Caesar

Hi again, Just to share some of my experiences with the AI: I actually find my AI pilots to handle their a/c pretty well; not too many AI losses on my machine due to stalls or awkward maneuvers (this could be because I usually fly the more modern a/c like the F-14, -15, -16, and -18 moreso than planes like the A-4, F-4 or -106.) Now if there was something I wish the wingmen wouldn't do is close in when they have 6 remaining AAM's to try to gun a bomber with its own gun in the tail that usually accounts for more losses than their handling the plane too roughly. That said, I have had several occasions with the older planes where they loose it, and after following the last 3 posts or so, I guess I now know why...of course, considering that I, the human pilot have done the same thing on more than one occasion (including that backflip incident) with cold-war era planes allows me to forgive them. Vale -"Caesar"

Ah, I see; my mistake. As for the flight models, I'm completely satasfied with the Tomcat and every other 3rd party plane I've flown; they're real kickass designs. The given data up there's just some of the test limits and earlier limits of the plane to compare it before the Navy had to put restrictions on it due to airframe age and those damn TF-30's. God I'm gonna miss that bird. Thanks for bringing more to light, Fubar. Vale, -"Caesar"

For performance data, it's usually best to try to find aircraft manuals, like (for Navy A/C) NAVAIR NATOPS operations ones if you can. It is true what you say, finding that data online is not easy. Also, in terms of books you can find some real gems too; but specific data for stall speed, max AoA and whatnot is real tough. Even the official data is not 100% accurate; or is modified for certain circumstances. The Tomcat (A-model) for example, is given a +6.5/-2.4G envelope in the latest public release of the NAVAIR 01-F14AAA-1 manual (1998). This is a precaution to preserve the old airframes, as through the 1970's and 1980's, the Tomcat was a 9G-rated plane. During its initial flight testing against an F-4, the Tomcat started with a +7.4G, forcing the F-4 outside the Tomcat's turn, reversed, and ended up on the Phantom's tail. The Tomcat pulled +8G with 6 AIM-54A Phoenix missiles, 2 267 gallon drop tanks and 2 AIM-9G sidewinders onboard at Mach .9, 20,000 feet altitude. (that little bit o' info from a 1975 release of Grumman F-14 by J.P. Stevenson, pg. 68) At M1.2, 20,000 feet the plane pulled 9G. With the glove veins extended the 'Cat pulls over 7G at M2.04 at 50,000feet. Below 275 knots, probably clean or with 4 AIM-7's, the 'Cat can pull over 6.5G. Under controlled circumstances, the plane can hit -5.5G on the opposite end. On AoA, the 'Cat in the NAVAIR manuals is not supposed to exceed 30 degrees AoA; but the Tomcat has hit nearly 90-deg. AoA. It can roll 360 degrees at 50 knots, 25 degrees AoA (again, J.P. Stevenson's book, pp.68) something that the NAVAIR manual would normally prohibit. So, to get an idea of the a/c true operational envelope, you have to look to more than one source, and finding test data, where they push the aircraft to find those limits is the best you can come by, but also extrememly rare. For now, I'm trying to find the limits of the a/c within the SF game; or, the limits that SF puts on the a/c. Vale, -"Caesar"

Ah, interesting stuff. I didn't know the latest patches had affected a/c departure. I'm still off finding the full envelopes of different 3rd party a/c...idk why really, maybe I just like seeing how far I can push it? I've inadvertantly lost an AV-8 in a hard turn, like fireengineer but in an older variation (the AV-8C). Of course, this may have to do with the fact that I fly all things on Hard, so that probably affects it also, as USAFMTL pointed out. As for the F-16's flat spin and if it can be done, I have no idea as to whether or not the computers would let the F-16 enter into a departure envelope, but my flat spin wasn't really much of a departure; really a highly controlled spin that was quickly recoverable. I still haven't lost a Tomcat to a spin due to excessive yaw-rates, but the velocity at which I've been trying may still be too high; roughly 300KIAS, sometimes 280-250. Maybe I'll make graphs of the data I find when I'm done... Well, back to work! Vale, -"Caesar"

Salvete; I'm glad I could be of at least some assistance, swiss. Hunter: none that I could see; I've had to add the carriers to SFP1 in the first place, and figure their locations using the mission editors, but I haven't yet encountered any T55's or AAA in the sea...of course, that could eventually change, by mission; I'm still experimenting with it. On a side note, when I added CVAN-65 to a custom desert mission, I mis-placed it and it was steaming along at 35kt on the desert, climbing the dunes and whatnot Vale, -"Caesar" Edit: After a few more mission tests, no, the Vietnam SEA map does not place ground targets in the sea or vice versa in my version of SFP-1.

Salve et tu, swiss_lipo If you use the search, you'll probably be able to find a lot on the subject; but for the basics alone: When you download terrain, you can generally just extract the folder into the \Programs\Wings Over Vietnam\Terrain directory (drag and drop usually works too). If there are more details for the installation, they'll likely be included with the terrain. Also, most terrain says "SFP1" or "WoV" denoting which simulation the terrain is for in the notes. Some work with both. I took the Vietnam SEA map from WoV and put it into SFP1 and it works fine. Hope this helps! Vale, -"Caesar"

Ah, understood. Now that you mention it, I have gotten an F-86 and an F-106 to depart under such conditions as too fast turn rate, or the like, but the more modern models seem very resiliant. Thanks for the input. -"Caesar"

Hey all, I'm not sure how many of you have heard of DOSBox, but I've been running it for a while now, and have gotta say, if you miss your old flight sims, there still may be hope. DOSBox is a DOS "emulator" (no, it doesn't pertain to that illegal ROM b.s. you hear about) that runs DOS programs in their natural environment. Basically, this allows you to run games designed for MS-DOS, that no longer run on Windows XP, or may run but horribly at best. For example, I have my favorite sim Fleet Defender Gold running on DOSBox, and quite well at that, though I'm still figuring out how to tweak the sound (it runs fine in other games, but skips in FD). This runs most if not all DOS games up to about, I'd guess 1994, as only so many resources can be allocated, but DOS versions of F-19 should work, I have over 100 kills in FD so I can vouch that it works, and other fun games like the strategy XCOM: UFO Defense or the futuristic Descent run just fine. It even supports modern joysticks; though I can't get the throttle working, I just leave that on the keyboard in FD. The caveat here is that you: A. Need to own (a) legitimate copy(ies) of the game(s) for installation B. Have to have patience for tweaking C. Need to re-learn DOS commands If you don't know DOS well, you can get what's known as a "Front-End" (one is called D-Fend) which allows you to modify values in a window, rather than right in DOSBox. To run games well, you have to figure a good processor speed, core, and memory allocation (Fleet Defender will run well at 20MHz on a Dynamic Core processor at 16MB of allocated RAM, I found) and this is a lot easier to do in a Front-End than with the DOSBox command prompt, which I've had to resort to doing when my new Front End failed to install properly. Sometimes different parts of the game will be affected: FD runs well in game with those settings, but for some reason, the menus ran better at 3MHz on a normal core processor . I haven't tried to install a program through DOSBox yet, I've actually just done that in command prompt, and then run the program in DOSBox, but this will become completely impossible for most DOS games in the future with the new 64-bit OS's which I've read will not support 16-bit installers. My solution: I install the programs and keep the installed file on archive, which then can be transferred to the new OS when I do upgrade. Unlike modern games, the installed file can just be copied; my current archive is backed up on a DVD, and I have done such a copy after a reformat and the programs still work fine in DOSBox. So, I can't tell you if you can get the install working on a 16-bit program through DOSBox, but if you can install it through command prompt, you can play it in DOSBox. Anyone else with old sims lying around oughta at least give it a shot, rather than just let the old boxes collect more dust! -"Caesar"

Well, I can't help you with the first problem, but the second one might have to do with the over-powerful countermeasures in SF/WoV. Basically if an enemy a/c starts dropping chaff, it will cause radar guided missiles to go dumb really fast, regardless of what era they're from. This causes them to blow up quickly after launch.

Haha, well that's good for you at least. I haven't had such luck even with AMRAAMs, they get fooled and I get mad and then I have to satiate my anger with guns. As I said before, to deal with my own issues, I just have all a/c carry fewer countermeasures.

SFP-1 can be bought legally from Circuit City's website for $4.99; on the search bar, select "games & toys" and do a search for "Strike Fighters" or the full name; it's the valusoft edition with the first patch.

Here's the extract utility link (second page of SFP-1 Utilities/Editors downloads): http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?download=343

I had a question pertaining to carriers as well. I have the CVA-63 added to SFP-1, but I can't take off of it from single missions, only campaigns. Does anyone out there know how to set it so that carrier based planes can take off of carriers on single missions, or for that matter, can it be done? (Do I have to use the mission editor, or can it be done in a basic fashion?) Thanks! -"Caesar"

It may have to do with the enemy a/c deploying countermeasures (chaff/flare). The chaff and flare are waaaaaay to effective in this game, deploying a single flare or chaff pack is sometimes enough to fool a missile. More advanced AAM's require more, but still, it can get to be frustrating when you fire four AIM-9's at a single target and not one manages to track, or tracks for a while then looses it. I experimented to see just how powerful the CMs are by making an experimental AIM-54, modeled after the AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed model. Just to test, I put the CM rejection at 1+e007. The missile is harder to fool, but indeed, I've had two or three go dumb before the third or fourth managed to track as it took the first ones to force the target to waste his CM's. To make air combat more interesting, I generally reduce the number of available chaff/flare on all aircraft to about 20, 15 or 10 even, making missiles on both sides far more deadly, and the combat more intense. I'm not aware of any bugs with the AA-3, but if I do recall, it is an older missile, with tighter firing parameters, little CM/Noise rejection, less launch reliability and more limited maneuverability. Couple this with the over-effective CM's and that might be your problem. -"Caesar"

Word only? Notepad isn't in your Accessories folder? That's strange...all Windows types I know of have notepad... I'd think you could open it with Word, but God knows if it'd open correctly or properly formatted. Good luck! -"Caesar"

Just search the forums and you should be able to find info on the parts you want to modify (use the search function to make it faster.) If there's a specific topic or mod you want to do and can't find any info on it/find it addressed, ask a question about it. -"Caesar"

I wrote about a similar issue in a topic "MP issues" I think reading that would help. When changing weapon loadouts you have to keep in mind that the pylons have specifications that must be followed, namely load limit, allowed weapon class and attachment type. If the AIM-4G is outside any one of these parameters, it won't work (and there are a few others, like weapon diameter, etc.) Another thing to worry about is date of use. If you're flying a mission in the 1980's, I don't think the AIM-4 is available for use. A question on the side: you say that you can't use the weapons pack weapons in MP; can you use them in single player? Also, does everyone have the same loadout data for their installs? When I tested out using 3rd party planes on LAN, we all synchronized our data to have the same planes, effects, dates, loadouts, weapons, etc. so it went off without a hitch; we were using F-14's with AIM-54's, F-18's with the -120's and got to test out the A-10 too. Keep updating with the progress! -"Caesar"

Over the internet, I don't think you can use a modified install for MP; that is if you're using a normal server. I've tested MP over LAN, and you can run third party planes and weapons in that, anyhow, so long as all installs have the same weapons, planes, etc. I don't know if there is a "direct connection" option that would have a comp host over the internet that would allow for third-party weaps/planes; if there is, you should be able to use modified weaponry. I do not think you can choose the loadout in MP under any circumstance; if you want a different loadout than the default, you have to modify the aircraft's LOADOUT.ini file. Remember, this will probably prevent you from playing on an official server; but if you're playing over LAN/direct host, and everyone has the same data, it should work fine. Things to keep in mind when modifying the loadout.ini: In the aircraft's data.ini file, the weapon hardpoints have specific weights and functions that must be observed. Because I always give examples using the F-14A, I may as well here too... This is one of the hardpoints on the F-14 from F-14A_DATA.ini. Note the LoadLimit, AllowedWeaponClass and AttachmentType. I've modified the LL and AWC from the original to allow the 'Cat to drop the Mk.84, and bombs in general. [PhoenixStation1] SystemType=WEAPON_STATION StationID=5 StationGroupID=1 StationType=EXTERNAL AttachmentPosition=-0.45,1.4,-0.6 AttachmentAngles=0.0,2.0,0.0 EjectVelocity=0.0,-2.0,0.0 LoadLimit=1000.0 AllowedWeaponClass=AHM,LGB,BOMB AttachmentType=USN ModelNodeName=suppphoenix01 PylonMass=55 PylonDragArea=0.02 Now, this hardpoint can carry Active Homing Missiles, Laser Guided Bombs and Bombs, up to a weight of 1000kg, and those under US Navy nation type. In the Loadout.ini, I can then create loadouts like the following: (Phoenix Station 1 is Loadout[05]) [AirToAir] Loadout[05].WeaponType=AIM-54C ECCM Loadout[05].Quantity=1 Loadout[06].WeaponType=AIM-54C ECCM Loadout[06].Quantity=1 Loadout[07].WeaponType=AIM-54C ECCM Loadout[07].Quantity=1 Loadout[08].WeaponType=AIM-54C ECCM Loadout[08].Quantity=1 Loadout[09].WeaponType=AIM-9S Loadout[09].Quantity=1 Loadout[10].WeaponType=AIM-9S Loadout[10].Quantity=1 Loadout[13].WeaponType=AIM-54C ECCM Loadout[13].Quantity=1 Loadout[14].WeaponType=AIM-54C ECCM Loadout[14].Quantity=1 Loadout[15].WeaponType=Tank330_F14 Loadout[15].Quantity=1 Loadout[16].WeaponType=Tank330_F14 Loadout[16].Quantity=1 and Loadout[05].WeaponType=Mk84 Loadout[05].Quantity=1 Loadout[06].WeaponType=Mk84 Loadout[06].Quantity=1 Loadout[07].WeaponType=Mk84 Loadout[07].Quantity=1 Loadout[08].WeaponType=Mk84 Loadout[08].Quantity=1 Loadout[09].WeaponType=AIM-9S Loadout[09].Quantity=1 Loadout[10].WeaponType=AIM-9S Loadout[10].Quantity=1 Loadout[11].WeaponType=AIM-7M Loadout[11].Quantity=1 Loadout[12].WeaponType=AIM-7M Loadout[12].Quantity=1 Loadout[15].WeaponType=Tank330_F14 Loadout[15].Quantity=1 Loadout[16].WeaponType=Tank330_F14 Loadout[16].Quantity=1 Now, I cannot put an AIM-9 on Loadout[05]-Loadout[08] because they only support Active Homing/Guided Bomb/Bomb and the AIM-9 is an IR missile. Similarly, I can't put an AIM-54 onto Loadout[09] or[10] because they only accept IR, and furthermore cannot support the weight of a -54 (in the data.ini, and in reality for that matter.) The AI pilots, and my plane use these loadouts as the defaults. The Air to Air loadout is used on CAP and Intercept, the Strike is used for Strike. Really, this seems unflexable, having to change the data files on the plane, but I'm quite certain it is the only way to get a different loadout in MP. To the best of my knowledge, if you change these values, everyone has to have the same values for the loadouts (we always synchronized our data just in case, so I can't say this is entirely true, but I'd guess it'd have to be the same.) I hope this helps! If not, well, I wish you luck and hope someone else can field the question better. -"Caesar"

Well, I think I can field your first question. To get guided A2G munitions to track, you have to press "E" to look at the ground target. This gets hard to do with the HUD on hard, as you are only given info about your plane (altitude, airspeed, etc.) and not what you've got visually locked. When you cycle to the proper target, drop your bomb or fire your missile/cruise missile, and it should track to the target you have locked. I'm not sure of the function of targeting pods myself, if they're required for certain munitions...I don't do as much striking as I do air to air combat. The strikes I do generally involve dumb bombs, so I can't tell you for certain if they're there to work or just for show. -"Caesar"

This September.... The King is dead. Long live the King!

Here they are; I'm guessing you can do the 'save target as' bit: IRgrowlLock.wav IRgrowl.wav Just remember to keep these on backup! -"Caesar"

Is it the one from the F-14/MiG-23 engagement, under normal search sounds like a normal growl, but upon tone goes to a high pitched almost alarm-sounding loop? I've got that one, but I'm not sure where it's located on the site (and if it's the one you're looking for)...in fact, I'm not sure where the install is for it either! I just keep a copy of my most recent folders on back up. If you do find the growl you like again, remember to back it up!

Well, I just ordered SFP-1 for a number of reasons (including its low price.) Until now, I've only played WoV, and I've noticed that as people talk on these forums, it seems as though WoV, though newer, does not have as many options or as many planes, maps, ships, terrain or the expandability of SFP-1. Some planes evidentally don't work in WoV b/c they need the SFP-1 LOD files and etc (which I understand can be copied.) So, though I'm certainly not planning to ditch WoV; I like it too much and have a damn good pilot going, I'd just like to know what are some of the major differences between WoV and SFP-1, and if there's any functionality that SFP-1 lacks that WoV has. Thanks much! -"Caesar" p.s. Am I right to assume that because of the inherant compatibility between the two, I could probably copy all the planes I already have from WoV to SFP-1?

Well just to share a bit of joy, gratitude and an observation, I'm writing to say I finally got SFP:1 at the campus. The expandability and "open-ness" of the game is staggaring compared to WoV. I've successfully imported the fighters, weapons and sound effects from WoV...and the Vietnam map just for the sake of it; it works fine. I am very happy with SFP:1. I think I'll revert WoV to Vietnam-only now that I have SFP:1. Again, thanks to all who got me info on the SFP vs WoV question. And now for a bit I found out over break but thought I should share: I have successfully gotten a modified install of WoV to function on LAN in which all parties have the same patch, install and aircraft; in other words, we didn't require a stock install to play and could use third-party planes (F-14's, -18's and A-10's were tested.) The first time worked fine, the second, one of my fellow testers had some computer issues that kept forcing him to drop/cause the program to freeze. I've yet to test it with him again, but the problem was not with WoV, it was with his computer which required a reformat. So, it seems anyways that for those of you who want to play MP with third-party planes, if everyone has the same planes, weapons pack, and version, on LAN at least you can pull this off (though as I understand, not over internet). I'm sure some of you already knew this, but for those that didn't, at least by our research, it is possible. Hopefully this will work with SFP:1 when we try in a few months over the next break. That's all for now, and thanks again. -"Caesar"

Ah, excellant news! One less thing to worry about (the very cause of my earlier MiG-25 and Tu-16 problem was airfield size.) Thanks!