Giant Slow Ultra Stick

I don't know if this means anything but I made two recordings today breaking off the wing. I made the first recording in RF EVO and then another one in RF 9.5 DVD. But the second recording I made in RF 9.5 DVD had the left aileron at a 90 degree angle until right at take-off when it snapped down to normal. Here's a picture showing that. I went back and looked at the plane in 3ds max and checked the schematic to make sure the aileron was connected to the wing (and the aileron collision mesh connected to the aileron) and both of them were connected properly. So I don't know what to think about that anomaly. But the recording in RF EVO doesn't show that happening with the aileron.

Giant Slow Ultra Stick 30.jpg
 
i can confirm i managaged to break the wing off copying technoids pattern but it took multiple tries and i lost just the one wing , the setting was at 100 for strength at 120 it didn't break off for me in RF8 . maybe a few more tries it could have but the battery was getting low before it could break set at 120 strength . that aileron breaking is something i havent seen like that before .
 
Last edited:
Duh.. I finally got the idea to see if I could break off the wing of the real plane I bought from steam. So I loaded it up and the first time I tried the wing broke off. But after that I had to do it quite a few times to get it to break off again. But I did break the wing off three times. I don't know how that helps me but at least it's not "just" my plane that does it.
 
This morning I chamfered the servo wiring to make it look a little better. I also tweaked the cinema cam a little. I can break the wing off just doing hard aerobatics like I would normally fly down low. Of course this is a fairly lazy flying plane so they're not crisp, but the point is I can still break the wing off doing them down low. In fact that's how I found out the wing would break off. And to get it to stop I have to add a lot to the wing strength setting. I went up to 160 from 120 and I could still do it. So I'm not sure what to do with it.
 
technoid said:
This morning I chamfered the servo wiring to make it look a little better. I also tweaked the cinema cam a little. I can break the wing off just doing hard aerobatics like I would normally fly down low. Of course this is a fairly lazy flying plane so they're not crisp, but the point is I can still break the wing off doing them down low. In fact that's how I found out the wing would break off. And to get it to stop I have to add a lot to the wing strength setting. I went up to 160 from 120 and I could still do it. So I'm not sure what to do with it.
Click to expand...
i wouldn't worry about that technoid , if you did that with the real RC model it would likely leave the wing behind :)
 
uncle twist said:
Tech. If I recall, (correct me if I`m wrong) you modeled the wing in 3 pcs. a lft/rt side/and a middle section, can you join them all together so that the wing is in essence one piece. ???
Click to expand...
It was a bit different than that, but overall that was right. What I did was "cut" each wing in the center to create the saddle for that side. Then I exported those two pieces to a different file so I could import them and have the normal wings and the saddle. Then I expanded the center piece to create a saddle that was a little larger than the wing. BUT. Later I attached each saddle to it's wing and then welded all the verts so the wing was one piece again, but with a center section that was a little larger than the rest of the wing. So after that there was just the left and right wings like normal.
 
I did a few release tweaks to the physics. I increased the wing strength to 180 from 120 which does help the wing breaking off but doesn't completely stop it. I had to go up to about 220 to completely stop it when I first tried it out and first posted about it. Then I tweaked the control throws a little and also changed the low rates from 60% to 70%. They were all small changes, but I like the way it flies a little better now.

I haven't done the spec map for it yet so there's still some stuff to do before I release it.
 
I was going to release the Giant Slow Ultra Stick today but I ran into a problem. I always model the plane using my RF 9.5 DVD version and then switch to RF EVO for the release build. But this time I had a problem with that. In my RF 9.5 DVD version the wing outside trailing wing tips are fine, but in RF EVO I have a small black area at each wing tip, which I assume is a smoothing group issue. So no release today.

Giant Slow Ultra Stick 31.jpg
 
I played around with the smoothing groups and I can get rid of the black area on the wing tip with the change I made, but it causes a line between the top and bottom of the wing I didn't want. So I'm gong to go back and make a physical change to the wing to fix it. Bummer I thought I was done with this plane.
 
I went back this morning and rounded the back of the wingtips to get rid of the shading and it looks okay now. BUT I found another problem that hopefully @legoman can shed some light on. Here's two pictures of the same build "but" how it was imported into RF EVO.

For the first picture I exported the max file to an fbx file and then imported that fbx file into RF EVO to create the kex file. But for the second picture I exported the max file to an fbx file and then imported the fbx file into RF 9.5 DVD to create the "kex" file and then imported the "kex" file created by the RF 9.5 DVD import process into RF EVO. The import process allows you to import a "fbx" file or a "kex" file. SO the kex file generated by the RF EVO import process causes the black areas on the plane but the "kex" file generated by RF 9.5 DVD import process looks just fine. And the really bad black areas are on the right side of the plane.

Giant Slow Ultra Stick 32.jpgGiant Slow Ultra Stick 33.jpg
 
Last edited:
I have noticed the same issues with Max 2023, waiting for the fix as Ryan said they are working on, Max has dropped support for Scanline.

Caution 3ds Max users

In versions of Max after 2020, Autodesk removed support for the scanline material type which RealFlight requires. Given 1) the release of Max 2024, and 2) Autodesk's policy of only providing access to the three most recent versions, it is no longer possible to obtain and install Max 2020. The...
forums.realflight.com
 
asj5547 said:
I have noticed the same issues with Max 2023, waiting for the fix as Ryan said they are working on, Max has dropped support for Scanline.

Caution 3ds Max users

In versions of Max after 2020, Autodesk removed support for the scanline material type which RealFlight requires. Given 1) the release of Max 2024, and 2) Autodesk's policy of only providing access to the three most recent versions, it is no longer possible to obtain and install Max 2020. The...
forums.realflight.com
Click to expand...
I'm still using the older version I've used for years. So is that supposed to be okay? I guess the thing to do is use the "kex" file generated by the RF 9.5 DVD import process and release it that way? Which is what I've been doing and I guess why I've never noticed this problem until now.
 
technoid said:
I went back this morning and rounded the back of the wingtips to get rid of the shading and it looks okay now. BUT I found another problem that hopefully @legoman can shed some light on. Here's two pictures of the same build "but" how it was imported into RF EVO.

For the first picture I exported the max file to an fbx file and then imported that fbx file into RF EVO to create the kex file. But for the second picture I exported the max file to an fbx file and then imported the fbx file into RF 9.5 DVD to create the "kex" file and then imported the "kex" file created by the RF 9.5 DVD import process into RF EVO. The import process allows you to import a "fbx" file or a "kex" file. SO the kex file generated by the RF EVO import process causes the black areas on the plane but the "kex" file generated by RF 9.5 DVD import process looks just fine. And the really bad black areas are on the right side of the plane.

View attachment 137468View attachment 137469
Click to expand...

is EVO on the left and 9.5 on the right in your images? What versions where the images taken in?

here is what the mig-21.KEX looked like from evo (L) and 9.5s (R) (both pictures were taken in evolution)
2023-12-23 14_31_35-RealFlight Evolution.png2023-12-24 18_54_52-RealFlight Evolution.png

if you are releasing the plane in EVO just transfer the 9.5 plane over to evo.

also my take on the plane breaking too easily concern. if the only way you can break the plane reliably besides unplanned one point landings, is an inverted snap roll. It is just fine and likely a bit too durable.
 
legoman said:
is EVO on the left and 9.5 on the right in your images? What versions where the images taken in?

here is what the mig-21.KEX looked like from evo (L) and 9.5s (R) (both pictures were taken in evolution)
View attachment 137471View attachment 137470

if you are releasing the plane in EVO just transfer the 9.5 plane over to evo.

also my take on the plane breaking too easily concern. if the only way you can break the plane reliably besides unplanned one point landings, is an inverted snap roll. It is just fine and likely a bit too durable.
Click to expand...
Yes the Left picture is EVO and the Right picture is RF 9.5 DVD. So your MIG looks the same to me in EVO and 9.5, is that what you were showing me. Like I mentioned I normally build the fbx and import it in RF 9.5 DVD and then use that kex file when I import the plane in EVO to release it.

And thanks for your thoughts on the breaking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top