FastCargo

Well, the MF F-16s were done before WOE came out with the additional coding for modern HUDs. There may be a mod somewhere around here to take advantage of that coding. FC

Mono27, If there are updates, they will be posted. Don't spam the message board with the eqivalent of "Are we there yet?". You won't die if you don't get an update. There are other things you can do. FC

Because this info may not be seen in the RAZBAM forum, I'd figured I'd let folks know here. http://forum.combatace.com/topic/50610-once-in-a-lifetime-offer-only-for-strike-fighters-series-fans/ All inclusive sale, all RAZBAM SF series products for $20.00 total. Only for 72 hours, starting at 0100Z, 7 Dec 09. Before anyone asks, some of the products may be for older versions of the SF series, and so may need tweaks to be fully updated to SF2I standards. Consult the RAZBAM part of the forums to make an informed buying decision and ask questions if needed. FC

All the article says is that Win 7 warnings are more subdued, it doesn't say anything it actually being less secure. How about fully reading and comprehending the article before going all 'tinfoil hat'. In fact, the XP mode emulation that Win 7 Professional and Ultimate can do is considered more secure than Vista because it can run a 'virtually' isolated machine (as said by the same author...there is some disagreement). FC

Let me make it a little clearer for you. Lets look at a typical WeaponStation: Don't worry about getting too specific here...this is just a generic station. Note the 2 areas in bold, the StationID and StationGroupID. The StationGroupID represents the group number that station belongs to. As an example, the outer wingtips on an F-16 would be stationGroupID=1, the outer pylons would be 2, mid pylons 3, etc. You can have a total of 6 selectable StationGroupIDs...another way to put it is that each StationGroupID represents a loadout 'line' on the Loadout screen. Now, the StationID represents the individual stations, of which you can have a total of 32 (with a bombbay like above considered one StationID). Again, in our example of the F-16, the left wingtip would be Station ID=1, the right wingtip would be StationID=2, the left outer pylon is StationID=3, the right one StationID=4, and so on. So, what does this mean. First, if you are using the Loadout screen, you can only load ONE type of weapon per StationGroupID. In other words, if you wanted an AIM-9P on the left wingtip, and an AIM-9M on the right wingtip, if they are both part of the same StationGroupID, you CANNOT do this through the loadout screen manually (there is a way to step around this using the LOADOUT.INI file, we will talk about that later). Secondly, you can have different weapon stations (different StationIDs) occupy the same point in space. An example is if you have a weapon station able to carry a 2000 pound BOMB (length, weight, diameter parameters all met), it means it can also carry a large missile (a AGM-88 for example) because the missile meets those dimensional parameters and you have BOMB, ARM as your AllowedWeaponClass. The problem is, in real life, that aircraft can't carry large ARM missile there due to whatever, but can carry a small ARM. So how to allow both types of weapons? Simply duplicate the weapon station with a new StationID number. Keep the BOMB station with the 2000 lb limits, but shrink down the ARM weapon station limits to what you want if needed. The idea is in the loadout screen, it will only let you select one or the other, both with the proper dimensional limits. Now, with the LOADOUT.INI file, it will override the limits I stated above (ie you can load different weapons, or load 2 weapons in the same space) IF you do not fiddle with the loadout screen (ie accept the default weapons as listed in the LOADOUT.INI. So, for your case, you will need at least 3 seperate StationIDs (or in the Lancaster's case, up to 5). However, depending on your preference and the amount of StationGroupIDs available, you can make each StationID a seperate StationGroupID. Voila, you now can mix and match weapons in the same bomb bay. You will of course have to work out the individual AttachmentPosition coordinates. A couple of things though. 1) The sim does NOT work out visual deconfliction issues on individual weapons, between weapon stations, etc. In other words, if all your bombbay stations CAN carry 2000 bombs, but in real life, you couldn't cram all those weapons into a bay...the sim won't care. It will do it anyway if you tell it to in either the LOADOUT.INI or the loadout screen, and visually, it'll look like crap because the weapons will be all overlapped and running into each other (bad clipping issues). The way to combat this are to either limit which stations can carry what type of weapons (length, diameter, weight limits and/or SpecificStationCode parameter), or force the proper weapons into the proper bays using the LOADOUT.INI (which will be disregarded if you go into the loadout screen). 2) The sim has a bug where you will get the proper bombbay animation (under AI control) for multiple weapon stations ONLY if every station has it's own animation. In other words, if you are dropping bombs, the animations will always look right, even if you have the same animations for several weapon stations. However, your AI aircraft, if multiple weapon stations are sharing the same animation, only ONE of the weapon stations will get the proper animation. The other weapon stations will be dropping bombs/firing missiles through the weapon door...again, an immersion killer... There may be no way to step around this if you don't have access to the MAX file to fix it. Personally, I use dimensional limits to the max extent where possible, and a good readme with a great LOADOUT.INI where not. FC

Military aircraft programs are getting ridiculous in terms of time from initial concept to operational status. Fighter type aircraft are bad enough (yes, I'm looking at you F-22)...but even straight forward concepts like a transport are taking way too long. With the A400M, you could have literally have seen the concept designs, then started a 20 year career, retired, and STILL not seen the first flight... This is not a criticism of the aircraft, just of the process. FC

Start here: http://forum.combatace.com/forum/99-thirdwire-woewoiwovsf-12-knowledge-base/ FC

Quite frankly, the USG can't write a contract to save their lives. Having had to deal with the results of such contracts...and finding out that we haven't figured out anything in 20+ years... FC

There aren't plans to make an F-15FX because the parameters of it's performance have not been specified in unclassified literature...yet. If you want to make one yourself, take a F-15E and add Japanese equipment and markings. That will get you close. Here is what is in the queue for release: http://forum.combatace.com/topic/45664-eagles-gone-wild/page__view__findpost__p__332465 FC

If it's from the old Bunyap pack...I don't think there is one. FC

Rugg, I hear ya buddy...I'd have gone ape if that had happened to my old muscle car... FC

Well, first, unless the USAF made some purchases of Block 60 F-16s, there are no F-16Es in the USAF inventory...especially not back in 1995 Mainly though, notice anything unusual in the UnitID number of the entry you are having problems with compared to all the other entries? FC

USAFBLT, Thanks brotha...I knew only a few units used them but wasn't sure which ones. Iceland were the only guys I knew for sure had them. I've hardly ever seen them on C/D models...pictures are fairly rare. FC

You go boy! FC

As far as the CFTs go, realize there were actually several versions of the CFTs made. The CFTs that the C model can carry are different from the CFTs that the E model carries. Things like mounting of the A2A missiles and A2G pylons. That was one of the changes made in the Eagle model upgrades that have been posted here. The E model pretty much never flies without the CFTs (it has flown without them, but it's very rare, and usually for specific events/cases). The C models on the other hand almost never fly with the CFTs. The Iceland (and maybe Alaska) guys were the units that flew with them on a fairly regular basis, but I think they've stopped doing that. FC

Well, sir, you aren't cool... ...if you tell an F-16 pilot how his plane flies based solely flying a PC flight simulator. As I stated in my blog post. Now, on the other hand, if you personally can chat with a Deuce pilot about what he does nowadays, I'm pretty sure you have some credibility there. But far be it from me for a Major to advise a Colonel on what he did or did not say... FC

Actually, no. Both versions are grey...the C model is a lighter grey, the E model a darker grey. FC

Outstanding pic Fubar...I remember that model very well. FC

The GBU-32 was planned to be released with the F-15SE...but I could pass it along to KillerBee since he's working on a SF2 weps pack. In either case, none of my weapon models would be nearly as detailed. FC

NEHENGO had one in work a long time ago. I have the fuselage of one that was in work a while ago...haven't done anything to it since though. FC

The F-35B hovers just fine...if you're good at it. FC

Well, no kidding there sherlock...not like we don't get those briefings either. Do you really think we don't think about this stuff? Seriously? Having the information and being able to do something useful about it are two different things. FC

Burn the heretic! Naw, seriously, I have no idea....I'd be curious because it would be one less thing I have to worry about carrying... FC

If I had to take a guess, I'd say that the AB effects in the SF1 model are out of date. Recommend going to the model's data.ini and renaming the effect to a generic effect other stock SF2 aircraft use. A secondary guess may be there are invisible 'links' the aircraft have that use a completely clear TGA file that is in the main aircraft's directory, and so those links now show up. That completely clear TGA file may now have to be put into each texture directory. FC