FastCargo

First, if the node doesn't exist (ie if there is no sms_weapon_aim7F node as an example), then nothing you do (short of retexturing a different node) will make it read correctly. And if you retexture it, you lose the node that you had (ie if you retexture the sms_weapon_aim9b to read AIM-7F, then it will never read AIM-9B no matter if you load an AIM-9B there). Second, unless the weapon is defined in the cockpit.ini under the [WeaponTypeID] section with a different number from all the other weapons, again, you will not see the particular node activated. Finally, even if you do define the weapon as above, (say AIM-7F=2), then the entry you have, say: Note the bold parts. The light only comes on when the Position = 1.0, and the Position only equals 1.0 when the Value is equal to the number you defined in the [WeaponTypeID] section. If you want to get an idea of just how complex this can get, download either the F-15 Super Pack or F-15 Baz Super Pack and fly one of the F-15C model cockpit versions. Then take a look at the cockpit.ini...it will make your brain explode...as it did mine. FC

Unfortunately, a LOT of the prop model FMs need work (and actually, some of the aircraft too). But there is hope...now that TK has released a P-51 and Spitfire, that's at least 2 FMs of similar vintage that can be used as a base to start fixing other aircraft. FC

I think that's in the FlightData CAT file.... FC

Did you try to repack a CAT file? That is a BIG no no...only experienced modders should attempt such a thing, and even then, most don't. Use the appropriate extractor for the appropriate sim: Gen 1 sims (SFP1, etc) use: http://combatace.com/files/file/343-sfp1woewov-cat-file-extract-utility/ Gen 2 sims (SF2, etc) use: http://combatace.com/files/file/10458-catpack-archiving-utility/ FC

I'd imagine because this aircraft was built for the Oct 08 patch or later. FC

Good luck! FC

Folks, here is the global way to fix the issue. Extract (if you haven't already) the SF2/V/E/I/EXP FLIGHTENGINE.INI file and look for these lines: Now, in the old Gen 1 series of sims, this is what you found in the FLIGHTENGINE.INI: Now, note the lines in bold and italics. When I was first creating the T-38 and trying to use the Lexx_Luthor method of getting a cockpit in the external model, I noticed very bad building flashing when the NearClipDistance in the [NearSceneClip] section was adjusted to something really small (as well as screwing up all the other aircraft views). After TK added the OpenCockpit parameter in the COCKPIT.INI file, I noted I did not need to adjust the NearClipDistance parameter anymore to get a cockpit inside the model...the OpenCockpit parameter essentially ignores the NearClipDistance parameter. However, note that in SF2, the NearClipParameter has been changed significantly. I think this is what is causing the 'flashing buildings'. I think the fix would be to adjust the NearClipDistance parameter in bold back to an SF1 value. Realize that for aircraft where OpenCockpit=FALSE, this could cause some parts of the aircraft external model to not be visible from the cockpit. Also, the NearClipParameter in italics may need to be adjusted as well, but I don't know the consequences of that. FC

We've known about that for a while...problem is that it stays that way during the day too. FC

That's why I posted those links...those are OSX programs that allow you to read AND write to NTFS partitions. Totally transparent to the user...you wouldn't know the difference. If I was you, I'd go full NTFS on the external drive, use one of the programs I listed in the post (they're both freeware), and you're there...no flipping back and forth on partitions. FC

Here's a big reason: http://www.theeldergeek.com/ntfs_or_fat32_file_system.htm You are much more likely to lose info on an external drive with a sudden power failure (I know, shouldn't happen on a laptop) with FAT32 vs NTFS. If you have Snow Leopard, you can use iNFTS to be able to fully read/write to your NTFS drive at the kernal level. If you have an older version of OSX, you can try this program: http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/system_disk_utilities/ntfs3g.html I've just downloaded, installed and tried it out (I run OSX 10.5.6). Seems to work just fine in copying files back and forth...no issues noted and is transparent to the user. FC

Yea? Where's the enemy AI? All I see are ducks... FC

I jumped on the cell phone thing late, so I skipped all that crap. Went straight to the 'flip phone' that fits in a pocket. The larger one was for when I was weekend SOF keeping track of my various aircraft flying over the US. FC

I've actually thought about this...with the cockpit being just like the stations they use. FC

Skynet is here.... Nice! FC

Wrench, Which building? FC

I've heard that the A380 cockpit, while similar to it's brothers, is different enough that although the idea of a common rating is possible, there hasn't been a lot of headway made it actually making it occur...one of those 'sounds good in theory but doesn't match reality' things. A similar thing occured with the 777 because it was similar to the 767/757 (which do share a common rating). I hadn't heard about the upper deck floor on the A380F, though it does not surprise me. At our company, the Airbus floors have had significantly more beam cracking issues than our other aircraft, even our older 727s and MD10s (as in the 727s have had less than 5, the MD10s less than 10, the Airbus over 100). That's too bad, we could use the lift of an efficient large freighter. Our 777Fs have been making money hand over foot for us with their increased efficiency over our MD11s. We actually have had an A330 on the ramp for evaluation as a midsize freighter to replace our A300/310s and some of our MD10s. The current feeling is that we aren't getting them (an interesting problem was the 'rake' of the aircraft on the ground was causing loading issues because loading crews couldn't get the cans pushed uphill...Airbus has proposed a nose gear mod that would solve this)...but we have a saying...'until you see it with a purple tail on the ramp, don't discount anything'. So who knows...the A330 would be a decent fit because it uses the same tube as our A300/310s, so we already have loading experience with the general type. The A350 XWB looks to be interesting...hopefully it'll be a lot better contender than their last attempt to compete with the 787...pretty much potential customers told Airbus to go back to the drawing board because their initial attempt was not good. FC

In my opinion, this is one of the TW series' greatest strengths...being able to realistically explore designs that never made it to production to see how effective they would have been. In the F-103s case...the answer probably would have been...'not much'. If you have enough knowledge and ability, you can pretty much 'sandbox' anything from WWI to the early 80s in decent enough fidelity to get an idea how things could have been. Another example is the B-70. You figure out pretty quickly that although it could have been a good nuclear bomber, it would have made a terrible conventional bomber on it's original usage doctrine (high and fast). FC

No, because it's not seen as a countermeasure. FC

Well, the A380 has been around longer than the 747-8I. But, there are several factors involved in the A380 vs 747-8I, a few are numbers based, a few are intangibly based. 1) The A380 has more capacity. For high traffic routes, this is a no brainer. 2) The A380 was more efficient (fuel used per passenger seat) than any 747-X product offered at the time. That can be argued to have changed with the 747-8I, which has a new wing. Intangibles: 1) The A380 is 'newer'. Like the argument that killed the F-20 in foreign sales...it's not a derivative of an existing design. Interestingly enough, in the cargo market, it's been a different story. The A380F (freighter) version was delayed for so long, and the delays were handled so badly by Airbus, that ALL the launch customers cancelled their orders and currently, no customers exist. But, the 747-8F has been selling quite nicely, along with the older versions, showing there is still is a market for high capacity cargo haulers. It can be shown that in a market where having the newest toys isn't as much of a factor as efficiency and operating costs, that the 747 is the clear winner. Maybe someday once the Airbus gets their act together with the A380F, they can compete in that arena. FC

They gots the money, they gets the plane...simple as that methinks... FC

First, welcome to CA. Second, for starting in the ThirdWire series, start here: http://combatace.com/forum/99-thirdwire-woewoiwovsf-1-knowledge-base/ This is our extensive knowledge base. Also, the link on the desktop is for a patch for the basic game. The issue you have sounds like a computer issue...usually a reboot solves the problem. FC

Boeing has had the frieghter version up and running for sometime already. Actually was down in Fresno doing approach tests with a 747-400 following it around back before the beginning of the year. It surprisngly doesn't look that different until you notice the engines. I have to admit, the 747 has always appeared more graceful than the A380 to me. The A380 always seems to look a bit 'stubby'. FC

Zur, I tried something similar and ran into the same issue. I think only bmps will work...I was trying to make a 'fused' display but couldn't get it to work. FC

Of course it's cool...it was written by Luc Besson and released in 1998. You may know Luc Besson as the director of the films 'The Professional' and 'The Fifth Element'. FC

Well, if you want them to perform like later models, you could simply copy over all the relevant lines from the later models (except the lines that refer to the physical LOD file, such as the dimensions, model name, exhaust position,etc). However, you may want to consider that you were not putting the misslies into proper parameters...or you were having a random chance bad day. The closer you leave it to realistic settings, the better idea you have of what it might have been like trying to fly and fight in your chariot of choice. Otherwise, you're basically playing an arcade game if you arm yourself with weapons from the future.... FC