iskenderwang / 787-family Goto Github PK

These were messed up in the -8 because at the very beginning I had used the -9's materials as the backbone of the merge, the chokes had been adjusted so there are two separate versions

ND would be highest priority. Very similar to the default Boeing ND. PFD would be nice

Integrate autopush support, per requests

The new touchdown sound and the V1 callout do not play for some reason. I will fix that right now

The files are reliant on the 787-8 folder. Rename all of the folder paths to 787-family to make this package independent.

The old one (APU_inlet) wasn't involved in any animation and wasn't even in the right location, plus the UV made it look like a glitch, so I just removed it

I actually meant that the gears will sink into the runway whenever the nose is up, for example on touchdown and when you rotate on takeoff the mains will become partially submerged in the runway, for example

I also have tried landing it with minimum weight, to see if that would alleviate weight on the wheels but it still sinks in

@MarcinListkowski So in the aftermath of our fix for the wingflex it seems a new, more minor issue has emerged – whereas before the replay would capture and play back the wingflex (glitches and all) exactly as it occurred in the flight at all times without any problem, the change from property-rule to autopilot affected something in some way so that now, even though it definitely is still recording the correct wingflex parameters as is shown any time you pause the replay, while playing back any recording it appears that the wingflex value properties (/sim/systems/wingflexer/z-m to be specific) are in a constant conflict between the state of the aircraft's wings when the replay was initiated vs. the actual values that were recorded. This leads to a bit of a comical fluttering effect as you can see here:

Are you aware of this situation? I'm hoping perhaps Thorsten or someone else highly knowledgeable in these areas might have mentioned something about this. I don't see any way or reason to further fix this through the aircraft's own code for the flight recorder or references to wingflexer, so I may need to take this over to the core devs. What are your thoughts chief? Or anyone else's for that matter? 😎

Sometimes when I open the navigation panel after loading in a flightplan, I see this

:

Notice that there is a waypoint that is off of the canvas. Can you please fix this? Thanks.

To not just have it looking better and more realistic, but also to improve the functionality. Any attempts I made to try using the CDU or FMC ended with it getting stuck – it should eventually be so that instead of an irrelevant/unnecessary item, it's an essential and working part of the experience like in the real thing

Currently work in progress

Do you think you could animate the cowl doors on the engine, as if someone were performing maintenance on it? Thanks.

As the name suggests – can't wait to add this and I think it's gonna be a treat for everyone once I've got it in place. Of course big up @tdammers for the fantastic work on this, and everyone else who was involved as well

On the flightgear wiki page https://wiki.flightgear.org/Boeing_787-8_Dreamliner:_Flightplan_and_Procedures_Tutorial I read about the flight plan database of virtual airlines.
I know that I need to make such flight plans, that is xml files for my airline in /FMC-DB/FMC-Flights.xml directory. Neither on the wiki page, nor in the readme or anywhere in the aircraft files I could find how such a file should look like. I did not find such a file either. Maybe I searched wrongly. Drealiner on FGwiki screenshots looks like old version, so this feature may not exist, but it would be very useful not only for virtual airlines, but also for regular users. It definitely improves the realism.

Just like @legoboyvdlp had mentioned – calling on anyone who has some knowledge in this area and is willing to go in and see what they can produce to replace the unpopular and buggy/problematic old FBW :)

Describe the bug
For the -9 they aren't at all functional or in the right location, and though the -10 has its in the right place, the animation is off

To Reproduce
Test the wipers on any setting in the -9 and -10

Expected behavior
The wipers on all 787 variants should work in the proper fashion

For both the -8 and the -9, or potentially even each engine variant

As seen above

Like in the 737 and other aircraft, and to have the option of using separate axes for rudder and tiller

Describe the bug
Left rudder input gives right animation.

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Go to chase view
2. Give left rudder input
3. Observe rudder turning right

Expected behavior
Rudder turning left

The issue of rain/the elements entering the cockpit had remained present in the old (current) 3D model, so hopefully our new 3D model can end up resolving this.

Describe the bug
FlightGear performs worse when in direct line-of-sight of the external model. Is being investigated. Lower-end computers are affected more. The exterior model should also be refined and enhanced in the general sense.

To reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Launch sim
2. Switch to exterior view
3. Performance drops

In FMC-DB/Vocabulary/Possible_Words.xml there's an extra PropertyList on line 11763 -- please remove line 11763 so it can be parsed properly. Thanks.

I tried something, but we're counting on @Marsdolphin to transfer over his existing work from the A330 😎 very cool

Would be great to have it working (at all, first and foremost) universally and to have a way to toggle it on or off, could be an essential tool for any MP or VATSIM situations

I have confirmed that the config section and gear-agl-ft.xml files are set up and referenced seemingly correctly per the wiki – this can be seen in 787-common.xml, which IS included in all the other set files and works as expected for the most part – yet, despite this, it is true that this error keeps coming up:

  144.61 [ALRT]:nasal     C:\Jenkins\workspace\Windows-nightly\flightgear\src\Scripting\NasalSys.cxx:1467: Nasal runtime error: nil used in numeric context
  144.61 [ALRT]:nasal     C:\Jenkins\workspace\Windows-nightly\flightgear\src\Scripting\NasalSys.cxx:1483:   at C:/Users/IskenderWang/FlightGear/Custom Aircraft/Aircraft/787-family/Nasal/it-autoflight.nas, line 885

I'm a bit lost as to why – any help when you have the time is appreciated @Octal450 !! :) if you recall we discussed this a few months ago, so I went to check but what's odd is that everything does appear to be in place as they should be. Once this is handled I can feel at peace updating ITAF to the latest version :D

Was thankfully able to find a way to smooth it out without causing problems, for the longest it looked the way it did in this picture (even tho it's a great pic):

Not really a big problem, seen it with other aircraft too like the 757 but it would make it much more better to have a gear that didnt sink

Adding detail to the wings and improving the UV

There is some very old code in question, and I don't know Nasal very well, so I thought it would be best to leave this here for someone more knowledgeable to have a look and see if they could come up with a solution:

  126.08 [ALRT]:nasal     C:\Jenkins\workspace\Windows-nightly\flightgear\src\Scripting\NasalSys.cxx:1467: Nasal runtime error: undefined symbol: dual_control_tools
  126.08 [ALRT]:nasal     C:\Jenkins\workspace\Windows-nightly\flightgear\src\Scripting\NasalSys.cxx:1483:   at C:/Users/IskenderWang/FlightGear/Custom Aircraft/Aircraft/787-family/DualControl/DualControl_base.nas, line 9

  160.62 [ALRT]:nasal     C:\Jenkins\workspace\Windows-nightly\flightgear\src\Scripting\NasalSys.cxx:1467: Nasal runtime error: nil used in numeric context
  160.62 [ALRT]:nasal     C:\Jenkins\workspace\Windows-nightly\flightgear\src\Scripting\NasalSys.cxx:1483:   at C:/Users/IskenderWang/FlightGear/Custom Aircraft/Aircraft/787-family/Nasal/brakesystem.nas, line 79

One of them appears to be a variable name that has no definition or meaning (at least not anymore), and in the other it tries to do math on a yasim property for gross weight, which doesn't work as it turns out and a JSBsim solution would be preferable anyways. Any suggestions welcome :)

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I've noticed the model could use some work in:

• Missing faces like inside of gear bays, back of gear bay doors, inside of the APU exhaust (might be related to #40) - all of those are see-through
• Missing details, especially pack inlets, maybe WiFi dome

Describe the solution you'd like
Improve the model. I've never done 3d modelling, but maybe there are some small bits I could contribute while learning.

Describe alternatives you've considered
no alternatives

Additional context
How does one go about it? Is it even in line of your plans @IskenderWang or you want to have this repo without new polys? How about not destroying existing liveries/paint kits?

Describe the bug
The ground service vehicles for the -10 are not quite in the right positions, since it currently still borrows those directly from the -9 without any further adjustments

To Reproduce
Select any one of the available ground service vehicles while using the 787-10

Expected behavior
All the ground services vehicles in their proper positions, based on the -10 model

787-8 and 787-9 have different flaps settings, one has a flaps 10 setting and the other has a flaps 15 setting

Hello,

I noticed that the new model for the 787 has been added. When possible, could you please release an updated paintkit? I would really love to make liveries for this aircraft.

Also, I know that Pilot 2938 is committed to making liveries already, but do you think you could add me to this project? I can turn out liveries pretty fast, and I would love to contribute to this project.

I have also made paintkits myself, and with a UV map I could make one for you as well.

Thanks!

Since I ported the extra views from the -8 directly to the -9 set files, they are not positioned correctly. This will have to be fixed eventually (by someone familiar with how to do so).

The default 787-8 livery has a door and windows on the engine

Describe the bug
The passenger windows are not in the same place in the liveries and in the emission texture.

To reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Open FlightGear using the 787-8 Genx.
2. Set the time to Dusk.
3. Take a close look at the passenger windows.
4. See error

Expected behavior
The light emission should be coming from the same place as the windows in the liveries.

Screenshots

Specifications

• OS: Fedora Linux
• Version: 35

Comments
I don't know if this issue is exclusive to the 787-8 Genx or if it's also present in the other models.

Yes, I have tried using other liveries, and there are a few which don't have this issue, for example Air Austral (REU.png) which seems to be based on the 4K paintkit.

I believe this could be fixed by updating the non-4K paintkits so that they reflect the real position of the passenger windows, so future liveries don't run into this issue.

Only a small part of the spoiler opens up when it is at full position

As title saids. Currently being done

I don't understand why or how they worked in the original 787-9 repo's version, but one consequence of this merger (even tho it's minor) is that the window lights only work for the -8 at the moment

Automatic holding patterns and VNAV functionality that the OG A/P had, the whole thing was a good effort for sure but it has since been replaced by the superior ITAF – ball is entirely in @Octal450's park with this one, no rush at all, just whenever he decides to get to it

Anyone else noticed how odd the FDM is? It requires such a large input just to roll a little and when you drop, the plane really wants to drop, and it really gets blown around by wind. And I mean if the FDM is 100% correct but it still doesn't handle correctly it could be possible to make small changes just to make it flyable, eg. the E-jets had pretty realistic FDMs but it handled horribly and the FDM was manually "fixed"

I selected the plane on the screenshot and FMC shows different engine and aircraft informations.

I don't even know how this is possible and to what extent it's related to Wingflexer/JSBsim as opposed to the model itself or any other factor, but yeah... should you accelerate the time to at least 4x (becomes even more severe on 8x) Wingflexer begins to crap out and cause all sorts of fuckery with the wing model until eventually, if you let it continue unchecked (I had, naively assuming it would return to normal eventually) it apparently can lead to whatever tf this is supposed to be:

after entering the route on the route manager ,
later on continue the flight
after reaching the first waypoint, the name of the waypoint overlaps the flight on the display and this continuedly happens the waypoint doesnt disappear after reaching.

pls fix this issue soon , this is my favorite plane

i think the issue is in the coding of the NAV present in the instruments folder

It's not a critical bug, but the liveries for this aircraft have unrealistic window placement and cargo doors. The cargo doors are completely opaque, and they aren't in the right position. Do you think this could be adjusted? I also have some liveries for this aircraft that I would like to contribute.