FastCargo

I guarantee that with the experience of the modders on the team, 99.9% of the ideas you can think of have already been thought of by the modders. We'll take any suggestions under advisement. FC

Also, it looks like the vertical stab is different than the standard P-51D. FC

Comparison between what we have here vs what you get at Alphasim: CF-101B - CombatAce CF-101B - AlphaSim CF-101B Pit - CombatAce CF-101B Pit - AlphaSim Skyray - CombatAce Skyray - AlphaSim Skyray Pit - CombatAce Skyray Pit - AlphaSim FC

Information about gun jams in the F-8 Crusader during Vietnam. http://www.vectorsite.net/avcrus_2.html FC

Most guys aren't going to be able to tell you that information. FC

Okay folks, this 'double cockpit' issue keeps coming up, so here's some info to help you solve your own problems. For folks who are having problems with cockpits not being in the proper position, the default is to match the entry in the data.ini: with the position in the cockpit.ini: That should in theory make your eye point from the cockpit match what the eyepoint of the pilot model, which of course should allow you to see what the pilot sees. However, TK has reduced the NearClipDistance parameter in the FLIGHTENGINE.INI in the latest patch, causing some odd issues with external aircraft parts showing that shouldn't. Lets talk a little about how all these parameters relate to each other. All Component entries in an aircraft's data.ini have this parameter: This is exactly what it sounds like...the mesh name and any SystemName in the Component entry will be visible from the cockpit view. In the FLIGHTENGINE.INI file there will be a parameter called NearClipDistance. This parameter is in meters, and tells the that within the cockpit view, anything with the distance is not to be drawn except for the cockpit LOD. Also, under normal conditions, the cockpit LOD will overdraw everything in the cockpit view (aircraft, weapon and pilot LODs). One more parameter that is sometimes relevant is the OpenCockpit parameter located in the cockpit.ini file. If this is set to TRUE, the NearClipDistance parameter will NOT be applied to that aircraft and the cockpit LOD will no longer overdraw everything. Anything with ShowFromCockpit=TRUE in the data.ini will be drawn and visible from the cockpit...even stuff that could be inside the cockpit. I use this to advantage in the F-111s, allowing you to have a WSO sitting next to you. However, all the models I have built have anticipated such a development. Note in the this OUT file: Note that the WindscreenFrame, CanopyFrame, and Cockpit are separate meshes, all the meshes normally closest to the pilot...and the ones that usually cause the visual issues. So, for this aircraft, I've put the following in the data.ini: then Note what happens...basically I've told the sim that in cockpit view, I don't want to see the Cockpit mesh (plus any submeshes) in the external model. You can do this for every mesh that you don't want to see from the cockpit view. This is the preferred method I use, to preserve the actual view from the cockpit as much as possible while avoiding clipping problems. Give that a shot for any model that you are having issues with. You may have to do some searching in the model's OUT file to determine what to hide. FC

Whoopsie! FC

Personally, I have no problem with it...as long as those who participate remember that playing a soldier is not the same as BEING as soldier. Here's a better example I wrote for the flight sim world: http://combatace.com/blog/3/entry-37-youre-not-cool/ FC

Be On the Look Out FC

But it has to be GOOD voice acting with good post production. Otherwise, it's just as bad IMHO. Believe me, I've tried recording on my HUD tapes and it still sounds like crap...even using a real helmet and mask, in a real aircraft, while actually flying. FC

Man, the more research you do on this guy, the weirder it gets...this wack job has been doing this sort of thing since 1993 at least. The original thread poster has a date of Aug 7th, 2010 for his personal encounter with this guy, so assuming that's correct, it means this guy is STILL doing this sort of thing. Heck, he's gone to jail for this already (actual fraud). FC

Whatta dumbass! FC

Outstanding...too bad we don't use JEPPS anymore...:). FC

Find this in the F-15SG data.ini: Change it to this: That should be it. FC

There will be several aircraft with double cockpits since the latest patch. TK lowered the NearClipDistance significantly which is causing the problem. The F-35 and F-15 ACTIVE are several patches behind. As far as the F-15SG goes, I'll take a look later on to see if I missed something. FC

I believe this is what you are looking for: http://combatace.com/files/file/7807-cockpit-photo-addon-for-the-thirdwire-series/ FC

It could have happened VERY quickly...depends on a lot of factors. FC

It's simple. I think everyone agrees here that the actual behavior the law was designed to discourage is reprehensible. The question is simply if the law as it exists does more harm than good. First, don't fool yourselves, there are always exceptions to every rule. For those who tout the 'slippery slope' of impinging on Freedom of Speech, I would remind you that yelling 'Fire!' in a crowded theater is a good way to get arrested. Most folks would agree that there should be consequences for your 'Free Speech' causing general public mayhem. That being said, there are always dangers of setting precedent causing a snowball effect...otherwise known as 'the boiling frog' syndrome. There is no question in the case of fraud, using fake credentials to attempt monetary gain....there are laws to address that sort of thing. Is there immediate harm in verbally lying about something where the only tangible gain is respect you don't deserve? That's a good question. Certainly if one is taken in by such a faker, and finds out about it, he will tend to approach the next veteran he meets with greater guardedness and cynicism. Will this cause long term damage to society? Only if the problem becomes epidemic and drifts into fraud. The best way to handle these idiots (besides taking them behind the woodshed for some wall to wall counseling), is to 'out' them whenever you find one. Let folks know, spread the word, embarrass the hell out of them. You'd be surprised how quickly the word gets around in this day of the internet. You can't really hide anymore in that respect. FC

Also, like the famous 'F-22 in the F-18 sights' photo, context is everything. There is no information on what was going on in those pics. Now, I'm NOT saying they weren't valid 'kills', but until you know the full story, you don't know dick. FC

Sure it can...Google 'F-15 ACTIVE'. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-15_STOL/MTD FC

Trust me, it wasn't magical...it was practice, and putting the aircraft in preset parameters to make the drop work. Also, for all intents, you were aiming with a shotgun, not with a sniper rifle. The idea was to put the center of your stick on your target...so you could have slop in your equations. Here's an interesting article...take a look at the CEP numbers: http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-5320632/Radar-bombing-during-Rolling-Thunder.html http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3101/is_2_53/ai_n29269246/pg_4/?tag=content;col1 CEPs were regularly in the 3000 foot range. FC

I remember doing almost the exact same spin recovery procedure in the mighty T-37...pretty docile spinner if I remember correctly. Fun stuff! FC

If you can see the stock weapons, but not the modded weapons, your weapondata.ini and weapondata.dat files are being saved in the wrong place. Both files should end up in the Objects/Weapons directory. FC

I am the creator of the moving map display for the F-15C. If you look at the cockpit.ini file, this is the reference: That is as much control as I have. You find something different, you let me know. FC

What makes this so hard to believe? Perhaps you should remember the story of Gordon Cooper. That aside, lets talk about a few things. First, I didn't drop bombs, I dropped 'sticks'. We bombed areas, large targets, runways, etc. We dropped entire bays...or had other weapons where accuracy to 10s of feet was irrelevant. However, we frequently practiced with single bombs, even BDU-33s (which looks slightly wierd...dropping a single coffee can out of a intercontinental bomber). And we found we were simply better than the computer...on average. There were several reasons for this: 1) In a perfect day, in a perfect test situation, computers could do it better. However, there was rarely a perfect day where everything was running at 100%. Even slight degradations in perceived inputs could result in significant errors. For a cold war computer, with less computing power than your cell phone, designed to drop weapons with yields in the kiloton range, this wasn't an issue. There were times in terminal manuvering phase that the computer simply couldn't keep up with the calculations....vs a good OSO who had already anticipated the changes would and get the weapon out on time. 2) OSOs and crews in general did this stuff in their sleep. We constantly competed against each other, and kept trying to find ways to make the other crews buy beer. You would be surprised how good you can get when you get free beer. I knew guys who would consult with MX to determine the exact amount of time it look for all the relays to fire after the button was pressed. One guy in particular even went so far as to determine how far the button had to be pressed...that's a little hardcore... 3) The 'fat finger/GIGO' factor. This still is a problem today of an error creeping into the computer by accident. The computer is dumb, and simply drops when the conditions were met. Verses an operator who could look at it, realize it wasn't right based his old school calculations, and drops on time. 4) If no one has figured it out by now, low altitude level bombing of a point target is highly inaccurate on the best of days...even if everything is 100%. All the possible interactions the weapon had after it was released meant that you always had a fudge factor. Even an article either you or streakeagle posted talking about the accuracy of radar bombing talked about the accuracy using radar was quite good...if you were using a full set of weapons to bomb an area. Accuracies now were simply not feasible back then. FC