FastCargo

Except at the box office and most reviews: The Star Trek franchise was in the crapper after Enterprise and Nemesis. Whatever you may think of the JJ Abrams reboot, it made the franchise profitable again. FC

Very sad news. RIP.

Oh now you done dood it...ya had to talk about falling dollars. LL can smell a conversation about fiat money like a shark smelling blood in the water...:). FC

Depends on the aircraft. 3rd party, maybe. TW native...maybe before a certain patch date. FC

Awwww man!!! That ain't right!!! Not at all! FC

I've got the following: SF2 SF2V SF2E SF2E + Exp 2 SF2I SF2I + Exp 1 SF2NA SF2 Merged (all of the above) Basically, I run 8 discrete installs....the idea is that I can test my mods in any enviroment to see what works or doesn't. What I did was run each install separately in it's own directory, then copied the directories (not the mod directories, but the actual program directories). I then uninstalled all of them, then reinstalled a Merged setup under SF2 Merged as the directory. Then ran each exe to build the mod directories. Within each mod directory, I altered the Version.ini to only show TRUE for the specific exe files needed, then made the Version.ini read only. Here's the weird thing...if I run (say the SF2V) the standalone exe, pointing at the default mod directory, it only shows the stuff available to a stand alone version of SF2V. If I run the merged version of the SF2V exe, pointing at the same mod directory, it shows ALL of the available stuff in a merged install, overriding the Version.ini file. Don't know why it works, but it does. And doing a standard copy/rename exe for the various exes (standalone or merged) results in mod install with the proper objects/terrains available. FC

Here's the thing...you are burning money building a non-combat aircraft for an air combat sim. You can just as easily learn how to move up to more complex aircraft by building an earlier year vintage aircraft that people want. Oh, like an F-5, or F-105, A-4, A-7, A-6. And DCS filling the spot left by MSFS? I'll believe that when I start seeing airliners being released and ultra detailed terrains with awesome airports. I want DCS to succeed...but some of the things I'm seeing have me concerned. FC

Go to this thread to figure out how to implement the feature: http://combatace.com/topic/61803-multiple-aircraft-taking-off-from-runway-at-once/ There are limitations though. FC

I always thought training in a trainer in a virtual air force to be kind of redundant. What I mean is this...in a simulated environment, everything is controlled. The idea is to use the simulator to get you up to speed in procedures and maneuvers that cannot be practiced in the aircraft (losing an engine on takeoff for example). But for normal procedures, it doesn't matter how much you practice in the simulator...you get on to the 'line' and a whole bunch of new stimuli are competing for your attention. In the real world, these real world training flights teach you to 'timeshare', to build that basic 'airmanship' that you carry onward from aircraft to aircraft. But assuming you're spending the jack on flight simulators for PCs, you probably already have as much basic airmanship as you are going to get in a simulated environment. Much better to spend your time getting up to speed on the specific aircraft you want to fly, and specific tactics your squadron/clan/troop/whatever wants you to learn. The only time I would spend on building a basic training program is if someone wants to learn who has no idea what military flying (or flying in general) is. FC

Those entries won't work...you're rotating the hands. What you need to be doing is positioning the hands. Use POSITION_Z instead of ROTATION_Z. FC

Yea, I don't understand this either. Obviously I have a personal interest...but it doesn't make sense from a financial point of view. FSX is about flyin', DCS is about shootin'. T-38s do a lot of the first, a little of the second. And there is already a decent one for FSX. You would think an F-5 would be a MUCH bigger draw. So many nations have had them at one point or another, you'd be casting a pretty wide net. FC

I guess I'm missing something...the original Falcon 4.0 source code was never legally released, correct? (Other than to Lead Pursuit for F4:AF) And everything since then is based off that non-legal code? Doesn't that mean that nobody really owns the rights (other than Lead Pursuit) and can't compel anyone to do anything? FC

The Tsar tank didn't do that well in its first (and only) field trial. http://www.landships.freeservers.com/lebedenko_info.htm FC

Download my F-5F MAX file to see how I used the Points to be able to determine where to hang weapons. Use the data.ini to 'group' weapons....you've got all sorts of errors there. What I might recommend is deleting all your weapon stations and start from scratch...usually go from outside in. FC

TCB Scale is what most folks use on the vertices's. You only have to scale from one to the other...(ie open to closed). The game engine will take care of opening or closing depending on the aircraft's power setting. FC.

Been there, done that. http://en.wikipedia....rumman_Guardian FC

I have to admit, I was never able to solve this problem with the Super Hornet. I finally had to build a flat plate inside the body to give it a shadow. FC

Hahaha!! Awesome! FC

Unexpected consequences. Someone posited one time when the AI rise up against us, it's because they'll have learned all the ways to kill us through video games...:) FC

Looks much better!

1) A cockpit. 2) Proper year span...those are the biggies. FC

What about on land? FC

I suspect it's your Intel graphics card. Intel cards are notoriously underpowered. FC

The TW online store certificate appears to have been updated. Everyone can stop freaking out now. FC

Assuming you're talking about a jet engine nozzle...both. Goto the modder's section and download one of my models (along with the released version) to see how it is done. FC