SAM's for community made ships in SF2:NA.

[Fubar512 1,350]

Hi-poly 4K60 (SA-N-3) by Krizis....

 

 

 

[KJakker 885]

I got the Seaslug launcher on Hinchinbrooke's HMS Antrim working.

 

Antrim_DATA.7z

 

 

I noticed that I missed a few things in the above file so here is an update of it.Antrim_DATA.7z

[colmack 660]

Should all of the ships be upgraded to the new weapon data system? or just the ones that carry multiple missile systems the reason I'm wondering because was thinking about doing a few myself...but if they already work in the old system?

Edited March 24, 2012 by colmack

[+WhiteBoySamurai 1,094]

Should all of the ships be upgraded to the new weapon data system? or just the ones that carry multiple missile systems the reason I'm wondering because was thinking about doing a few myself...but if they already work in the old system?

 

Some of them don't need it, and in fact the new way of entering launcher data doesn't seem to work well (sometimes not at all) with surface-to-surface missiles. Basically, any ships without SAMs, especially without multiple launchers, should still be fine AFAIK.

 

For example, the Iowa can mostly stay the way it is; the guns and Tomahawks are working as they are. But it does need new effects and detection entries, GunnerID entries for fire control radar, collision model, and other stuff. I did most of that already on my install, and I'll share that if the IdiotTeam doesn't update it themselves first.

[KJakker 885]

Some of them don't need it, and in fact the new way of entering launcher data doesn't seem to work well (sometimes not at all) with surface-to-surface missiles. Basically, any ships without SAMs, especially without multiple launchers, should still be fine AFAIK.

 

For example, the Iowa can mostly stay the way it is; the guns and Tomahawks are working as they are. But it does need new effects and detection entries, GunnerID entries for fire control radar, collision model, and other stuff. I did most of that already on my install, and I'll share that if the IdiotTeam doesn't update it themselves first.

 

I still think that some of the ships with only on launcher should still be updated in certain instances, for example if the ship had the ability to control multiple missile despite only having one launcher, due to the new "MaxMissilesInAir=X" entry.

 

As for the Iowa's, What about arming their MK141 Quad Canister launchers for the Harpoon missiles so that they have their 16 Harpoons in addition to the 32 Tomahawks?

Edited March 25, 2012 by KJakker

[+KnightWolf45 1,147]

Some of them don't need it, and in fact the new way of entering launcher data doesn't seem to work well (sometimes not at all) with surface-to-surface missiles. Basically, any ships without SAMs, especially without multiple launchers, should still be fine AFAIK.

 

For example, the Iowa can mostly stay the way it is; the guns and Tomahawks are working as they are. But it does need new effects and detection entries, GunnerID entries for fire control radar, collision model, and other stuff. I did most of that already on my install, and I'll share that if the IdiotTeam doesn't update it themselves first.

most memberes off the Idiot team are having a hard time in RL so please relese you update.

Edited March 25, 2012 by cocas

[+WhiteBoySamurai 1,094]

I still think that some of the ships with only on launcher should still be updated in certain instances, for example if the ship had the ability to control multiple missile despite only having one launcher, due to the new "MaxMissilesInAir=X" entry.

 

As for the Iowa's, What about arming their MK141 Quad Canister launchers for the Harpoon missiles so that they have their 16 Harpoons in addition to the 32 Tomahawks?

 

Yeah, ships with multiple missile rails on a launcher are good candidates for update. There actually aren't very many ships like that out there, though.

 

I'd love to add Harpoons to the Iowa, but like I said, the surface-to-surface launchers on ships aren't working right. I *might* be able to add them in as a separate missile type and still have them controlled by the main WeaponSystem, but it will look strange since they have to have the exact same facing as the Tomahawks in that case. I'll try posting on the TW boards and see if I can get more info. If nothing turns up, I'll post a "good enough for now" Iowa to the thread.

[KJakker 885]

Yeah, ships with multiple missile rails on a launcher are good candidates for update. There actually aren't very many ships like that out there, though.

 

I'd love to add Harpoons to the Iowa, but like I said, the surface-to-surface launchers on ships aren't working right. I *might* be able to add them in as a separate missile type and still have them controlled by the main WeaponSystem, but it will look strange since they have to have the exact same facing as the Tomahawks in that case. I'll try posting on the TW boards and see if I can get more info. If nothing turns up, I'll post a "good enough for now" Iowa to the thread.

 

I wonder why the main Weapon System on ground objects uses Surface to Surface missile against aircraft? I have not see a fighter try and launch an air to ground weapon against a aircraft in flight.

[Fubar512 1,350]

Surface to surface missile launchers on ships are working just fine, as long as there are no entries under "weapons systems" to confuse them. You must have their "TargetType" declaration set to "GROUND".

 

Right Dave?

[colmack 660]

I'm working with the Iron Duke type-23 released by SUICIDAL in the SF1 section wondering with the VLS since its giving problems to you WBS if I made it have a YAW would that free up the problem of VLS not working?

[+WhiteBoySamurai 1,094]

Surface to surface missile launchers on ships are working just fine, as long as there are no entries under "weapons systems" to confuse them. You must have their "TargetType" declaration set to "GROUND".

 

Right Dave?

 

Yep, got all that, but they're still not shooting. I tried different weapon types (command guided, semi-auto command, and now the new cruise missile type), but doesn't seem to make a difference. Could you please take a look at the CG-47 entries and see if you can figure it out?

 

[DetectSystem]

TargetType=AIR_AND_GROUND

RadarSearchTime=0.1

RadarSearchRange=560000.0

RadarSurfaceSearchRange=50000.0

RadarSearchStrength=450

RadarTrackTime=0.5

RadarTrackRange=320000.0

RadarTrackStrength=450

RadarPosition=0.0,25.0,15.0

RadarMinimumRange=0.1

RadarMinimumAlt=40.0

RadarFamilyName=SPY-1

RadarSearchFreq=2.0

RadarTrackFreq=4.2

RadarMissileGuidanceFreq=16.0

RadarSearchCW=FALSE

RadarTrackCW=FALSE

RadarMissileGuidanceCW=FALSE

MultipleDetect=TRUE

MultipleTrack=TRUE

DataLink=TRUE

NetworkType=USN_SHIP

OpticalSight=TRUE

NightSight=TRUE

VisualRange=24000.0

VisualMinimumAlt=0.0

ViewportPosition=0.0,-6.5,44.8

MaxVisibleDistance=30000.0

RadarCrossSection=2000.0

 

 

[WeaponSystem]

//this space intentionally left blank

 

 

[LauncherSSM]

SystemType=GUNNER

GunnerID=7

TargetType=GROUND

MissileRange=130000.0

MinMissileRange=1000

TrackingRange=130000.0

PitchLimited=TRUE

PitchAngleRate=45

MinPitch=15

MaxPitch=75

DefaultPitchAngle=35.0

YawLimited=FALSE

YawAngleRate=90

MinYaw=0

MaxYaw=360

DefaultYawAngle=90

DataLink=TRUE

MissileLaunchTime=1.0

ViewportPosition=-4.1,-84.16,50.0

IndependentSearchChance=50

LookAroundChance=100

GunnerFireChance=100

GunnerFireTime=0.5

MaxMissilesInAir=2

YawModelNodeName=dummySSM // The "DummySSM" node is an invisible box linked to the hull, hidden among the Harpoon launchers.

PitchModelNodeName=dummySSM

MinExtentPosition=-6.35,-87.525,2.801

MaxExtentPosition=-1.617,-83.724,7.999

 

[Missile05]

SystemType=MISSILE

GunnerID=7

MissileID=1

WeaponTypeName=RGM-84A

WeaponPosition=-4.1,-84.16,6.04

ShowMissile=FALSE // If I change ShowMissile to TRUE, I can see the Harpoon pivoting, but it won't launch.

IndependentPitchMovement=FALSE

ReloadCount=7

ReloadTime=1.0

 

Not sure what the issue could be here. None of the new default ships have any working SSM launchers; are there any third party ships that have it working with the new format?

 

 

As for VLS, when trying out new ways of doing the launchers for the Kirov, CG-52, and Burkes, I tried taking out the WeaponSystem entry, putting in dummy launch nodes below deck with YawLimited=FALSE, but only got limited success. They won't shoot unless aircraft fly directly overhead. So colmack, AFAIK it won't make a difference to have yaw on the Duke's launcher. It should be able to still work as the WeaponSystem with minor modifications.

[colmack 660]

 

 

As for VLS, when trying out new ways of doing the launchers for the Kirov, CG-52, and Burkes, I tried taking out the WeaponSystem entry, putting in dummy launch nodes below deck with YawLimited=FALSE, but only got limited success. They won't shoot unless aircraft fly directly overhead. So colmack, AFAIK it won't make a difference to have yaw on the Duke's launcher. It should be able to still work as the WeaponSystem with minor modifications.

 

 

It is working fine with the old system "TOASTED MY ASS" but was thinking about adding the SSM she has tubes for them right behind the VLS and thought it might be easier with the new system....

[KJakker 885]

Here, try this test scenario. It is not realistic but it is a ship launching SSM's using the new system.

 

 

[+WhiteBoySamurai 1,094]

Tried the mission: It's launching within visual range for me, which is a good start. If I move the ship any further away in the mission editor, though, it won't shoot. I'll try messing around with the detection settings more and see if there's any improvement.

 

Ideally, we want to get SSMs launching from where they're supposed to (i.e. Exocets from the forward box launchers on the County, and not from Sea Slug racks), and we need to make sure that a surface-to-surface missile system will still work if the ship already has SAMs.

[Fubar512 1,350]

Dave and I have the Iowas firing their 16 inchers and launching Tomahawks well over the horizon (well over 20 NM distance by radar). In fact, so far, that the 16" rounds are landing about 1,000 meters short...

[KJakker 885]

Ideally, we want to get SSMs launching from where they're supposed to (i.e. Exocets from the forward box launchers on the County, and not from Sea Slug racks), and we need to make sure that a surface-to-surface missile system will still work if the ship already has SAMs.

 

I have been looking the the ".OUT" files for some of the existing ships and I thing that it is going to take more that INI editing to get all launchers on a number of them working. They just do not have the necessary components or structure to link a launcher to. For example the HMS Antrim's two Seacat launchers.

[+WhiteBoySamurai 1,094]

Dave and I have the Iowas firing their 16 inchers and launching Tomahawks well over the horizon (well over 20 NM distance by radar). In fact, so far, that the 16" rounds are landing about 1,000 meters short...

 

Sounds great. Would you mind telling us how it's done?

 

 

I have been looking the the ".OUT" files for some of the existing ships and I thing that it is going to take more that INI editing to get all launchers on a number of them working. They just do not have the necessary components or structure to link a launcher to. For example the HMS Antrim's two Seacat launchers.

 

Yeah, unfortunately there are some models that don't come with an .OUT, or have object names like "mesh123" and "objectXYZ," or don't have proper hierarchy and pivots for new weapons, and so on. It's better to just skip the lost causes for now.

[orsin 159]

<p>for Los details or even the original Max file of udaloy and Slava class please refer to YEYEYE. If you have difficulty I may be able to help.<br><br></p><p><br><br> <br></p><p>I haven't got time to try NA's new naval system. Does it support multiple types of missile on one ship now? Can sandbox and sa-n-6 coexist?</p>

[KJakker 885]

<p>for Los details or even the original Max file of udaloy and Slava class please refer to YEYEYE. If you have difficulty I may be able to help.<br><br></p><p><br><br> <br></p><p>I haven't got time to try NA's new naval system. Does it support multiple types of missile on one ship now? Can sandbox and sa-n-6 coexist?</p>

 

There are still some issue with SSM's and SAM's on the same ship that need to be resolved. However multiple missile types are possible on the same ship. The Third Wire Kiev for example has two SA-N-3 launchers and two SA-N-4 launchers all of which will engage aircraft.

[+WhiteBoySamurai 1,094]

Yes, multiple SAM types are working. I have four types of missiles and about 10 separate launchers working on the Kirov, for example. I'm not sure if we'll be able to get both Grumbles and Sandboxes/Shipwrecks working together until TK comes out and explains exactly how to do so.

I'd love to get my hands on the source files of the Slava and Udaloys so I can fix the shadow issues and get the flight decks positioned better. (It has to have the same pivot as the main model's parent object, and right now I'm just guessing --probably incorrectly-- that it's 0,0,0.)

[KJakker 885]

I read the comment about redoing the Type 22 Broadsword class frigate over in the "Modern Royal Navy ship update pack" thread. I thought the "Type22_data.ini" file that I have attached might be of use to you. It is very rough and in need of quite a bit if adjustment but it does have the aft Seawolf launcher working.

Type22_data.7z

[KJakker 885]

I read the comment about redoing the Type 22 Broadsword class frigate over in the "Modern Royal Navy ship update pack" thread. I thought the "Type22_data.ini" file that I have attached might be of use to you. It is very rough and in need of quite a bit if adjustment but it does have the aft Seawolf launcher working.

Type22_data.7z

 

 

Here is an update to the file above. I had a mesh name wrong for the aft launcher. It has been changed as well as some other minor adjustments.

 

Update_Type22_data.7z

 

[+WhiteBoySamurai 1,094]

Thanks, I'll check it out. Maybe we can get the entire Royal Navy finished soon.

[KJakker 885]

I have been using a Hex editor to work around the lack of a .OUT file for finding the Mesh names. I found that the Exocet launchers for the Type22 are named Exocet1,Exocet02,Exocet03, and Exocet04. Also take a look at the aft FC radar and aft Seawolf launcher. They look like they may have some animation or mesh alignment issues.

Edited April 6, 2012 by KJakker

[colmack 660]

here is a data ini for the Anzac/Yavuz I put together prob needs some more work on some numbers as the Rim 7 cant hit a barn with the wrong side of a cow but it works...

ANZAC_DATA.zip

Edited April 6, 2012 by colmack