FastCargo

Alluded to a little bit, but not explained well is the intersection of two curves. The increasing curve of costs to make a good flight sim (more features, more fidelity, etc.) and the decreasing curve of percentage of interest (more gamers in general, but less in percentage of the hardcore simmer). Those 2 factors combined is what has seriously decreased the flight sim market in general. FC

Except the AI can't take off with it. FC

It's a mesh problem, can only be solved by either fixing the mesh or disabling shadows. FC

No worries...if it works, it isn't stupid. Just post the relevant lines here if you want. We've got bigger issues with the A and B model right now anyway. FC

I forgot to tell you...the F-35s have been working for some time now. I simply lowered the spring values on the struts. The axis doesn't need to be specified as long as the wheels 'roll' properly. You only need to do that if they aren't rolling in the proper direction. FC

What he said. "Two weeks." FC

Deliberate falsification of records? Think VERY hard about what you just said. You're saying a police officer can basically make something up in order to get you arrested, jailed, etc and the worst they'll suffer for it is an administrative punishment. I can see you're taking advice from the North Korean police. FC

Well, if he's a separate mesh, you need to find out what the mesh name is. There is a way to remove parts of the cockpit. There's a thread around here, or it references a thread on the thirdwire site. Assuming the pilot mesh is detached from any other part of the cockpit, it should be pretty easy. FC

Okay, I think this thread has run it's course...our young Anthony W. has learned something new today and that will hopefully help him in the future. The original problem has been solved...any more comments are simply beating a dead horse at this point. Thread closed. FC

Yes, you do. People here spend a damn lot of their own time to get these mods out to folks to enjoy. The absolute least you can do is take the time to read and comprehend the documentation. FC

My wife has an older iPod. While the interface is nice, we can't stand iTunes. That's one thing I really don't understand about Apple. Why they can't make it simple drag and drop into a directory and look up the metadata later, vs drag, wait to convert, look up the metadata, then put it into the iPod. Hell Dave, I remember the issues you were having with your iPod and iTunes...how many times did you lose all 3k+ worth of songs? I don't mind having them on an iPod, I just don't want to go through iTunes. FC

MAKO is right in a way. Women get in minor scrapes...as men we try to see just how bad we can hurt ourselves. I'm only partially joking... FC

Depends what kind of exercise and where. FC

You're assuming ATC would have seen either of them. Or that they were under ATC positive control. FC

It doesn't matter about advice, what matters is getting the correct version of DirectX from Microsoft. Period. FC

You need the newest version of DX9 from microsoft. Disregard whatever version your computer says it has...get the newest version. Get it directly from Microsoft, do not go anywhere else. FC

Actually, isn't that model the stock ThirdWire model? Edit: Yep, it is. Here's a topic relevant to this issue: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=21978 FC

For all that's said here...insurance premiums favor females over males, especially in the young driver category. Considering insurance companies have to pay money when an accident occurs, maybe that will tell you something. Perception and reality don't always match. FC

With the iPhone it isn't what you get necessarily...it's how it works. The iPhone's interface is simple and powerful. Other phones are much clunkier in execution...why do you think other phones are going the same way? As a human factors major, I can appreciate what the iPhone brings to the table. As a person who likes to tinker, I like the idea of a firmware upgrade to unlock/add features even more (I've been doing that with my PSP for years). Each person is different...some need that conductivity, some don't, some need varying degrees. Don't think your viewpoint is the only right one. Actually, I've been slowly reducing my device count as more convergence arrives...used to be I had a phone, PDA, and MP3 player. Now it's just the phone. Once a phone actually gets decent playable games...the PSP goes too. FC

Interesting info about the ALE-50 in game so far. Now, I asked about what the 'missile' aims at in game on the TW forums. TK said that the IR missiles go for the engines (like you'd expect), but the radar missiles go for the mean of the hitboxes. I'm wondering if it's more than that. Here's why. We already know the sim MUST take the position of the pivot points of the mesh into account for the following reasons: 1) Flight controls, wheels, etc (duh). 2) In 'Hard' FM mode, the sim uses the pivot point as the 'center of mass' for the particular mesh...I inadvertently figured this out while working on the F-107's 'lean left' problem. The question becomes...what if they are used for more than that? If the radar missiles aim not for the middle of the hitboxes, but the mean of the pivot points, that would give a good representation of the middle of the mass of the LOD file. This would work to our advantage, in that whenever the ALE-50 is deployed, the pivot points for the segments of the ALE-50 all move way to the rear, beyond the center of mass of the main aircraft model. This would have the side benefit of causing a recalculation of where the 'mean' of the points are...moving it to the rear. If the radar missiles all aim for that point...you've basically just reproduced what the ALE-50 can do in reality. Have to admit, that would be cool if it really works like that... What we need are tests in a controlled enviroment. One on one, BVR range, give the shooter SAHMs or AHMs only, do tests with and without the ALE-50 deployed, and no ECM, various aspects (tail, head, side). If we see a definitive difference...there ya go. FC

The F-22 for the ThirdWire sims was created and released before the Oct08 patch, which 'activated' the RCS and IR sig modifiers. At the time, the RCS modifier was 'all or nothing', so you had to make a negative number just to somewhat mimic stealth. Now that both modifiers work, like JAT said, a review of all the aircraft are necessary. This may also require a review of radar strengths of most aircraft for the same reason. FC

Just like I said...use the loadout.ini for the particular aircraft. FC

Well, make sure the weapon station attachment matches the particular weapon attachment (SOVIET, etc). Make sure the weapon station limitations meet or exceed the bomb limits (length, load, diameter). Make sure the weapon exists for the years you are trying to use. Finally, in the loadout.ini, make sure the weapon is called for using the weapons name listed in the weapondata.ini. FC

The LOD for the runway is what you are looking for. Figure out which airfield it is calling for, then figure the LOD, then look for it in the Desert CAT. FC

Well, for most operators of CAT III capable aircraft, autoland is mandatory when conditions get that low (there are exceptions...Southwest Airlines actually can do manual CatIIIs because they have a HUD). The autopilot controls the throttles and flight controls and flies the whole thing down, including the flare, touchdown, and rollout. The pilots are basically monitoring the system to make sure it is working as designed. Our Airbuses are rated to 600 RVR (basically, no ceiling, vis is 600 feet) with a 100 feet alert height. However, our MD11s are rated to 300 RVR, with a 50 foot alert height. In either case, you do NOT have to see to land (again, exception for SWA). Also, realize that in the MD11, at 50 feet, you're basically in the flare! In either case...it's kind of spooky! FC