.Possible problem with roads on italy map
Moderator: SEOW Developers
Hi all,
it´s been a while, but now I´m back
.
Got a problem with factories in our Iasi-Data:
the factories (buildings) we inserted are not shown ingame, only their positions are correct. So a human pilot is not able to attack these factories, but they are working fine, they are shown on the MP and they are taskable as targets. What did we do wrong?
4Shades, could you please check the data I send You, because the error is enclosed.
@PA-Dore:
I will give You the DL-Link, but I think it´s better having the factories problem cleared before, so u have correct data.
it´s been a while, but now I´m back
.Got a problem with factories in our Iasi-Data:
the factories (buildings) we inserted are not shown ingame, only their positions are correct. So a human pilot is not able to attack these factories, but they are working fine, they are shown on the MP and they are taskable as targets. What did we do wrong?
4Shades, could you please check the data I send You, because the error is enclosed.
@PA-Dore:
I will give You the DL-Link, but I think it´s better having the factories problem cleared before, so u have correct data.
-
IV/JG7_4Shades
- Posts: 2203
- Joined: Mon 08 Jan 2007 11:10 pm
- Location: Perth, Western Australia
The other way to have universal ready database for all is to use original objects of the map
SEOW-Wiki:
"As a rule of thumb, we usually consider any factory building with 3 or more chimneys as a valid major factory installation, and any fuel dump with 6 or more fuel tanks as a valid fuel facility, but as map builder you can make your own convention about what deserves to be an installation in your map. In FMB, locate all such facilities on the map and place a stationary object INSIDE the fuel tank or factory. Save the FMB file and find the X,Y,Z coordinates of the stationaries and use them to build new records for the Industrial_Installations table. In that table you can ignore the Sm_x,Sm_y,Sm_z,Sm_h,Destruction_Code,Event_Date and Production_Points fields, but the other fields are all necessary. Every factory and fuel dump should have its own unique name. Stick to the naming conventions already in the table."
In some maps, there are no 3-chimneys on the map, I used 1-chimney factories.
In other maps there are none industrial objects. In ash_Battle_of_France_1940 for example, I added 3-chimneys factories and fuel dumps directly in the map: The France Seow industrial table includes exactly these objects (ash_Battle_of_France_1940_Online)
SEOW-Wiki:
"As a rule of thumb, we usually consider any factory building with 3 or more chimneys as a valid major factory installation, and any fuel dump with 6 or more fuel tanks as a valid fuel facility, but as map builder you can make your own convention about what deserves to be an installation in your map. In FMB, locate all such facilities on the map and place a stationary object INSIDE the fuel tank or factory. Save the FMB file and find the X,Y,Z coordinates of the stationaries and use them to build new records for the Industrial_Installations table. In that table you can ignore the Sm_x,Sm_y,Sm_z,Sm_h,Destruction_Code,Event_Date and Production_Points fields, but the other fields are all necessary. Every factory and fuel dump should have its own unique name. Stick to the naming conventions already in the table."
In some maps, there are no 3-chimneys on the map, I used 1-chimney factories.
In other maps there are none industrial objects. In ash_Battle_of_France_1940 for example, I added 3-chimneys factories and fuel dumps directly in the map: The France Seow industrial table includes exactly these objects (ash_Battle_of_France_1940_Online)
Sorry for beeing absent and haven´t answered, but we got some unexpected Problems with the Airbases (landing Planes crush into parked ones). So at the moment we are working on capturing Airbases Date new as PA Dore wrote some posts before. I will give You an update of the Date if all problems are solved.
Cya, Fish
Cya, Fish
"landing Planes crush into parked ones" : I guess you have to create new airbases_layouts.
If airbases have changed (take off and landing points, bearing, shape...) the old airbases_layouts will be not correct.
See WikiSeow
(choose free layouts numbers)
If airbases have changed (take off and landing points, bearing, shape...) the old airbases_layouts will be not correct.
See WikiSeow
(choose free layouts numbers)
Hi guys,
this seems to be a real problem with these airbases
.
We found 4 "problem childs" so far, as they are:
- Botosani
- Balti
- Bacau northwest
- Husi
It seems to me that the calculation method for getting the midpoint as the reference for all other objects doesnt work for this Airbase type. I assume the reason ist the different location of start and landing coordinates given by the layout. Calculating the midpoint as described in the Wiki (Xmidpoint = (Xtakeoff + Xlanding)/2 Ymidpoint = (Ytakeoff + Ylanding)/2 ) seems to work for airbases with only one runway and opposite located start- and landing points at this runway. But these airbases got start- and landing point in another way, as one can see in IL FMB.
So, the calculated midpoint seems to be wrong, and so all the ACHS, AAA´s etc. are wrong.
Can anyone say how to do correct calculation in this case?
Or am I wrong?
Thanks for help .
Greetz,
Fisch
this seems to be a real problem with these airbases
.We found 4 "problem childs" so far, as they are:
- Botosani
- Balti
- Bacau northwest
- Husi
It seems to me that the calculation method for getting the midpoint as the reference for all other objects doesnt work for this Airbase type. I assume the reason ist the different location of start and landing coordinates given by the layout. Calculating the midpoint as described in the Wiki (Xmidpoint = (Xtakeoff + Xlanding)/2 Ymidpoint = (Ytakeoff + Ylanding)/2 ) seems to work for airbases with only one runway and opposite located start- and landing points at this runway. But these airbases got start- and landing point in another way, as one can see in IL FMB.
So, the calculated midpoint seems to be wrong, and so all the ACHS, AAA´s etc. are wrong.
Can anyone say how to do correct calculation in this case?
Or am I wrong?
Thanks for help
.Greetz,
Fisch
Hi Fisch
- Check that TAKEOFF and LANDING are the same as in Airbases table (not to have a reverse layout). This works only for symetrical airbases.
- I guess there are no existing layouts for these airbases. So the best way is to create a new one for each new airbase, except in case of identically airbases = same layout.
- The takeoff and landing point could be EVERYWHERE (but exactly as in Airbases table), the layout calculation works well, because every object is located with RELATIVE coordinates from the middle point.
- The takeoff and landing point cannot be the same (ERROR /0)
- AAA and FUEL locations have no importance. This means only the number of AAA emplacements and fuel capacity.
- ACHS, BALLOONS, SL, CF and others objects locations only have importance.
- Use Me323 for ACHS: Planes need a lot of space for taxi without crash.
Cheers JP
- Check that TAKEOFF and LANDING are the same as in Airbases table (not to have a reverse layout). This works only for symetrical airbases.
- I guess there are no existing layouts for these airbases. So the best way is to create a new one for each new airbase, except in case of identically airbases = same layout.
- The takeoff and landing point could be EVERYWHERE (but exactly as in Airbases table), the layout calculation works well, because every object is located with RELATIVE coordinates from the middle point.
- The takeoff and landing point cannot be the same (ERROR /0)
- AAA and FUEL locations have no importance. This means only the number of AAA emplacements and fuel capacity.
- ACHS, BALLOONS, SL, CF and others objects locations only have importance.
- Use Me323 for ACHS: Planes need a lot of space for taxi without crash.
Cheers JP
Somewhere should be mentioned that (and how!!) the Tkoff/Landing coordinates for Airbase_layout table have to be calculated additionally.
I was close to getting crazy, as we did all as described and the ACHS were still false.
Now it seems to work.
Some smaller problems will be asked tomorrow.
Thanks so far
.
Greetz,
Fisch
I was close to getting crazy, as we did all as described and the ACHS were still false.
Now it seems to work.
Some smaller problems will be asked tomorrow.
Thanks so far
.Greetz,
Fisch
This pdf performed by II/JG77Hawk_5, RAF74_Taipan and IV/JG7_4Shades is still available: (except #layouts)
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/seow/S ... s_v2.0.pdf
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/seow/S ... s_v2.0.pdf
I Know this, we did everything as described in this documentation. But I didnt found anything about calculating Tkoff/landing Points for Airbases_layouts table .
Some smaller problems:
now that we got the ACHS - problem solved and running a test campain, in Mission Planner there are no free berths indicated for Botosani Airbase, even if there have to be some. I added 44 ACHS and got 40 Aircraft parked. Addionally the colour of the headline fonts is white, never seen that before
.
Also the indicated Take Off Vector seems to be wrong, because aircraft starting in 90 degrees direction (east), and it says take off vector is North North East. screenshot
(Don´t worry about the missing AAA and fuel, we first tried to get the ACHS working correctly, there are no other Installations in the layout at this point)
What could be the mistake?
Thanks for helping again ,
Fisch
.Some smaller problems:
now that we got the ACHS - problem solved and running a test campain, in Mission Planner there are no free berths indicated for Botosani Airbase, even if there have to be some. I added 44 ACHS and got 40 Aircraft parked. Addionally the colour of the headline fonts is white, never seen that before
.Also the indicated Take Off Vector seems to be wrong, because aircraft starting in 90 degrees direction (east), and it says take off vector is North North East. screenshot
(Don´t worry about the missing AAA and fuel, we first tried to get the ACHS working correctly, there are no other Installations in the layout at this point)
What could be the mistake?
Thanks for helping again
,Fisch
-
IV/JG7_4Shades
- Posts: 2203
- Joined: Mon 08 Jan 2007 11:10 pm
- Location: Perth, Western Australia
Hi Fisch,
The white letters mean that the airbase is out of supply. You need to define fuel storage in the layout, then add a fuel holding to that airbase in Airbases table.
The takeoff vector is calculated from the takeoff and landing waypoints defined for that airbase in the Airbases table. if your airbase is one of the few weird (multi-runway) ones in IL-2 that has takeoff and landing locations on different runways, then the takeoff vector will probably be calculated incorrectly.
You might be able to define a false takeoff location to give you the right takeoff vector, but you would have to use that location in your layout definition too. Gets messy! I blame the airbase designer!
Cheers,
4Shades
The white letters mean that the airbase is out of supply. You need to define fuel storage in the layout, then add a fuel holding to that airbase in Airbases table.
The takeoff vector is calculated from the takeoff and landing waypoints defined for that airbase in the Airbases table. if your airbase is one of the few weird (multi-runway) ones in IL-2 that has takeoff and landing locations on different runways, then the takeoff vector will probably be calculated incorrectly.
You might be able to define a false takeoff location to give you the right takeoff vector, but you would have to use that location in your layout definition too. Gets messy! I blame the airbase designer!
Cheers,
4Shades
IV/JG7_4Shades
SEOW Developer
SEOW Developer
Difficult to answer without datas... Could you send me:
- layout.mis
- Airbases_Layouts table
dore@flibusteairline.com
- layout.mis
- Airbases_Layouts table
dore@flibusteairline.com