Improve the broken wing model

[gilbertohasnofb]

@wlbragg what do you think if we improve the broken wing model by showing the wing structure through the broken point? I am talking about these green metal structures: http://www.mikejamesmedia.com/modo_media/modo_wip/cessna_310k/cessna_310k_138_ribs.jpg

Here you can see how they look in the 172: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FbGczdVEcts/UQaMdCgj4cI/AAAAAAAAAAs/IquO8W5p6xc/s1600/Cessna+172++glass+cockpit+%287%29.jpg

If you like the idea, I can create a texture for that. If not, feel free to close this issue.

[wlbragg]

Yes, you want to just add the texture to part of the end of the wing? Great idea, I don't like the symmetry of the existing damage. I pinched the ends of the broke off wing, do they need to be opened back up?

[gilbertohasnofb]

Yes, you want to just add the texture to part of the end of the wing?

Yep, we can create a simple 2D object where the wing is broken (similar to the seat mounts for instance).

I pinched the ends of the broke off wing, do they need to be opened back up?

Aren't the wings losing their tips completely when they break? Because if they do, we should be able to see something like that: https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4068/4431293697_5d2de5f2ce_b.jpg

Tell me what you think so I can work on it.

[wlbragg]

we should be able to see something like

Right, but I pinched that broken gap off (because it was just a void anyway), so you probably want the space back?

[gilbertohasnofb]

so you probably want the space back?

Well, I don't particularly want anything unless you agree with me that this would be an improvement to your damaged model :smile: My proposal comes from the idea that when a wing breaks, it would normally break in between those structural points and that normally we would be able to see these structures, but I guess it's also possible to brake a wing in a way they don't show. So in the end it's just a decision of how we want it to look, if we keep it as it is or try to show a bit those green metallic structures like this: http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/images/blog/Cosford/rootendwingkynnspitfire.jpg

[wlbragg]

I don't particularly want anything unless you agree with me

gilbertohasnofb, when I say "you want", especially in this context, it is just a figure of speech meaning I am looking for your definition of what it is your suggesting and how you might anticipate it will look. I absolutely agree with where your going with this idea, I just need to know if you think we should open that space back up, for technical reasons? Is it easier to texture the end if it is a bigger flat surface or does it even matter, technically speaking? I think it would look better if you could see some kind of ribbing. If you agree then I will open the ends up a little bit and then you can do the texture, agreed?

[wlbragg]

https://copy.com/sYJeLFJBzmkJgqBC Above is a link to a zipped up Blend file. It is an example of what I am talking about with the wing. If you have Blender and can get around in it, look at the ends of wing_1BB, compare the two ends and you will see one is pinched together (left), the other is opened up about the same normal width of the wing (right). If not here is what I am talking about. The first two are opened up (right wing)

These next to pictures are showing the left side as the model is now (pinched off somewhat)

Does this need to be one way or the other? If you want to use this Blend file for a test, go ahead and then we can do a final on the original damage.blend file after we decide if the original damage file needs the ends opened up.

Even the way they are now they aren't completely closed or pinched together. Some may be more than others. When I say some, we have the following "broken" wings, wing_1BB wing_1RDLB wing_1RGLB wing_1LDRB wing_1LGRB

[thevirtualfer]

Hi guys.

Unfortunately, my ISP told me that the problem with my connection will be solved only on August/12

cheers.

2015-06-21 1:28 GMT-03:00 wlbragg notifications@github.com:

Here is an example of what I am talking about with the wing. If you have blender and can get around in it, look at the ends of wing_1BB, compare the two ends and you will see one is pinched together (left), the other is opened up about the same normal width of the wing (right). https://copy.com/sYJeLFJBzmkJgqBC Does this need to be one way or the other? If you want to use this Blend file for a test, go ahead and then we can do a final on the original damage.blend file after we decide if the original damage file needs the ends opened up.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Juanvvc/c172p-detailed/issues/319#issuecomment-113862937 .

[onox]

@thevirtualfer Do you happen to live in the US where you can choose from as many ISP's as long as it's the only ISP you can choose from? :open_mouth: I would switch ISP if they can't fix your connection within 1 or 2 weeks.

[gilbertohasnofb]

@onox I believe thevirtualfer lives in Brazil, and depending on where you live these problems can be quite annoying.

@wlbragg in order to show that structure, the wings would need to be opened indeed. I have seen pictures of planes with broken wings which are pinched but also which are opened (and thus the internal structures can be seen), so that's why I said that either way is fine with me. Personally the first option (open hole showing the inner structure) sounds better looking to me, but now we are discussing aesthetics of a broken wing :wink: So what do you think, which option would you prefer?

[tigert]

often the wing just crumbles too. I guess if it is overstress in the air it likely gets torn off, but on crashed aircraft often the skin stays on and just crumbles at the impact point, much like the bending damage we have (had before?)

Doing custom damage model for each kind of overstress and impact might be a bit overkill though. :)

[gilbertohasnofb]

Doing custom damage model for each kind of overstress and impact might be a bit overkill though. :)

Oh sure, I never meant that! I just meant that we should choose a single damaged model, and I proposed to maybe change ours as to show the inner structure. But I am also fine leaving it as it is since our damaged model is quite good :smile:

[dany93]

I'm afraid you are making this aircraft heavy (in Mo) for secondary features. In the end, bad for the fps... And impossible for those who do not have a very recent computer. It is still very usable (thank to those who succeeded at this), please let us keep this.

[gilbertohasnofb]

@dany93 Well Dany, I was thinking about adding a single 2D object of the wing structure, and the texture could well be inside one of the already existent png files, so I hardly think this would make the aircraft any heavier on the CPU. But I kind of see your point, although we surely have different views on this. As much as I agree that the model shouldn't be an overkill of thousands of unnecessary polygons or overly detailed minor parts (door handles, seats, etc.), I also care for the aesthetics of the model very much (after well, my main work here is to deal with textures). If we would only think about fps on low end computers, we probably would have only improved systems and FDM while the whole model would have stayed as the previous default plane, which looked horrible in my opinion (but gave great fps even in old humble machines).

[wlbragg]

@dany93, thank you for keeping us grounded. As gilbertohasnofb said, we are only talking about a single 2D object of the wing structure, and the texture could well be inside one of the already existent png files. I think gilbertohasnofb was correct in suggesting we look at the possibility of doing this minor texture upgrade to the existing damage model. I was never happy with my final version being so symmetrical looking and clean at the breaks and bends in the wings. I always had in the back of my mind the thought of coming back to this at some point in time and making it look a little more "realistic". I didn't know how I was going to go about that and all along thought I would have to redo the models. But gilbertohasnofb suggestion of just modifying a simple texture would make all the difference in the world as to the look of the damage at little or no cost in performance. His idea answered my original concerns without him even knowing I had them. So I am all for a little texture work on the damage. All the talk of opening the wings up was just my ignorance of not knowing what he needs technically to place a texture at the end of the broken wing. I don't think we are talking about adding any new model parts at all, just potentially closing the ends of the broken wing tips where I pinched it together when I broke it and the reason I did that back then was not for any other reason than I didn't know what to do at the end so I just pinched them almost closed.

[gilbertohasnofb]

Cool @wlbragg, I am already working on this. And by the way, is this a "new feature" or a "bug fix"? We are basically improving a feature we already have, so I guess it could be fine to have a 3.6 release milestone. What do you think? Any ideas, @onox ?

[gilbertohasnofb]

@wlbragg Done, see the file Models/wing.png on master. I didn't add these structures to every livery's wing.png as we don't need to make it livery-dependent. Let me know what you think.

[onox]

We are basically improving a feature we already have, so I guess it could be fine to have a 3.6 release milestone.

If you look at that way you can consider the 3.6 release milestone :smile:

[gilbertohasnofb]

@onox thanks :smile:

[onox]

Is that commit you added to master the only thing we can expect or does this issue need more commits?

[gilbertohasnofb]

From my part that was the only commit (unless wlbragg wants me to improve something on that texture). But now wlbragg will have to create the 2D object and apply the texture in his damaged model, so I guess we should wait for that before closing this.

[onox]

Feature branches :sob: :sob: :sob:

[gilbertohasnofb]

I don't understand, sorry... you mean I shouldn't have pushed it to the master?

[onox]

Never mind @gilbertohasnofb :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

[gilbertohasnofb]

No, please tell me so I don't do the same thing next time. You mean that since this is not only a texture fix but also will include some other modifications I should have created a branch for it?

[onox]

That would have been nicer, yes.

[onox]

Shall I force push again to pretend it didn't happen? :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

[gilbertohasnofb]

Shall I force push again to pretend it didn't happen? :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

Is that really necessary? These force pushes have been breaking my repository all the time, and this is just a texture modification. What about this: I will create a new branch now in which wlbragg will do his work. If any modifications to this texture is needed, I will also do it in that branch. Then we merge back with the master once the work is done.

Also, next time I am adding something (texture, sound) which is not a simple substitution but needs some more work (some programming, adjusting model, etc.) I will always create a new branch. Is that all right?

Sorry for making a mess :cry:

[onox]

I think we can better do it now. I'm here for assistance anyway.

Can you backup that texture file you added?

[onox]

I will always create a new branch. Is that all right?

Yes! :smile:

[gilbertohasnofb]

Ok, then go for it! And yep, I always do my work on a different folder so I always have a copy of it. Just reset the master and I will create a new branch!

[onox]

Okay. Do this:

1. git reset --hard 636767ac4dd90e5d173846c60b7dfcb31f86ebd1
2. git pull

[gilbertohasnofb]

Done. So just to confirm, now I do a git checkout -b bug-319, then add my stuff and commit it, then I do a git push -u right?

[onox]

Yes.

[gilbertohasnofb]

Sorry onox but it didn't work. After I did git push -u, I got:

Branch master set up to track remote branch master from origin.
Everything up-to-date

And I can't see the new branch nor the modifications here on GitHub...

[onox]

Btw, sorry that I'm so persistent on it, but if you always do your stuff in a feature/topic branch, then your work can be reviewed and tested, and when it's ready it can be merged to master. If instead you just simply commit directly to master, then no one can review and test your changes. If you accidentally break something, you break it for everyone.

If you're the only person working on a repository, then committing directly to master is OK, but if you're working in a team (as we are), you should really try to use these feature/topic branches. So I hope you understand it a bit :smiley:

[onox]

What does git branch say?

[gilbertohasnofb]

That I am at bug-319 branch. Locally everything is fine, the problem was with the push I believe.

[onox]

git push -u origin bug-319

[onox]

Did you add a commit to bug-319 branch?

[gilbertohasnofb]

git push -u origin bug-319 did the trick, thanks! So I guess the problem was that I was using only git push -u. Thanks again, onox...

[onox]

I got it:

From https://github.com/Juanvvc/c172p-detailed
 * [new branch]      bug-319    -> origin/bug-319
Already up-to-date.

[gilbertohasnofb]

Okay, so let me repeat this so it doesn't get lost:

@wlbragg Done, see the file Models/wing.png on the branch bug-319. I didn't add these structures to every livery's wing.png as we don't need to make it livery-dependent. Let me know what you think.

PS: you are a saint, onox!

[wlbragg]

OK, I'm a little behind, give me a bit (later today) and I'll take a look, thanks!

[gilbertohasnofb]

No rush at all, take your time and let me know if you need anything to make it work. Thanks!

[gilbertohasnofb]

@wlbragg related in a certain way: https://github.com/Juanvvc/c172p-detailed/issues/329

[wlbragg]

gilbertohasnofb, I have both ends of the "both wings broken" model closed off and uv mapped with your new texture. For some currently unknown reason, it is not carrying over to the model in FG (I am completely new to mapping textures to models in Blender). So I'm preparing to post a forum request for help shortly. I can't wait to see it in the sim. I was under the impression that we were going to add some "damage" texture to the top and bottom of the damaged wings also, like ripped away skin maybe. Do you think this is feasible or reasonable. Are there costs to using a different texture on the damaged model than the one used on the undamaged model?

[gilbertohasnofb]

Oh, that is really not my area of expertise either! I have so far only created textures, and then either @Juanvvc, @thevirtualfer or @dg-505 would apply them in the model. So it's better to ask them what's the best route to take.

[wlbragg]

So it's better to ask them what's the best route to take.

OK, the question still stands for @Juanvvc, @thevirtualfer or @dg-505.

What cost are associated to having a totally different texture set for damaged models?

[wlbragg]

As much as I want to do this it is a little over my head. Texturing in Blender is an art and requires great skill and stamina for anything detailed. I just don't have the experience (or stamina) to do this. I spent some more time on this using a different approach and realized I don't know enough to pull this off. As a matter of fact, along with this issue we really need a modeling expert to come in an repair some of the existing UV maps in the various blends. But I didn't want to just ignore this issue so I am letting you know where we're at with this.

[gilbertohasnofb]

@wlbragg there is no problem, this would be implemented only for FG 3.8 so we have plenty of time. Let's focus now in solving the issues for the 3.6 release and then we tackle this once again, and maybe some of the 3D modellers would help us as well.