JazAero

little background where we started and where we are now. All of the external model is complete, the cockpit is nearly complete. The flight model is also nearly complete. We are tweaking it based on testing reports. the model has been unwrapped ready for texturing. I may entertain bringing on a texture artist. Who can really do this bird some justice. But do it quickly. If you're interested send me some portfolio shots I might consider bringing you on.

the extra 330 is being developed by a small group primarily myself and our lead programmer Aeroshell, external models are nearly complete internal models are being worked on, EFM flight model is well into development. See the following post https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=245470

coming soon A small group of us have been working tirelessly over the past several months to bring to you this remarkable aircraft. we are currently in alpha testing, we have a fully functional aircraft with clickable cockpit and dynamic EFM flight model. Enjoy these teaser screenshots of our current state of progress. all original 3D models and custom written external flight model. Some of the core features of this aircraft include: EFM flight model written in C++ accurately detailed 3D model smoke system Realistic smoke tank delivery system consumable smoke oil ( yes you can run out of oil ) dynamic and accurate reciprocating engine model logic ( that does not rely on tables ) dynamic control pressure logic detailed lift/drag logic detailed pitch and yaw moment logic dynamic damping coefficients detailed fuel tank and fuel flow logic realistic roll rate 420° deg/sec realistic weight and balance Realistic 3D model. Clickable cockpit PBR textures Electric trim stay tune for further news

A small group of us have been working tirelessly over the past several months to get this aircraft up and running. Enjoy the teaser screenshots. all original 3Dmodels and custom written external flight model. stay tune for further news

that's a very generic review, I'd be more interested to know what is the field-of-view? what kind of screen door effect did you experience if any? What is the absolute resolution? Are the lenses smooth or fresnel? (it makes a difference) are there light bleeds? What is the comfort level? What is the IPD adjustment range? what is the absolute frames per second? What were the DCS settings you used when you reviewed it? What video card and computer set up were you using when you tested it? how does it compare with existing products from Pimax, Odyssey, XTAL, etc. they didn't pay you for the review but they sent you free product. That alone can skew a reviewer's perspective. you're asking the user base to consider this product which is a very expensive purchase. But there is no real substantive information in the initial review. don't mean to be so critical but this is one of those times when being critical has merit. Don't take it personally.

Congratulations

I'm getting this error message in max 2014 which cropped up recently. " Missing DLL' s file name: EDMmaterialtool.DLC ". I've never gotten this before, and I can't seem to get rid of it. I have re-installed several different versions of the plug-in but no joy. Anyone have any ideas

1st of all there's nothing common or sensible about it. Adjusting a person's physical IPD E.g.: only has the effect of allowing a person to easily focus their eyes on 2 separate images so the Human Eye And thereby the brain can superimpose them together without strain. It does not One thing to adjust the apparent size or distance of those images. Invoking common sense because you run out of arguments is just a cheap excuse For not being willing to admit they ED used the wrong nomenclature and And that should've been the end of that but you keep on insisting That somehow 2 totally unrelated measurements are somehow equal. If you read through the posts. You would see for yourself that apparently the 2 measurements are far from equal, and for good reason. The physical IPD of your eyes does not change image size or position. But the camera position internal to the software is doing just that by changing the focal length And/Or convergence Point within the software Thereby changing the focus point Making Rendered objects appear larger or smaller. In the 1st example The 2 images are parallel, and changing your IPD merely brings those 2 into focus, so they superimpose correctly. The 2nd example The 2 Cameras are not parallel, changing the convergence point or changing the users focal point has the effect of making objects appear larger or smaller. This is what ED actually Appears to be doing. Hopefully we can put this to rest and perhaps ED can change its nomenclature from. "IPD adjustment" or "IPD" to. "convergence point adjustment" or "CPA" Then you don't have to rely on people's "common sense" Because it's only "common" If you are An Optician or photographer.

"Virtual Heads" do NOT have pupils !! only human beings, flesh and blood have pupils. Virtual heads only have rendering positional viewpoints. you just won't give up this fallacy of "pupils". IPD is not the correct term for VR camera adjustments.

I will concede to call it "camera scale" or "camera convergence" or "camera adjustment" if you will concede that There are NO pupils in a camera..... "Interpupillary distance (PD) is a measurement of the distance between the centres of your two eyes and is dependent on whether you are buying eyewear for distance or close up. This measurement is used to properly align the centre of your eyeglass lenses with the centre of your eyes" Source"The Canadian Association of Optometrists" Or in the case of VR to align the center of VR lenses with the center of the eyes pupils. This is only related directly to the human eye. Not cameras. you are very stubborn even when your wrong.. DCS used the wrong terminology plain and simple.

and yet you still managed to get it wrong each time.. it is NOT IPD! that is incorrect nomenclature, and it's misleading and confusing.. it's a world scale adjustment.. and it has not a single thing to do with pupillary distance. You are adjusting the distance between rendering cameras, not your physical lateral focal distance of your eyes. the 2 are totally unrelated. Why not just pass this on to ED and stop trying to defend and erroneous position.

I have a lot of great respect for the work he did and the person he was.. He will be missed. My condolences to his wife and family.

impressive amount of work.

Great. So once again you quote me, and then create a post in an attempt to somehow show I was wrong. Sorry, but I was not wrong given the information at hand. My definition was 100% correct. The fact that you are talking about 2 different kinds IPD was never mentioned in the original post nor was it mentioned in the screenshot. So how is anyone supposed to know which one you're talking about. My post was related entirely to the physical IPD adjustment. You must be fun at parties. :-)

Great. So once again you quote me, and then create a post in an attempt to somehow show I was wrong. Sorry, but I was not wrong given the information at hand. My definition was 100% correct. The fact that you are talking about 2 different kinds IPD was never mentioned in the original post nor was it mentioned in the screenshot. So how is anyone supposed to know which one you're talking about. My post was related entirely to the physical IPD adjustment. You must be fun at parties. :-)

inter-pupillary distance IPD, has nothing to do with the size of objects. It Is the distance between the pupils of your eyes. setting this distance determines whether or not your eyes have to strain in order to view and keep in focus 2 superimposed images as in the case of VR. So that each image matches the center focal point of each eyeball. Setting the wrong IPD causes eyestrain and headaches.

slow and steady. Everything you see is handmade and drawn every single vertex every single pixel. This takes time. But without question, this is the most accurate model of an A4 Skyhawk you will find in any mod.

As you know, I have been developing an A4 Skyhawk https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=123434 prior to yours. my mod is a bit older and currently only in use by airshow teams, but yours is further along. I have firsthand working knowledge with this aircraft. I was a jet engine mechanic in the Navy in the middle to late seventies. I Had the unique opportunity of having been stationed at Miramar . "Top Gun" during its heyday when these aircraft were in use daily. as a 3-D modeler with close to 10 years experience, I would even join forces with your team. you guys have done an amazing job. I have a number of different aircraft that I'm currently working on , which could benefit from your ability to track the flight model in Excel. Since this is a "community mod" would you be willing to share some of your development technology specifically your ability to data log, with the community?

So where is it ? :)

Yes, I will have Both versions. Geometry work is complete, animation almost complete, Textures have been turned over to a texture artist. I am currently working on an SFM flight model. Implementation of the cockpit is the next major hurdle. My time is divided between this and a couple of other projects. As well as Practicing, Flying For Virtual Black Diamonds Jet Team. :-) I would love however if one of you superduper programmers out there would contact me about doing a AFM/EFM. At the Moment, Those flight models are a little beyond my capabilities. But I wouldn't mind getting some volunteers.

It's been a while since I posted anything. But we now have 2 models The A4-C, and the A4-F Skyhawks, going in .

… And continues

work continues…

Thanks, I Couldn't remember the name of the person doing It. See what happens when you get old…

I thought the sky raider was already being done.