.

[skreyola]

3) The level on which forward compatibility (exp→standard) works is the sources and nowhere higher in the chain. Thus the situation is somewhat painful for authors as they have to make two versions themselves, or expose everything.

1) True, but they do comprise a set in the generic sense.
2) That's a good idea.
3) Thank you for clearing that up. I agree that this is a bad situation, and it should not fall on the pak authors the way it does now.

So, the answer to my question is "Yes, it's difficult." and I withdraw the request.

[vilvoh]

Well, I must say that these planes have a large payload, most of them two or three times more payload than the biggest freight plane included in the official pak64 (If I'm not wrong It's a Beluga with 25 units) So it may take some time to load them.

On the other hand, I've read the other thread related with this topic at Simutrans Experimental board, and I must admit I didn't know STExp had that feature available. However, it's very difficult to make an addon compatible with such a different paksets, even more difficult when we are considering different simutrans versions. The balancing approach for STExp it's completly different from the Simutrans standard one.

Therefore, we can't talk about a set in the generic sense, as there're many different scenarios with a lot of possible variables to take into account. Sometimes it's feasible to develop an addon for several paksets, sometimes it's not. That's all.

Anyway, if you really want to play with this set using STExp, the sources are available (dat and png files) so you can modify them (seems that you only have to add just one attribute), remake the pak files and enjoy with the result..

[VS]

"Yes, it's difficult." and I withdraw the request.

The logical step is to grab all that material, modify to suit your needs and bake an exp-compatible version.

Perhaps unrelated, but if Simutrans could read dat+png instead of paks, half the compatibility would cease to be a problem...

[skreyola]

Well, I must say that these planes have a large payload, most of them two or three times more payload than the biggest freight plane included in the official pak64 (If I'm not wrong It's a Beluga with 25 units) So it may take some time to load them.

I have baked some of your planes into an STE pak. Having done this, I realize I must look like a perfect fool. You are correct that most of them have significant capacities. I did not realize this since the ones that looked most interesting to me (and therefore the ones I downloaded and installed) were the small ones, like the helicopters. Yes, the large ones will have long load times, and in my rebake, I ended up giving some of them a much longer load time than the default, but what I was actually intending to reference (I'm veeeeeeery sorry for the confusion I caused) were the helicopters, which have small capacities suited to, e.g., an ink line, and therefore should have a quick turnaround.
On that note, I wish to thank you again copiously for providing these aircraft, and moreso for providing the PNGs and DATs. I downloaded the dat files part 1... is there somewhere I've missed looking for part 2 (or whatever set features the bulk of the helicopters)?

(attachment updated in reply #160)

[vilvoh]

I downloaded the dat files part 1... is there somewhere I've missed looking for part 2 (or whatever set features the bulk of the helicopters)?

It's my fault. I forgot to upload the dat files of the second part. If you want to port them, I can send you the files.

The second set of dat files is available at graphics.simutrans.com.

P.S: Thanks for the STExp port.

[skreyola]

Thank you for making the sources available. Here is the updated pak zip with the xv-dats included inside.

P.S., it occurred to me my filename might be unclear... the flying crates refers to the crates of goods, not to the aircraft themselves, which are of extremely high quality.
@VS: What I meant by that was it was unreasonable for me to ask vilvoh to remake the pak for exper branch because it's not exactly a trivial thing, especially if he doesn't play with the exper branch.

[vilvoh]

I've been working on new helicopters from the Sikorsky family, in this case they're S-51 and S-55. I've about five color schemes for each model, so be prepared for a big set..

[vilvoh]

Another two ones: A long copter called Piasecki-H21 and a german plane from WWII called Horten IX V1. It's going to be a futuristic plane for mail..



P.S: Ops! I forgot to add the engines to the Horten IX V1 model..

[vilvoh]

The Piasecki set is almost finished. In addition to that, I had time to work in several new airport buildings like this one base on the future Beijing Airport Terminal..

us (site down, do not visit) ]/image/show/P6evDXxtMh/dragon-imperial-prev.png]

Another one called U85 Terminal..

us (site down, do not visit) ]/image/show/pWxsh4_MCC/u85-terminal-pre.png]

[Fuzzy Peach]

Would it be possible to render some of those PNG's for pak128 then downscale them. Because then it could be developed for both.

[vilvoh]

I may try it, but let me finish the pak64 version first..

[Fuzzy Peach]

Okay.

PS: Are you using something like blender or paint?

[vilvoh]

I use Blender and GIMP

[Fuzzy Peach]

Okay. So what if you lined them up in GIMP for pak128. Then downscaled them to work with pak64. The only other thing you'd have to do would be make the pak128 DAT file.

PS: If it's okay with you i could make the pak128 DAT files if you do that. I would put your name under copyright.

[vilvoh]

I use 3D models, rather easy to rescale, which means I can render (generate) the pak64 image, then rescale the model and render again in pak128 scale. I only use GIMP to fix small details before releasing the object. Anyway, I'm still making some test to find out which is best layout for Dragon Imperial Terminal..

PS: we can share the copyright of pak128 version..  

[Fuzzy Peach]

Okay. That would work. I think that that layout would work but with a little piece on one end where passengers would enter from a bus or train or something. Like the place in an airport before passing through security.

[vilvoh]

What I have in mind is to code the central part as an airstop and the arms of the terminal can be extension buildings, or the other way round.

[Fuzzy Peach]

I was thinking something like the attached photo. Where the small blocks are like the stuff you've already made and the Huge terminal hall is like the part before security. It's just a suggestion though.

EDIT: I attached a corrupted photo apparently. I'm going to re-upload.

[vilvoh]

That's exactly the idea. Take a look at the building in real life..

http://blog.hotelclub.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/beijing-airport-2.jpg

EDIT: I've already finished the tests and the result is top notch, isn't it?  

See the in-game screenshots, with and without traffic.

us (site down, do not visit) ]/image/show/WQFxfvpBei/simscr01.png] us (site down, do not visit) ]/image/show/DPDWrNqmMM/simscr04.png]

[Fuzzy Peach]

Those look great! I just see a few bugs. There are a couple of alignment issues with the centre piece and the exterior ones. And on the front end pieces it looks like there's a grayish wall behind and underneath it. I understand that underneath it is mean't to be there though.