• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

FSX Spinning prop vs Propdisc

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 1281
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 1281

Guest
Hi,

Looking at the PR video of the new A2A B-17 (Sim Outhouse) one commentator remarked that he liked the idea of having "real" spinning blurred propblades rather than the usual flat prop discs.

My question, do any of the members here have any experience with creating that effect, and if so how is it done? By using an extra set of propblades and blurring them via alpha? And perhaps slap on an extra propdisc for good measure?
 
If i saw a practicle reason for doing that sureley the best solution would be to create wide prop blades and alpha the blur effect. That said it isn't realy worth it in my opinion because the only time you would notice the difference is when at low rpms anyway. Just my 2 cents
 
Thanks for your input Blogga. I am not sure whether RPM enters into the picture. Whether at prop0_slow or blurred, when seen from a side angle, the standard prop discs become insubstantial allowing one to see through to the drive shaft if there is any. Not nice. The question is how to make them denser and three-dimensional especially towards the root. My idea was to clone prop0_still, rename it as prop0_blurred_02, and use a new texture and alpha, see pic (just a test), all in a ddition to the default prop disc. Same for prop0_still etc.

Can't say whether it'll work because for some reason or other this prop0_blurred_02 vanishes as soon as the sim goes beyond the _still RPMs. Anybody have a clue?? (I am new to FSX so may have easily missed a step.)

props.jpg
 
Ok i can see where you are coming from when considering the default aircraft technique for creating prop disks but if done right a prop disk can be a very realistic technique for creating the propeller illusion. The biggest problem i can for see with your suggestion is that fsx cannot animate a propeller @ 2700 rpm. Even if it could the monitor refresh rate would create the same bottleneck at 70 Hz anyway. Your fully animated prop would appear to reverse or become stationary in the Sim.

I use two 3 dimensional double cones, one inside the other, (Figure 1) to create a prop the inner one uses a far denser alpha to resemble the root of the prop (Figure 3) and it is also a lot thicker. The outer cone is a lot more blurred (Figure 2) because it should barely be visible. They both are a single sided default transparent fsx material. The spinner or drive shaft are not transparent. Instead i use a blurry Texture that resembles speed.

Untitled-1-1.jpg


That said if you want to explore the 'no disk' option then in order to remove the disappear you would have to write some additions into the modeldef. specificaly you would need to change the visibility range and iniminate the 50 or 25% rpm decrease in the animation.
 
Your idea of two interlocking cones sounds very interesting indeed. Will try it that way. Many thanks. Any idea why my prop0_blurred_02 behaves as if it were a prop0_still?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It is essentialy the same animation it has the same keyframes the only diference is the visibility range. prop still animates the same for all the prop stages. Below 6.25 percent of the rpm range 'prop still' is visible above it and to 12.5 percent the 'slow' disk is visible then above that is the 'blurred.'
 
Roger that.

As for my prop0_blurred (cloned from prop_0_still) behaving as if it were a _still prop is that in addition to declaring the clone via the Animation Manager it also has to get the prop0_blurred visibility effect assigned via AttachPointTool ... at any rate this is what seems to do the trick in this case. Man, FSX really takes some getting used to... and I haven't even touched textures yet.
 
lol :) Spare a thought for those who taught ourselvs from scratch. The sdk document was the only main resourse I used. I only discovered this site a few months ago and its been an invaluable resourse since. if only i had discovered it 2 years ago my project would be finished by now.
 
I wish I could but my companys CEO has Requested the project remain hush hush untill shortly before the release. :( Shame because the only thing any developer wants to do is show off his work, lol
 
Oh i forgot to mention that i only use the two disk prop technique for the external model because from inside the aircraft you don't really notice the slower moving inner cone in realworld.
 
Blogga said:
lol :) Spare a thought for those who taught ourselvs from scratch. The sdk document was the only main resourse I used. I only discovered this site a few months ago and its been an invaluable resourse since. if only i had discovered it 2 years ago my project would be finished by now.
Click to expand...

Most of us who've been here all along are likewise self-taught, although at least we did have some small benefit from being part of previous FS beta teams, and thus had some limited interaction with the MS/ACES team, especially during FSX development.

As a long-time commercial developer (3d modeling and gauge/systems programming) I can certainly relate to the needs of my employer for discretion. Although my contract does not explicitly forbid "freelance contract work," many times I've had to turn down some extremely lucrative offers simply because I couldn't avoid using techniques I'd developed for my primary employer... :(

I do try very hard though to share what I think of as "first principles," that is, the "basics" and then drop enough bread crumbs along the way such that folks can follow them and -with diligence- arrive at the same conclusions as have I... :D

As it happens, I've followed quite a few trails of crumbs myself along the way... In fact, I make a habit of investing at least three of my daily work hours to what I think of as "continuing education," having a regular round of development forums I follow...

"A day that passes without learning at least one new thing is a wasted day."
 
We will respect that ... HOWEVER....

You are now morally obligated to post in FSDeveloper.com the first "peek" ....(as soon as the decision is made that "it is time") .


Blogga said:
I wish I could but my companys CEO has Requested the project remain hush hush untill shortly before the release. :( Shame because the only thing any developer wants to do is show off his work, lol
Click to expand...
 
Yes i'm sure that won't be a problem, and i'm alowed to share any knowledge i have. I'm just not alowed to announce anything before the date. You will notice since i got help with something last week i have been posting here on anything i can.
 
Much appreciated Blogga. I am sure I have zillions of more FSX related questions but I am still wading through the SDK and tutorials (thanks for those Bill L) before asking the obvious. I noticed that this site's Wiki, which is generally excellent, could use some update in the area of aircraft model export, and perhaps being new to the exercise, I can do my bit helping to pinpoint the areas that tend to have a beginner stumped. Just for instance, with FS9 MakeMdl you got a helpful logfile identifying, among other things, co-located vertices. I get a runtime error window for such things now, but no logfile. Come to think of it, don't reply to this here, I'll post it as a new thread. Then, textures ....

Manfred
 
Sure, no problem. But keep in mind that the strobe effect is caused by the camera - if you were looking at it, you would not see those blurry props rotating slowly. It would appear a solid disk.
 
If FS-X supported vertex animations you could deform "pizza-slice" portions of a circle (or double-cone) based on RPM to seamlessly go from solid to disk... I use this technique without the vertex animations, slow, blurry and fast versions that also respond to prop beta... hub is animated with default prop animations...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top