Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  3. Today

  4. Wings Over Ogaden (DEMO!)

    omegaeleven commented on omegaeleven's file in User Made Campaigns

    Did you make a mod folder? Maybe you accidentally placed it into one of the SF2 games..
  5. The Royal Navy in Korea, circa 1950.......
  6. Well, here we get into a fog... If you know which mods are "unethical" or something and can confirm this, point out which ones they are and I'm sure the team won't want to keep them. If something like this was "inherited" and is being used, it is due to pure ignorance, and not due to bad intentions, therefore, I cannot call it "unethical", as there is no intention of cheating anyone, and no one there is nothing to profit from it. I don't know what happened at the time, and if I had been one of those who suffered, I would have been pissed too. But I think it's wrong to point the finger at someone who wasn't involved in this imbroglio, and just wants to do something nice for the SF2 community, with heart and good will, and also doesn't know what happened and wasn't even involved. If these "stolen" mods are present in the current installation and this can be proven, it would be nice to point out which ones they are so that the situation can be resolved. I'm absolutely sure they would do so willingly.
  7. Yesterday
  8. swambast started following YAP AND RISING SUN for wov and Vietnam Lovers – Unite!
  9. I know the golden era of Vietnam passion is behind us, and many prefer post-Vietnam flying these days. But, I’ve been especially motivated by some recent activities. This includes some behind the scenes discussions with veteran modders. And GKABS recent work with the Intruder, has been really great to see. Beyond this, considering the never ending controversary of YAP stuff, multiple tragedies on the WTR Project and a general lapse in Vietnam-era assets…I thought it would be interesting to start a specific thread for those that still find this Vietnam era appealing. And especially any modders that would be willing to potentially collaborate on projects. From there I had some additional ideas to share if there's enough interest. Welcome your thoughts and comments on this topic, thanks.
  10. I got the first part when the RW group first dropped it. Honestly, I was NOT impressed, either with the aircraft or the terrain mods. Now, that being said there are some nice 'eye candy' pieces that would look good incorporated into other period terrains. But top of the line, no. (now, remember I"m speaking ONLY of this 1st part) The original WW2 PTO mods were also not that impressive, although, again, having some nice bits. And don't even get me started on YAPs Persian Gulf fiasco. I do remember their basic tennant --- "we're telling (selling) stories, not the various objects needed to tell them" (or words to that effect)
  11. Swambast makes the point I was trying for, but with better words. No matter how it's sliced, it will still contains "unethicly sourced" items. I remember the raging shitstorm when it was being released for WoV. A large number of you don't. DA: no, i'm not in the group. To quote somebody famous "would I want to join a club that has me as a member?"

  12. Wings Over Ogaden (DEMO!)

    Sheriff commented on omegaeleven's file in User Made Campaigns

    Here you go path.bmp
  13. Sorry, I really was not planning to post anything, but holy hell...I mean...holy hell. So much misinformation here, makes my head spin. For example, there are countless items from SF1/YAP ported to the new SF2 version as part of that scope - does that mean now it's all ethical, moral and legal...LOL? There are still plenty of concerns with content in this revamp project (not said lightly and supported by evidence). The project leader is absolutely trying to do the right thing, but he's inherited a hodge podge of illegal and/or unauthorized assets that's still used for the SF2 version. And there remains unethical modders that in my opinion stain the entire efforts undertaken. The leader is caught in the crossfire between progress and doing it ethically; please don't make sweeping claims and facts on this topic as myself and many other veteran modders lived through this time then and now and know the real story – and this portrayal is not it.
  14. I was planning on it as I need to do a Block III version of the Growler, and the newer pods would need to be done. When that happens isn't set in stone, but it is planned.
  15. Hi Eric, is the Next Generation Jamming pod AN/ALQ-249(V)1 in the works for the Growler at all by any chance?
  16. are you in the group? and if not do you want an invite? its private but they havent been too piccky lets say not as open as here but way way less restrictive than DAT
  17. So, can we have such things in this game? Yes, we can. I saw the method in F/A-18A I downloaded. It essentially creates a fake highlift surface which is activated under given conditions and prevents you from exceeding the given limit. Only in Hornet this fake surface slices down the total lift force - which works, but is not really optimal. Firstly, if you pull really hard and go at high AoA you will already experience the lift force going down - then this limiter kicks in and the situation can quickly turn into accelerated stall. Secondly, I haven't managed to make it work for stock F-16. The solution is to apply pitch downward force instead of slicing the lift. Much simpler and effective. This is the type of limiter I put into MiG-23MLD. If you try to go above 25AoA it kicks you back five or so degrees. MLD didn't have fly-by-wire and had simple limiter, so this is even close to historical behavior. Moreso, MLD is not particularly twitchy plane so it works fine. [AoA_Limiter] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE Cmdc=-0.5 DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_ANGLE_OF_ATTACK Setting[1].Angle=45 Setting[1].DeployValue=25.0 Setting[1].RetractValue=24.9 MaxDeflection=45.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=10.0 SmoothDeployment=TRUE But if we try this for more twitchy planes - like F-16 - this creates weird pitch wobbling. Not good, so we have to be more precise. This is the limiter for stock F-16A [G_Limiter] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE Cmdc=-0.1 DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_G_LOADING Setting[1].Angle=45 Setting[1].DeployValue=8.0 Setting[1].RetractValue=7.99 MaxDeflection=45.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=0.5 SmoothDeployment=TRUE [G_Limiter2] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE Cmdc=-0.05 DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_G_LOADING Setting[1].Angle=45 Setting[1].DeployValue=8.5 Setting[1].RetractValue=8.49 MaxDeflection=45.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=0.5 SmoothDeployment=TRUE [G_Limiter3] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE Cmdc=-0.025 DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_G_LOADING Setting[1].Angle=45 Setting[1].DeployValue=9.0 Setting[1].RetractValue=8.99 MaxDeflection=45.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=0.5 SmoothDeployment=TRUE [G_Limiter4] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE Cmdc=-0.015 DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_G_LOADING Setting[1].Angle=45 Setting[1].DeployValue=9.5 Setting[1].RetractValue=9.49 MaxDeflection=45.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=0.5 SmoothDeployment=TRUE [G_Limiter5] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE Cmdc=-0.5 DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_G_LOADING Setting[1].Angle=45 Setting[1].DeployValue=12.0 Setting[1].RetractValue=11.99 MaxDeflection=45.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=0.5 SmoothDeployment=TRUE It has 4 (!) main stages which introduce progressive pitch down moment. In effect, no matter how hard you pull, you will keep 9 - 9.5G in continuous turns and wobbling is minimal. The fifth stage is hard cap to prevent going overboard at hard pulls (stock F-16A can easily get instantaneous 20G, crazy). Limiter takes few seconds to kick in but then does it's job. The template is fit for any plane you wish. The first, simpler method could be used for older no fly-by-wire planes, while multi-stage limiter for the ones that have it. Likewise, you can limit negative AoA and G too. Obviously, the values had to be tailored for different planes. You need to check the deploy/retract values to specify the range when limiter kicks in. Then, you had to adjust the downforce Cmdc value. If plane gets too wobbly, it had to be decreased; if the limit is exceeded, increased. In general, you want to keep the wobble minimal, at 2-3deg AoA or 0.2-0.3G units. Usually, the more twitchy is the plane, the bigger Cmdc should be. The values are by no means final. You can stack more stages if you fancy and play around with different values (ControlRate here is the speed at which downforce is applied and removed, I.E - 10 - instantly, 0.1 - very gradually) This is G limiter for Hornet for example: [G_Limiter] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE Cmdc=-0.05 DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_G_LOADING Setting[1].Angle=45 Setting[1].DeployValue=8.0 Setting[1].RetractValue=7.99 MaxDeflection=45.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=0.5 SmoothDeployment=TRUE [G_Limiter2] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE Cmdc=-0.025 DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_G_LOADING Setting[1].Angle=45 Setting[1].DeployValue=8.5 Setting[1].RetractValue=8.49 MaxDeflection=45.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=0.5 SmoothDeployment=TRUE [G_Limiter3] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE Cmdc=-0.015 DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_G_LOADING Setting[1].Angle=45 Setting[1].DeployValue=9.0 Setting[1].RetractValue=8.99 MaxDeflection=45.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=0.5 SmoothDeployment=TRUE [G_Limiter4] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE Cmdc=-0.010 DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_G_LOADING Setting[1].Angle=45 Setting[1].DeployValue=9.5 Setting[1].RetractValue=9.49 MaxDeflection=45.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=0.5 SmoothDeployment=TRUE This turned out a little bit wobbly, but it keeps Hornet at 7.8-8.2G in continuous turns. Fifth stage is not needed. As you can see, Cmdc values are decreased to reduce wobbling. You may notice that limiter is kicking in at both cases at 8.0G, but Hornet is kept at 8G continuous while F-16A is at 9G. This is the quirk of the method, you had to tailor it for every plane. Attached stock F-16A data file with limiter enabled F-16A_Netz_Data.INI
  18. From my understanding, Revamp is limited to SF2. The proposal was precisely this: make it free, updated, with objects, etc. AUTHORIZED by the creators, made by fans who obtained permission to use the name YAP from John Shelton's widow. The site with the original payware, made for SF1, is not part of this scope and I don't know who is responsible for it, but I know it's not YAP-RW.
  19. yes as well as they are doing some fine tuning of both site and the mods prior to going live. not a bad idea really do be prepared when you go to get it, last i checked it was about 15-16 GB install. thats after alot of trimming down; the Aircraft folder alone was 15 GB when they started, and the decals another dozen. its better now but still pretty damn big
  20. I would be nice to actually HEAR from the revamp mod group. Things that are, or were, payware at still very much a gray area to us Admins (and modder too!). I know it's something that we'll have to discuss at some point in the future. Would one consider the SF1 version as abandonware?? Do we ignore it because it is/was payware?? I'd VERY much like to hear from one of the leaders of the Revamp Project.
  21. no, it is not. And there are many inaccuracies, in the old one, and in the revamped one too. But it is just a matter of how you look at things. Anyway nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.
  22. I wish other mods on their site were remade for SF2 and free too, but we still have Yankee Air Pirate (which sounds gorgeous and the most complete vietnam war mod for SF ever), Drug War (which gives a complete different and interesting view on a front we never would have expected to see in a flight simulator), and Flight School (which i can't wait to try and learn from it). If i got it correctly, there are no more founders for these mods, so that's why they are and should be free, they belong to the community now. And also if i understood correctly it was illegal to sell them? Or maybe a got this part wrong
  23. Oh so that's the reason why RW mods disappeared?
  24. Not yet a member on FB, are the files there? I remember seeing them on their site under YAP-RW, DW-RW and FS-RW, but now i can't find them anywhere, and when i click on some RW link, i get error 404. Did they remove the RW versions from their site? Why is that?
  25. its a private group atm. but im trying to get an admin of the group to update here
  27. change 23: new site is still a work in progress, it will be a few weeks until it is ready.
  28. look for the YAP-RW in Facebook. Until a new site is provided, is there where the things happen.
  29. well, nothings totally free you can only post so big a file on FB, or allow so many people to access a Google drive. at som point you gotta have a site and no amount of likes, non monetary fan support or best wishes pays for that. are you a member of the group on FB?
  1. Load more activity
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..

  I accept