Hello
Now Zeppelin LZ127 (Graf Zeppelin)
Two version, one for standard and one for experimental (@ James may you insert experimental version in github? I don't have access to gitgui for one week).
Standard and Experimental version differ in running cost, less for standard, higher for experimental (experimental has high comfort and catering level).
Model isn't in scale, zeppelin was 236m length = 5 tile in simutrans ....
Attention: 256px tile
Giuseppe
Excellent! The Graf Zeppelin also had a mail capacity of 12 tons (Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeppelin_mail)), if you would like to include that.
One wonders what might have happened had the world not descended into darkness around the time of the Hindenburg disaster.
Hello
Quote from: wlindley on August 23, 2013, 03:05:35 PM
Excellent! The Graf Zeppelin also had a mail capacity of 12 tons (Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeppelin_mail)), if you would like to include that.
One wonders what might have happened had the world not descended into darkness around the time of the Hindenburg disaster.
I would like to create a model that was carrying mail and passengers at the same time, unfortunately with simutrans, for aircraft, you can not.
I will fulfill the postal version, although it will have a huge carrying capacity for the period.
I thought I was coloring the helm with a slightly different color to recognize on sight when the two models are in use.
Giuseppe
Gosh - very impressive looking! Just compiling with it now to test. As to the mail capacity and holds issue - I shall have to consider at some point doing something to allow this to happen in Experimental, although it is preferable to see whether it should go into Standard first. Have you added an extension request for this?
Edit: Hmm - it seems as though it will use the full length of the runway even if this is not necessary. Investigating...
Edit 2: Pushed changes on 11.x that should cater for vertical takeoff and landing aircraft - now they take off and land on the actual destination stop tile and do not taxi or need a runway.
Hello
Quote from: jamespetts on August 23, 2013, 06:47:22 PM
As to the mail capacity and holds issue - I shall have to consider at some point doing something to allow this to happen in Experimental, although it is preferable to see whether it should go into Standard first. Have you added an extension request for this?
I've just done http://forum.simutrans.com/index.php?topic=12443.msg122989#msg122989 .... unfortunately with English as I am able, I hope you understand. :-[
Giuseppe
Quote from: jamespetts on August 23, 2013, 06:47:22 PM
Edit 2: Pushed changes on 11.x that should cater for vertical takeoff and landing aircraft - now they take off and land on the actual destination stop tile and do not taxi or need a runway.
Does your way restriction system apply to such destination tiles? If yes this would be an easy way to have dedicated helipads.
Hmm - an interesting thought. I had not previously considered this application of way constraints before. In theory, they should work to prevent aircraft using a heliport if the heliport was encoded with a prohibitive constraint and helicopters (and no other aircraft) were also so encoded, but I have not tested them in this use.
If somebody would like to draw me a Pak128.Britain suitable helipad graphic, I can certainly test the code and adjust it to make it work if and as necessary.
Hello
Quote from: jamespetts on August 26, 2013, 11:05:45 PM
If somebody would like to draw me a Pak128.Britain suitable helipad graphic, I can certainly test the code and adjust it to make it work if and as necessary.
I'm working on a zeppelin docking tower, but I never draw a building ...
Giuseppe
Very interesting! How were these used in real life?
Hello James
Some example of zeppelin docking tower (also Empire State Building in New York may be considered a big docking station, never used, too dangerous).
http://www.liveinternet.ru/users/alexandre75/post92489521/
Giuseppe
It is not clear from the pictures (of which there are a great many) how the docking towers were actually used; there was a tower in the foreground in the photographs of the Hindenburg disaster, but it is not clear how that was actually used. I assume that the airships have to land fully for people to disembark? There are certainly plenty of photographs of it on that site having landed fully.
Hello
Quote from: jamespetts on August 27, 2013, 12:18:35 PM
I assume that the airships have to land fully for people to disembark?
I think so, but I'm not sure.
There is a photo (the 17 and the 47) were the graf zeppelin is docked, and the 34 were a airship is approacing to the tower. :)
Giuseppe
Probably best to assume for the time being that the airship docks at the tower, then lands completely on the grass below?
Hello
Quote from: jamespetts on August 27, 2013, 01:13:03 PM
Probably best to assume for the time being that the airship docks at the tower, then lands completely on the grass below?
I think so, but I can not track down movies, or documents to corroborate the thesis.
Looks a lot like how the ships to anchor at the docks, throwing a rope to a hook.
Giuseppe
Seems sensible. I don't think that I'd like to have to alight from an airborne airship down a tower like that.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e7/LosAngeles_Panama_1929_1.jpg)
(http://www.airships.net/wp-content/uploads/graf-zeppelin-los-angele004a.jpg)
Note the staircase for loading/unloading.
More:
http://www.airships.net/lz127-graf-zeppelin/history (http://www.airships.net/lz127-graf-zeppelin/history)
Interesting!
Hello
The mail version, the color is a little more bronze to make it recognizable from the previous model.
Two version, one for standard, one for experimental.
@ James, may you insert the exp version in github? Thanks
Giuseppe
Splendid - thank you.
This aircraft in particular does, perhaps more than any other, raise the issue of the need to consider modifying the code to allow a hull/hold arrangement with aircraft. Did you ever get any response to this extension request in Standard?
Hello
Quote from: jamespetts on August 29, 2013, 10:34:46 PM
This aircraft in particular does, perhaps more than any other, raise the issue of the need to consider modifying the code to allow a hull/hold arrangement with aircraft. Did you ever get any response to this extension request in Standard?
Zeppelin is the perfect case of aircraft used for passenger and mail at the same time; zeppelin has high capacity to lift payload and limited space for passenger = at full passenger the zeppelin has free capacity for goods.
The exetension request is proceeding.
Giuseppe
Hello All
The new Zeppelin´s looks very good out.
Hello
A new zeppelin, graphics and specifications are those of the LZ10.
This model, however, covers temporally from the date of the first commercial flight of a Zeppelin, until the introduction LZ127
EDIT: 256px image
Giuseppe
Thank you very much for that. I notice that you remark in the comments that you do not have a value for the maximum speed, yet Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LZ_10_Schwaben) gives it as 73km/h - your guess of 70km/h was, therefore, remarkably accurate.
You also give its introduction date as August 1909, whereas the Wikipedia article gives it as July 1911 - may I ask what your source is for the earlier introduction date? (If Wikipedia is wrong, it might be worthwhile editing the article to correct it).
Hello James
Usually I don't use wikipedia. In another site (but I don't remember), I found more data (accomodation, dead weight ...). Cruising speed is declared 44mph.
Usually, for all my planes, I don't use max speed but I use cruising speed.
Your intoduction date is correct, August 1909 is the date of first commercial flight of LZ6, LZ6 is the first Zeppelin used for commercial passenger transport.
My intention was to use the data and the appearance of LZ10, but to use LZ10 as a generic reference to all Zeppelin produced in the period, from the first flight ever until the LZ127.
Maybe you can take away LZ10 from model name and leave a generic "Zeppelin" or change the date of introduction as proposed by you.
It should, however, alter the dates of introduction of the airports in the same manner so that the date of introduction of the zeppelin are available infrastructure.
Giuseppe
Thank you - that is helpful. I have set the introduction date for the LZ10 to the correct date, and set the introduction date for the airport infrastructure to August 1909 on the basis of the LZ06. Generally, I take the view that, where there are a number of quite similar vehicles, it is quite easy to model all of them, as the graphics require only slight modification from one to the next, and sometimes none at all.
How similar does the LZ6 look to the LZ10? If very similar, it might be possible to use the LZ10 graphics for the LZ6. If there are some small but noticeable differences, it should be fairly straightforward to produce graphics for the LZ6.
Hello
LZ6 has a motor in less dell'LZ10 and has a passenger cabin smaller.
LZ6 has a different tail but has similar characteristics to the LZ10.
256px image.
Giuseppe
Hello
LZ10 mail version, LZ10 has similar graphic but different color.
The payloads are shown for both the experimental and the standard version, you must place the appropriate comments.
256px image
Giuseppe
Thank you very much for those - they are splendid!
Hello
Sorry, but intro date of lz10 mail need to be modified accordingly to the lz10 passenger version.
Giuseppe
Done.
Hello James
In github, air256, there are 3 ".dat" files for zeppelins, but there are also 3 ".dat~", odd.
Giuseppe
Ahh, the ~ files are generated by the text editor that I use in Linux when I am staying with my parents, as now.
James -- You can add "*~" to your .gitignore, and those files will be omitted from the repository. Indeed, please purge the old ones as clutter.
Thanks - these are now in standard.
Hello The Hood
I think you have to comment payload=7000 in file air/air256/Zeppelin_LZ10_Mail.dat, 7000 is the experimental version.
Giuseppe
What should that be in Standard?
Hello The Hood
Quote from: The Hood on January 20, 2014, 02:53:21 PM
What should that be in Standard?
Sorry for the confusion I created.
When I create planes carrying mail I always write in the file information related to the capacity in the standard version and version in experimental.
Usually I put the data in this way:
#Experimental
payload=7000
#Standard
payload=140
it is sufficient to comment on the capacity that does not compete or delete it.
You may:
1) delete experimental version:
#Experimental
#payload=7000#Standard
payload=140
2) If you do not delete the ability to do experimental is sufficient to add the comment in front of the payload = 7000
#Experimental
#payload=7000
#Standard
payload=140
Giuseppe
Is there a scaling factor between experimental mail demand and standard mail demand?
Hello The Hood
Quote from: The Hood on January 22, 2014, 09:17:54 AM
Is there a scaling factor between experimental mail demand and standard mail demand?
Yes:
Standard 1 unit = 50kg
Experimental 1 unit = 1kg
In all my planes, to provide an objective point of departure, I always point (with comment) the maximum load of the aircraft in tonnes.
Example #payload 7t
Giuseppe