FastCargo

What the man says...hangovers are usually the result of dehydration. When I'm out and about and thinkin about drinkin, the 1 to 1 ratio is a winner. Wake up the next day ready to go! FastCargo

You probably should contact the YAP team directly to get your problem solved. FastCargo

Sparviero, To be honest, I think we are having a very hard time understanding what your problem is. The machine translator is not doing well. What is your native language? FastCargo

That was common knowledge considering the controversy surrounding BS, ED, SF, and CP in general before BS was ever released. Now, providing links where to get such a thing...THAT is a bad idea and most definitely not tolerated here. FastCargo

That was the thing I noticed too...the AIM-4 series...kinda suck! Hell, you'd be better off using them as FFARs... FastCargo

Yep, what Timmy said. Cool! NFG is in the modeling game! FastCargo

Nice Dels, Those Mavericks look HUGE on that thing... FastCargo

Very different design philosophies... The XF-103 has been updated quite a bit...sent it back to Wrench,The for his evaluation. The FM is just about done...handles just like you'd think an aircraft like this would handle...turns like a brick. She'll do Mach 3+ and can cruise at 60000+ feet but takes a while to get there...the ramjet doesn't get efficient until above Mach 1. Front weapons bays are full automatic, we've finally figured out why automatic bays only work in certain situations. Rear weapon bays are manual...and the AI will use rockets in air to air combat. After playing with this for a while, I can tell you, she was definitely built with only one thing in mind...to be a high speed point interceptor against non-manuvering bombers. Anything else, she's pretty much out of her element (maybe a high speed tac recon platform)... FastCargo

Not quite true...it's worse than that, T-1s and T-38s grads are sharing the load. Also, don't be surprised if you see this option in the future for other services...I see UAVs in Navy commericals already... Also, it is a single tour right now and then back to a real aircraft for the young guys. The one's really getting screwed are those with a target on their forehead to build experience for the UAV line. For those bitching about what you might get out of pilot training I will remind you of the early 90s when the services found themselves with an excess of pilots. In the USN, they solved the problem by rank ordering the classes, dividing them down the middle, and dumping the bottom half...gone with a capital G. In the USAF, they went to the 'bank'...graduating and then not flying for up to 2 3/4 years. But everyone I know that happened to did eventually get back to flying. The USAF did keep it's promise in that respect at least. Career's (and life) a lot of times simply play out by timing...being in the right (or wrong) place at the right (or wrong) time. I got 'banked', but that helped later on getting an assignment back to the base I was banked at in a flying capacity. I didn't stay in my weapon system, but that also means I've been flying continually for 15 years. I got stationed at an isolated location, but that really helped in getting a job in the reserve because I knew everyone in at the base and they knew me (a big help). Ultimately, the service can use and abuse you...the best thing to do is capitalize on opportunities to make your position better when they come up. Half the jobs I got were long shots that I got just because I asked... What kind of instructors did YOU have...I can't remember half that crap myself. FastCargo

Ha! Found a link if you want to go green...save the planet...drink beer! http://the-darus-beer.blogspot.com/2008/07...nking-beer.html FastCargo

In 3ds max, you can specify the value of specular and gloss. I don't have the notes in front of me, but you can make it so that the values in the LOD file override any values put in the TextureSet.ini file. The idea is for things like natural metal to always make shiny, and tires to always be dull, things like that. And you can specify this change to any or all parts of the mesh. Other than actually changing the MAX file to put out a new LOD, there isn't a way that I know of to change this. And I have no idea what to even look for in the LOD file. FastCargo

Look in Dave's sig. FastCargo

Okay, who's the engineer that designed THAT? FastCargo

Wrench, Sorry about that. I forgot to answer your question. Well, I've been using CCleaner for a while. The 2 things I look for is that a) It doesn't pork my windows install, b) It gets rid of crap in the registry and useless files. So far, CCleaner has performed both tasks admirably. It's probably a little conservative when deleting stuff, but that's okay. Defragging-wise, I just use the standard Windows defragger with no issues. There are probably better ones out there, but I've never used them. FastCargo

Uh yeah....total modifications (OTC, DS, NF, etc). You try multi aircraft in something like that and you'll end up with a mess. Or weapons available on aircraft that it never really carried. Not to mention ground objects may show up that were never in that theatre of operations, or during that time period. Unless HD space is a REAL premium, there is no reason NOT to simply use a separate install. Feel like WWII? Click on your WWII install. How about a 1950s conflict in Europe...or Lexx_Luthor's Siberian Sky conflict. Just click on the exe needed. No copying, renaming, etc. Most of the TW sims stock are less than 1GB in size...paltry by today's standards. FastCargo

True...which would open up all sorts of other possibilities (ie if you could user select parts to jettison in flight, other things are possible with this capability). FastCargo

Jug, I just got one thing to say: GIDDYUP! FastCargo

You're assuming one isn't already in the works...oh wait... FastCargo

I was thinking about the situation with the drop tanks a bit more and had some questions/possible solutions. 1) Under the old (Bunyaps) weapons pack, all files were in one directory, however with the recent MF weapons pack, all weapon files are now in their own directory, resulting in them needing individual ini files. My question is....is there anything preventing having different squadron tanks just by making a different specific weapon directory (ie Tank300SkyrayGen, then Tank300SkyrayVF1, etc). The idea would be that the bitmap and LOD names are the same, just different directory and ini names. My question is, would this work? My proposed solution is basically, each squadron still gets their own tanks, but no LOD hacking, renaming bitmaps, etc. For future skinners, all they would need to do is include the new directory, and of course, a weapondata.ini entry. The problem is that the Skyray's loadout.ini file would determine which tanks go on the model...unlike the current method which would match the tanks with the squadron skin (because they are skinned by the squadron, not by the bitmap located in the weapons folder). A possible 'workaround' is the default tanks would be unmarked 'generic' tanks, which would actually be very plausible...which you could still override in the loadout screen. 2) Solution 2, which is more radical. Shoot the tanks off. Keep the tanks part of the aircraft LOD. Make 2 new components that would basically name the tanks, with each Component having a hitbox, and SystemNames of a fuel tank and a weapon station. Make a new entry in the weapondata.ini that would be named the drop tank name, but would actually be a gunpod, with very few rounds of a gun (which you would have to make as well) that has no sound, effects, anything like that. There would be no LOD file either. The idea is that when you load the 'drop tanks' you are actually loading a gunpod that points straight at the 'hitbox' for the component (ie the tanks that are part of the LOD). When you go to fire your guns the first time, the guns shoot the hitbox of the drop tank, cause enough damage for the tank to separate. Obviously there are several problems, the first of which is 'Would I blow myself up?'. Secondly, how do you make the Component tanks NOT appear at will (like if you wanted to load bombs instead of drop tanks)? Third, this means the tanks would always 'jettison' whenever you fire the guns. Just thinkin out loud...any comments? FastCargo

Actually, the answer is...it depends. Like any other flight control problem, the severity of the issue will determine the possible courses of action. There have been many instances where a configuration that was considered unlandable was able to be recovered. This situation would be no different. I think people assume off axis thrust vectoring to be more powerful than it is. Remember, TVC is meant as an augment to manuverability, not to completely overpower conventional aerodynamics. Otherwise, you might as well get rid of all the other aerodynamic surfaces...don't see any future designs doing that anytime soon. More than likely, assuming the particular pilot has airspeed and altitude to regain control of the situation, then it's a matter of doing a controlability check to determine the aircraft flight control limits. Also, like a jetski, TVC is most effective with high power settings, so if you can minimize the power you need on final (fly a simulated 'engine out' pattern), that minimizes the cross inputs you have to put in to counter any adverse effects. Personally, unless the TVC got stuck at that 'perfect storm' of angles, I'd say a dual stuck TVC situation is certainly recoverable...as long as both engines are running. Single engine on the other hand...then I'd be concerned. FastCargo

Also, I'm still not clear on something. Is the EO_CAMERA (installed on a aircraft and NOT using a pod) a 'fixed' camera? In other words, does it 'gimbal' at all? Because the aircraft entry doesn't show any 'gimbal' limits. And, even if the negative G entry works...would you still lose the external pod camera if you hit 'Jettison all'? FastCargo

I am serious, and don't call me Shirley. But hey, do you like gladiator movies? (This thread hasn't been hijacked...it's been derailed and smashed and the local area has had to be evacuated due to a toxic spill...) FastCargo

You know, the DS Mod...modification of a small handheld gaming device built by Nintendo...but that's not important right now. FastCargo

Also, and this isn't a slight to weapons modders (I am one), but sometimes I think we suffer from too many choices rather than not enough. I was looking through my old weapons list, and I had to wonder exactly how many of these did I use, and how many variants of a weapon do you really need. Heck, that's why with my Hellfires, I didn't make EVERY variant, only those that had external model changes. FastCargo