FastCargo

Also WDH, try Paint.net...it works pretty well, and with a plugin, will work with PSD (Adobe Photoshop) files. I know a few people here who swear by it. FC

TF = Terrain Following = disabled. GMT = Ground Map Terrain = maybe new name for what used to be Terrain Avoidance mode (TA). In real life, Terrain Avoidance and Terrain Following are very different modes. FC

Fubar, You know I'll be asking to incorperate them in the 'all in one' terrain mod for WOE... . FC

Eric, I owe you one. Let me see what I can do. FC

What Dave said. I've been lucky compared to those here who've really been in harm's way. From the mudfeet on the ground to the high spy Deuce guy, thanks...we owe you. FC

What? It can't be that bad... Sorry I haven't spent much time on it...I'm up to my ears in holiday stuff before I start my next trip. FC

I'll venture that 95% of the problems people have been having post patch have been due to old mods not working properly. Which makes absolute perfect sense. Think about the QC nightmare that TK would run into if he had to try to accomodate all the mods with every patch. I will also note that TK specifically says that the current sims are still NOT considered Vista compliant. The fact that they can run on Vista machines at all is a bonus. FC

You do know why: A) Airbreathers don't fly at 300000k+ feet for real (at least, not unless they're scramjet powered) and B) There's a damn good reason why a jet would break apart if you slam back on the stick at 800+ KIAS... FC

There's a couple in our gallery: And this one: and this pic of a MiG-28...oh wait... FC

Threads on the Combination Weapons Pack 2.52 issues merged. Gentlemen, I appreciate the effort that went into doing this...believe me, I know the effort involved. That being said, I get the feeling some of this was rushed and not thought through as well as it should have been. The idea of such a thing is to eliminate the errors that have been showing up, including duplicate weapons, missing effects, alterations of files without the original author's knowledge (which could have helped avoid errors). For those who don't know, I am putting together a 'all-in-one' mod for WOE which combines the best mods for the GermanyCE terrain, including enhanced airfield lighting, road airfields, increased NATO air defense mods, trees, tiles, etc. The idea is to go from stock to awesome in one easy to install mod without or with minimal errors. The only reason it hasn't been released to the general public yet is that I'm waiting on CA_Stary's awesome 4 season's mod. Anyway, for those in the know, not only did I run this by my fellow CA moderators to beta test, but I also ran the beta by every person who's work is in the mod (at least, I attempted to, some folks I couldn't get a hold of or they couldn't access the file). The main reason is for those who's work is in the mod, and therefore know their work best, can look to see what has been altered and help fix it if there is a problem. I think that should have been done for this weapons mod. A closed beta with those people who's work is directly in the mod does wonders for bug fixing because I guarantee they'll see the errors first. Also, you as the compiler have to keep track of what you changed from the original owner's configuration, and be prepared for the consequences of such. Swapped LOD files and missing effects are things that can cause all sorts of problems. Stuff like this needs to be either worked on, or spelled out in a readme (what other things you might need, etc). Yes, it's a long and very tedious process. Yes, you might get sick of looking at it after a while. Yes, there are about a billion things to consider. That's part of the responsibility of putting together something like this. If you're the 'goto' guy, guess who people are going to be going to when it doesn't work right. I would recommend a reattack on this with a very specific plan in mind (consistent naming conventions, exactly which models to use, effects, etc). My personal technique is I run a dead stock install of SFP1 (or pick your favorite) to test things (like a weaponspack, aircraft, terrains) with an established baseline. That way, anything that doesn't work can be immediately traced and documented. You would not believe how important it is to have proper documentation of something like this...helps a lot in squashing bugs. Let me be clear here...this isn't a b***h session. For a freshman effort, it's not bad, and we learn by doing. Consider this a learning experience, and use this debrief to make a better product. Good luck. FC

Notice anything new here? Look closer... Yep, you'll be able to add a personal touch to your cockpit...just about ANY cockpit. Mod to be uploaded soon. FC

Released...enjoy! FC

Question...could 2 structure LODs occupy the same space? In other words, one LOD would be your normal building, the other would be your 'nuke crater' trigger...that way you don't have to make a new target coordinate, just use the same coordinate as another building that exists... Also, the 'nuke crater' trigger building could probably be invisible, right (using TGAs)? So you wouldn't have to even have it visible if the building on top of it gets destroyed conventionally. FC

Too bad it's probably a fake picture. That's the ONLY picture I've EVER seen of a supposed mid-wing F-5 variant. Plus, as I look closer, I start seeing certain 'tells' that make it look like a photoshop pic. Eric, sorry for not getting back to you...older son got sick so had to deal with that...currently at the squadron doing our quarterly MUTA. FC

He was the smart one...got out of aviation and went into the medical field! FC

Eric, I'll take a look this evening when I get home and send you screenshots of the 'disjointed' areas for tweaking. FC

Listen folks, the reason there was duplication is because some aircraft loadouts use the NATO designations, some use the Russian designations for the missiles. There are a couple of ways to rectify the problem. 1) Tweak ALL the aircraft to use one or the other OR 2) Make duplicate entries that in ALL other ways, look exactly the same. An example: [WeaponData001] TypeName=AA-10A FullName=AA-10A Alamo-A ModelName=AA-10A etc, etc, etc. and [WeaponData002] TypeName=R-73A FullName=AA-10A Alamo-A ModelName=AA-10A etc, etc, etc. Note the ONLY difference is the TypeName. This allows maximum compatability with all aircraft. You all need to get your sierra together to come up with standardized common Weapondata entries to make this work well. FC

Looks good! In a way, it's too bad it's semi fictional. FC

But did you open each entry individually in the weapons editor, hit OK, then Save? FC

Couple of questions. Looking closely at the main gear, the bogies seem asymetrical. Meaning, the right (looking forward) wheel on each main gear bogie seems to be forward...which results in a foot print that looks like this (looking down): ..||..|| ||..||.. Now if the real aircraft is like that, then that's fine....but it means maybe the sim has some weirdness it doesn't like about the asymetric gear layout. Or maybe it just looks that way to me... That's about all I can think of at the moment... FC

Can you state the CGPosition parameter? FC

Veltro, Troubleshooting: 1. Try in Normal flight mode 2. Try with nothing loaded at all on the wings Report here with results... FC