You have the general idea right but we only support tracing right now for some asset types – we did major terminals and parking garages that way first because they are amenable to facades and the shape often is quite important.

Please do file a bug re: ground elevation and we’ll take a look…there are a number of ways to finesse slopes, but I’d have to see the pack to pick the right one.

Ah, I see. I got the impression the lego bricks were meant to enable us to accurately trace building footprints, which X-Plane would turn into plausible-looking buildings, just like we accurately trace the taxiway layouts, while leaving the visual representation to X-Plane. Hence my surprise to find only a handful of facades. My bad.

So I set out to create a plausible layout for KTIW that, while not accurate, is still somewhat representative of the place. Which is a surprisingly quick process, at least for a first rough draft. But of course I ran into another problem: half my buildings float or are buried on one side, because the whole apron is aslope, slowly descending towards the edge of the cliff the airport sits on. Which looks especially funny for .agps, with the attached accessories sitting on the ground, but the main building’s wall suspended a few feet above. For ordinary .obs, I can partially correct that by manually (and painstakingly) setting the elevation, but the .agps seem to ignore that. Now what? Can I somehow tilt the buildings (which is completely unrealistic, but would probably look more plausible nevertheless)? Should I file an art asset bug report (“hangars have no basements”)?

Judith

+1

You are an irritating little guy, arn’t you?

Actually skeletal animation _is_ on the long-term road map….not for dragons but just because it’s the logical next step.

When we first coded OBJ animation, most GPUs were not programmable; we chose non-skinnable rigid body animation for performance reasons. These days skeletal animation can be done 100% on the card and is probably more CPU efficient for some cases. I’ve been meaning to write up an RFC for a future “OBJ10” (whether OBJ10 makes it into XP10 or 11, who knows, but I figure it’s good to give people a sense of where we’re going.)

I hope these issues get fixed and plane becomes more and more of a awesome flight sim. obviously to please all you guys/ save further issues, I am done for good commenting and following this blog. I am simply going to check the wiki beta and file a bug report if something is not fixed/ deal with not seeing whats being done on this blog.

thank you

LoreLai, maybe I wouldn’t need to complain or repeat issues if people took them seriously and acknowledged them/ fix them and or not leave us users in the dark about eta’s for fixes and features. never mind sarcastic remarks, non addressing replies and such. This is ridiculous.

The plan still stands. I can’t guarantee that every library element will be exactly like what you see in real life; the library is meant to be plausible, but not accurate. For accurate, use a 3-d modeler. The library will become more ‘rich’ in shapes over time.