FastCargo

Buy SFP1 from ThirdWire. FC

Okay, that's pretty cool! Have to get far away though to get it all... FC

Awesome...perfect for weapons testing! Heck...maybe we could come up with some training missions for the new guys...a syllabus per se. FC

There are several ways to control the wings manually. The problem is that the AI will then either fail to be able to sweep the wings at all, or will only be able to use full forward or full aft with no in between settings. In other words, if you make a manual sweep, you cripple all your wingmen. FC

I'm going to squash this idiotcy right now. 1. Air is a fluid just like water. There are currents, hot and cold spots, eddy's etc. You could run through several layers horizontally and vertically, with just enough difference in temp/dew spread to cause contrails to appear and disappear from the same jet at the same alititude. You can have the exact same aircraft, changing a few thousand feet in altitude, leave very different contrails. Individual engines or different power settings cause cause differences in the amount of water vapor. Hell, you don't need engines to leave contrails at all...I can tell you of a time in a B-1B where I left huge contrails off the coast of Florida during William Tell. It was coming off the wings of our formation in huge sheets that looked thick enough to walk on. Or the time I left a couple of huge circular contrails in a T-38 while doing a supersonic high G run at 40k to 30k...looked back to see what looked like a giant 3d 'S'...because of the G I was pulling. All related to the same effect that causes those pretty transonic cones folks see. 2. Aircraft fuel dump in distress. Or they dump water for tests (such as icing tests), or they burn oil in the exhaust for airshows, or for evaluating airflows...there are about a billion ways an aircraft could have a trail behind it. Did you know a lot of larger aircraft have an APU in the tail? So if you fire it up, you leave an exhaust which has...guess what...water vapor which can be a different content ratio than a regular aircraft engine (actually, APUs are fairly inefficent anyway)...so, yes Virginia, you can con from an APU yet not from the engines ON THE SAME AIRCRAFT. 3. Now, lets talk about distances, shall we? I hear this every once in a while that somehow someone knows that aircraft are at the same altitude because they are very close in size. Not necessarily. Here's a nice math exercise you can do to figure out why seeing is not believing. It's the same exercise I use to explain to new pilots why the WORST way to rejoin on another aircraft is to head directly at it. A) Break out your geometry and trig skills, you're going to need them. First, pick an object of a fixed size...or use an arbitrary length (lets say 200 feet). B) Set that object at a fixed distance from your eye (lets start at 30000 feet). C) Assuming the end points of your object are perpendicular to your eye, note that it forms a nice triangle that can be divided lengthwise to form 2 identical right triangles. D) We can now figure out the angle of arc the object takes up in our field of vision using the inverse tangent function (for our example, about 22.9 minutes of arc). Here, I'll even provide the formula: X = (minutes per degree of arc) x (2) x (inverse tan ((length of object / 2)/distance of object) = 60 x 2 x atan((Y/2)/Z). If you draw it out, you'll see exactly what I'm showing here. E) Now, start adjusting the distance parameter and recalculate. Take all your results and chart them on a graph. Note the interesting thing...the graph is not a linear curve. In fact, it stays pretty flat until near the end. Which means that when objects are far away, estimating relative distance becomes more and more difficult. F) The accepted number is that an average human can note change with approximately 2 minutes of viewing arc change. This assumes a clear, high contrast situation with a non-moving target (ie the target is not sweeping across your field of view) at maximum eye resolution. You start throwing other varibles (multiple targets, sideways vectors, contrast/brightness changes) and the threshold to note a change only goes up. Heck, looking at our math...you can't even tell the distance change until the target has changed altitude by at least 2000 feet. And did I happen to mention this becomes progressively more difficult the smaller the target is? 4. I hear a lot about a global chemtrail conspiracy. Yet, not one reliable person has ever come forward anywhere and said, "Yes, I was a part of it." In the history of real conspiracies, in almost every case, it only took one person to bring the whole thing crashing down. And this was before the age of the 24/7 information access and ubiqitous cameras. And yet, out of the literally hundreds of thousands of people that would be needed to actually do such a thing, not one reliable person has ever been found? In this day of governments with more leaks than a colander? 5. Oh, and as a commerical and military pilot myself, I have to ask...exactly what would be my motivation to have this crap sprayed on my head? My families' head? Somehow, every single person involved would have to be coerced into doing such a thing and NOT ONE PERSON would say "Enough is enough?". Men who have been through hell and back and not one would say "I risk falling on my sword because it is the right thing?" Please. So, put away your tinfoil hats, the black helocopter you hear is actually your neighbors' lawn mower, and I'm pretty sure the only mind control is from the 'Entertainment' part of your TV. FC

You can't. The versions have diverged enough that new SF2 LODs are no longer usable in the Gen 1 series. http://forum.combatace.com/topic/43234-how-to-make-a-sf2-aircraftweapon-useable-in-gen-1-thirdwire-sims/ FC

All snide comments aside, this is actually pretty significant for a couple of reasons. One, the previous attempt at scramjet propulsion was 12 seconds, which was considered a success. This was almost 20 times longer in duration...a true cruiser vs a quick jolt of thrust. Two, for a technology pusher, a lot of stuff used was cribbed from other systems. The FADEC was from an F-35 F119, the booster was from the ATACMS, and the igniter was from a TF33...from an old C-141. There are more examples all throughout the system. The idea was to minimize new tech risk and increase redundancy (the history of test missile flights are usually only 50% success) to increase the chances of having 4 good flights. Both of these are significant...because it means lots of room for growth in capabilities/range in future versions. If your foundation is solid, adding to it is much easier. If you've ever read up on the challenges of having a successful SCRAMJET engine, you know why this is significant for future transportation and weapon systems. FC

From Wiki: "The later releases from THQ were real-time strategy games: Dawn of War, Dawn of War: Winter Assault, Dawn of War: Dark Crusade, and Dawn of War: Soulstorm. Developed by RTS veterans Relic Entertainment who had previously created the award-winning Homeworld and Impossible Creatures, these were considerably more popular and well received, with Dawn of War netting a 4.5 out of 5 from GameSpy." The 40K RTS series has been out for a while. FC

I'm pretty sure FOV can be adjusted too.... FC

The other thing that can happen as I have found out is that a mesh can be considered too 'concave' for it to shadow. In other words, take the mesh in question, cover the open holes, and then look at it closely. If it has too many or too large of 'dents' inward, it won't shadow. A simple example would be a bowl. If you model the whole bowl (inner and outer) as one mesh, it won't shadow. But, if you model the bowl as 2 separate meshes (an inner surface mesh and an outer surface mesh), then it does shadow. That's what I've noticed... FC

I still have it (including the Defiance campaign)...it wasn't very cooperative in XP last time I tried to get it to work... FC

Or...instead of trying to make sense of that, use Partition Wizard 4.2. It's a free program that will allow you to manipulate partitions (even non-Windows partitions) pretty easily. The problem is that XP/Vista/Win7 will not let you move 'backwards' (to the left) to merge or expand a partition. If your partitions were reversed, it wouldn't be a big deal...XP/Vista/Win7 would be able to take care of that easily by just expanding the partition to the 'right'. So, use Partition Wizard instead to move the whole partition to the beginning of the drive. Now, depending, this may wipe your MBR, so I would HIGHLY recommend: A) Making a System Recovery Disk. B) BACKUP your partition. Use PW to 'move' the partition to the beginning of the drive...then use the System Recovery Disk to rebuild your MBR in case it gets wiped. Be careful my friend... FC

crazygood150, As you can tell by the posts on this thread, rudeness is not very well received here. Constructive critiques are welcome as long as it is just that...constructive. However, even that only goes so far if you do not actively contribute to the commmunity...or worse, do not do sufficent research before posting something. It's easy to point out faults...it's much harder to actually contribute something useful. Considering how long you have been a member here, you should have known better. In this case, if you had done a bit of searching, you would have figured out fairly quickly, that the F/A-18A from the MF was built and put out before the code to have advanced avionics (Avionics70.dll) had been incorperated into the sim, therefore, the MF had to come up with some workarounds. Since then, there have been updates, and a modernized HUD for the F/A-18A is available. I invite you to explore the site, including our Knowledge Base, and the search function, to find the answers you need. If, after doing some of your own research, you find yourself at a loss, we will be happy to help you so long as you treat others and their creations (which you get for free) with respect for the hard work and time they put in. With that, this thread is closed. FC

I think all you have to do select avionics to 'Hard' in the Options panel...something like that. Of course, I believe that gets rid of most of the targeting boxes and cones as well... FC

http://ps3.gamespy.com/playstation-3/top-gun-2009/1091666p1.html FC

That's an excellent thought! It'll be great to see if that works! FC

All bets are off at that point. FC

Sometimes the CCC can override what the game is trying to tell the screen and so mess up what you are seeing. Try turning just the CCC (Catalyst Control Center) off and see what happens. FC

You haven't said what your computer screen resolution is. Match the resolution selection in WOE with what your screen is and you should be fine. However, make sure Catalyst isn't jacking with your settings as well. FC

Excellent! I'm thinking, can you add heavy and small aircraft parking slots? That way we can test static aircraft functions... Just a thought. FC

What the f*** is wrong with people...seriously. Did they think that there wouldn't be consequences? Simple punishment after a short time in heavy work prison...tattoo 'Dumbass' on their foreheads. Have them wear THAT for the rest of their lives. FC

Hmmm...lets look at those articles in detail shall we? Really? In the rest of the article, the only thing addressed by this statement is the relationship to the UN. Nothing else in this first statement is mentioned other than the general "hundreds of other items". Nothing on civil rights, slavery at all. Specifics please. Dumb...why did they even bring this up. Doesn't matter to me either way, they both reference the same thing. The UN, like every other organization, is not perfect. Now, specifics on 'undermining US sovereignty' might be a bit far, but why shouldn't we put the UN under a microscope? We certainly have been putting US history and policies on the dissection table lately, seems only fair to me to do the same to the UN. Okay, there are 2 statements here. First statement says "strengthened the requirements on teaching the Judeo-Christian influences of the nation's Founding Fathers". This could be interpreted as either "the basis of moral authority from which the Constitution was derived" or "the Founding Fathers wanted this to be a theocracy". Maybe it's just me, but I'm pretty sure it was the former...using guidelines and examples from history and their own lives, including Christanity, to develop what became the Constitution and the US government. The second statement is "attempted to water down rationale for the separation of church and state." Note the first word...attempted. Seems they were unsuccessful...imagine that. The US Government IS a constitutional republic (as is most modern "democracies"). The US Dollar has declined in value, and the US abandoned the gold standard a long time ago. These are both probably true...and not new critiques of any educational system. As far as the UN article goes, lets again look at the statement..."efforts by global organizations including the U.N. to undermine U.S. sovereignty". Again, this does not assume that they have been successful, and the US does have veto power. What it might suggest instead is looking at instances of UN actions working directly against US interests. Could this be considered an 'effort' to 'undermine' US 'sovereignty'? Maybe...each instance would have to be evaluated on it's own. For all the 'fear mongering' being thrown around, I see a whole lot of nothing here...no other specifics are mentioned. If they were, maybe we could evaluate what was actually passed a little better. The whole "UN" thing might be a little overboard...but certainly they should be looked at as sternly as US history and policies are...seems only fair. FC

I don't know any other users of the F-16 who use non-droppable tanks. As far as why, I have heard simply it's because any fighting the Sufa would do would probably be over Israel and they don't want tanks dropping on their heads. I have no idea if that's true or not. As far as the loading screen issue goes, it now makes sense. The CFTs and center drop tank are two different kinds of fuel tank. Because the sim always tries to load the same thing for every weapon groupID, when the loadout.ini overrides that, you'll get what you see in the loadout screen. FC