| Author |
About Collision With Objects
|
|
| Dudley Henriques 2005-10-20, 11:31 pm |
| I've noticed that it's possible to taxi right over a taxiway sign or even a
group of signs without causing a collision even though I have realism set to
reflect collisions.
Is this because the sign is set in the sim below the wing height, or are the
signs exempt from impact for other reasons?
Thanks
Dudley
| |
|
| "Dudley Henriques" <dhenriques@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:tEV5f.17597$QE1.7530@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
quote:
> I've noticed that it's possible to taxi right over a taxiway sign or even
a
quote:
> group of signs without causing a collision even though I have realism set
to
quote:
> reflect collisions.
> Is this because the sign is set in the sim below the wing height, or are
the
quote:
> signs exempt from impact for other reasons?
> Thanks
> Dudley
I don't know the answer, but this non-collision feature is a good thing. At
Klagenfurt (LOWK) in Austria there's a taxiway board right in the centre of
the taxiway at the intersection between taxiway C and L. To get to the
stand/gates you have to taxi straight over this marker board, usually giving
it a good clout with the nose wheel as you go. Fortunately this doesn't
cause the aircraft to explode or volcanoes to erupt etc.
Steve
| |
| Handsome 2005-10-21, 5:40 am |
|
Dudley Henriques wrote:
quote:
> I've noticed that it's possible to taxi right over a taxiway sign or even a
> group of signs without causing a collision even though I have realism set to
> reflect collisions.
> Is this because the sign is set in the sim below the wing height, or are the
> signs exempt from impact for other reasons?
> Thanks
> Dudley
"Crash Detction" is a property that all scenery objects may have ...
with some it's enabled others it's disabled.
The "crash" is triggered if the "scenery object" comes in contact with
the aircrafts "contact ponts" as defined in the aircraft.cfg file.
Also, as you say the wing contact points would normally pass above the
taxi sign but even if you hit them with gear there seems to be no
effect so I assume the property is disabled for taxi signs.
Martin
| |
|
| Thank goodness for the signs being disabled or I'm sure many of us would be
watching the scenairo reload a couple of times before we could take off.
Reprograming that FMC on the PMDG737 is not a lot of fun after the second
time.
"Handsome" <tdbscotland@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:1129883906.488997.45000@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
quote:
>
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
> "Crash Detction" is a property that all scenery objects may have ...
> with some it's enabled others it's disabled.
>
> The "crash" is triggered if the "scenery object" comes in contact with
> the aircrafts "contact ponts" as defined in the aircraft.cfg file.
>
> Also, as you say the wing contact points would normally pass above the
> taxi sign but even if you hit them with gear there seems to be no
> effect so I assume the property is disabled for taxi signs.
>
> Martin
>
| |
| Gregory 2005-10-21, 7:33 pm |
| On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 23:22:01 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
<dhenriques@earthlink.net> brought the following to our attention:
quote:
>I've noticed that it's possible to taxi right over a taxiway sign or even a
>group of signs without causing a collision even though I have realism set to
>reflect collisions.
>Is this because the sign is set in the sim below the wing height, or are the
>signs exempt from impact for other reasons?
>Thanks
>Dudley
did the wheels run over the sign(s) or just the wings?
One of the developers at freeflight design made a 757 (17MAR03)
http://www.freeflightdesign.com/jets.html
http://www.freeflightdesign.com/pre..._B757_FSDS2.jpg
that would crash when taxiing at KBFI.. or even on takeoff roll..
http://www.airnav.com/airport/KBFI
There was some discussion about a `radius' set in the MDL??
Fr. Bill would know.. and certainly the guys at FFDesign.
-Gregory
p.s. where better a place to launch a new 757? 
| |
| Dudley Henriques 2005-10-21, 7:33 pm |
| Thanks. I figured it had to do with the contact points somehow. I'll have to
taxi over a sign and try to hit it with the gear and see what happens :-)
I'm also assuming from your comment that it's possible for a developer to
either make a contact point crash sensitive or not crash sensitive??? That
would explain a lot I think.
DH
"Handsome" <tdbscotland@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:1129883906.488997.45000@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
quote:
>
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
> "Crash Detction" is a property that all scenery objects may have ...
> with some it's enabled others it's disabled.
>
> The "crash" is triggered if the "scenery object" comes in contact with
> the aircrafts "contact ponts" as defined in the aircraft.cfg file.
>
> Also, as you say the wing contact points would normally pass above the
> taxi sign but even if you hit them with gear there seems to be no
> effect so I assume the property is disabled for taxi signs.
>
> Martin
>
| |
| Dudley Henriques 2005-10-21, 7:33 pm |
| Not sure exactly where the gear was in relation to the sign. Probably passed
near it but not into it. The wing would be over for sure.
D
"Gregory" <flightsim.maps@bkwds.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:uruhl1pnd82sr8jnn3oukj3vqm2k96cakn@4ax.com...
quote:
> On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 23:22:01 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
> <dhenriques@earthlink.net> brought the following to our attention:
>
>
> did the wheels run over the sign(s) or just the wings?
>
>
> One of the developers at freeflight design made a 757 (17MAR03)
> http://www.freeflightdesign.com/jets.html
> http://www.freeflightdesign.com/pre..._B757_FSDS2.jpg
>
> that would crash when taxiing at KBFI.. or even on takeoff roll..
> http://www.airnav.com/airport/KBFI
>
> There was some discussion about a `radius' set in the MDL??
> Fr. Bill would know.. and certainly the guys at FFDesign.
>
>
> -Gregory
>
>
> p.s. where better a place to launch a new 757?
>
| |
| Handsome 2005-10-21, 7:33 pm |
| The contact points, if defined, are always "active" and are positioned
relative to the aircrafts datum reference point. It is only the
scenery that can be flaged, with or without, crash detection (solid)
i.e. on contact they will cause a crash or trigger scrape sound/wheel
landing sound etc.
Martin
| |
| Dudley Henriques 2005-10-21, 7:33 pm |
| Thanks much. Something new to learn every day :-))
D
"Handsome" <tdbscotland@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:1129931923.185559.96850@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> The contact points, if defined, are always "active" and are positioned
> relative to the aircrafts datum reference point. It is only the
> scenery that can be flaged, with or without, crash detection (solid)
>
> i.e. on contact they will cause a crash or trigger scrape sound/wheel
> landing sound etc.
>
> Martin
>
| |
| Quilljar 2005-10-22, 5:31 am |
| Wow! I only just noticed Martin's back again. Welcome back old son we have
missed you!
Sincerely,
Quilljar
| |
| Bill Leaming 2005-10-23, 7:35 pm |
| On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:40:38 -0400, Gregory wrote:
quote:
> There was some discussion about a `radius' set in the MDL??
> Fr. Bill would know.. and certainly the guys at FFDesign.
The value for "radius" is set automatically in the .mdl file created, based
on the "external model's" complete part list. It is not the "radius" of
the a/c per se, but rather an value that set's the "eyepoint" while in Spot
View for proper viewing distance at 1.0 zoom level. It also affects the
apparent size of the model as seen in the "Preview Window" whilst choosing
an a/c.
For example, the recent SR20G2 release's original radius entry is 86
meters, because of the deployed parachute canopy!
Fortunately, using AFCAD2, it is a trivial matter to use the "Aircraft
Editor" to modify the radius to a more correct 10 meters... ;)
Bill
| |
| Gregory 2005-10-23, 7:35 pm |
| On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:42:35 -0400, Bill Leaming <n4gix@comcast.net>
brought the following to our attention:
quote:
>On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:40:38 -0400, Gregory wrote:
>
>
>The value for "radius" is set automatically in the .mdl file created, based
>on the "external model's" complete part list. It is not the "radius" of
>the a/c per se, but rather an value that set's the "eyepoint" while in Spot
>View for proper viewing distance at 1.0 zoom level. It also affects the
>apparent size of the model as seen in the "Preview Window" whilst choosing
>an a/c.
>
>For example, the recent SR20G2 release's original radius entry is 86
>meters, because of the deployed parachute canopy!
>
>Fortunately, using AFCAD2, it is a trivial matter to use the "Aircraft
>Editor" to modify the radius to a more correct 10 meters... ;)
>
>Bill
Well umm.. it's difficult to remember about any such crash detect
radius. The discussion is somewhere in the FFD forum around
or after MAR03. The 757 would report a `building crash' when
passing by the hangers at a considerable distance.
-Gregory
| |
| Bill Leaming 2005-10-23, 11:31 pm |
| On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:56:43 -0400, Gregory wrote:
quote:
> Well umm.. it's difficult to remember about any such crash detect
> radius. The discussion is somewhere in the FFD forum around
> or after MAR03. The 757 would report a `building crash' when
> passing by the hangers at a considerable distance.
That's precisely the point. The model's "radius value" as set in the .mdl
file IS the "building crash distance" as far as the sim is concerned...
|
|
|
|