It's like crack...

After assigning the hierarchy, I reloaded the model. Now when it crashes, some of the parts, but never the fuselage, settle into the ground and disappear. The model is only 3,006 triangles, so I didn't do any c-mesh parts. Do I need to do a c-mesh on a model under 8,000 tris?
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    256.6 KB · Views: 14
Ah, yes. Typical N :eek: :eek: B!
Upload a bird before it's ready. Been There, Done That. :p

Are the falling bits because your Hierarchy was wrong or just no C-Meshes?
 
I didn't realize the parts were sinking until the hierarchy was correct, so it's not that. I'm working on a c-mesh now. My guess is that they are now required for all models, regardless of tri-count, period. Anything to enable missiles and rockets and other detachables in my RC sim. :rolleyes:
 
I added a collision mesh, but the parts still seemed to sink. (I did learn a better way to do that, just using the schematic view.) I was flying at the USAF Museum, and the parts still disappeared after breaking off. I assume what's happening is theat the computer generated grass is deep enough to take in the parts, but who knows for sure? So the repost includes the hierarchy fix, but no c-mesh.
 
USAF Museum is a photofield. I tried it at Joe's garage, and when I crashed on the runway, the parts fell through each other, but did not sink through the runway.
 
Here it is. I don't think this is the cause, though.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    204.2 KB · Views: 26
The way you have the fuselage Group might be conflicting.
I would un-group the fuselage and it's collision mesh from where it is, and then change the name of that grouping to something else.
I like to use ~CS_Fusedetails for things like Canopies, antenna, wires, etc..., they will not deform the physics wireframe if they are put int a ~CS_ object.
You could also make the Canopy object a ~CS_CANOPY if anyone ever wants to make a variant with an opening canopy, the choice would be there.
 
The only reason I have them grouped like that is because it's easier for me to bake in colors on one entire object (in this case the canopy) and assign the material with the .tga to the entire fuselage. I do this with just about every model. The Emeraude is a great example. The landing gear had some baked parts, and some mapped parts, all grouped together and called ~CS_lg and ~CS_rg.
 
The Simple Flyer and the Spacewalker also have parts that eventually disappear at the USAF Museum airport. It also happens at Sod Farm. It's usually the smaller parts that are affected, like hstabs, vstabs, elevators or rudders. The wings usually don't sink, but I think they will if they are small enough.
 
Looks to me that the sim could get very confused, by not haveing every thing linked back to the root frame.
 

Attachments

  • ScreenShot001.jpg
    ScreenShot001.jpg
    162.9 KB · Views: 14
The artist's reference document (or one of KE's documents) states that any object not linked to the fuselage links to the fuselage by default.
 
It's not two fuselages. It's a part named 'fuselage' and a part named 'canopy' combined into a group called 'fuselage.' RF only recognizes the group name, not the individual part names inside the group. The component name fuselage doesn't require a ~CS_.
 
Shameless self promotion. I used to do some funky things with mapping in Max, resulting in the original mapping in Wings being different than the final map. Until now, I've never rendered this plane.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    200.3 KB · Views: 13
  • 2.png
    2.png
    248.3 KB · Views: 14
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top