FastCargo

No, you're not wrong. Just realized myself. I'll fix it when I get around to it. FC

Okay, I'll take a look this evening. FC

Well, typically from what I've seen, most USAF (ACC and AETC) aircraft display the 2 letter base identifier on the tail, then the serial number which consists of the letters AF and the last 2 digits of the fiscal year the aircraft was allocated to be built , then usually the last 3 digits of the actual serial number. Sometimes you will see 4 digits of the serial number if there are more than one aircraft with the same last 3 digits....i.e. 923 and 4923. Also, somewhere on the aircraft in smaller print is the actual completeserial number, usually consisting of the last 2 digits of the year of the aircraft, a dash, then the full serial number. Finally, this changes if the aircraft is assigned as the Squadron, Group, Wing, or numbered AF bird. Then you will usually see a slightly flasher tail code (usually the base color and a contrast color..creating a shadow effect), then the identfier of the particular Squadron, Group, Wing, Numbered AF, etc. In the pictures above, the left F-16 is for the 4th FS at Hill...designated as the Squadron bird. The one on the right looks like just a generic line bird of the base. Sometimes you might see variants of this in Reserve or ANG units...but usually for only specific designated aircraft. FC

You know, that B nose looks a little...lumpy. Let me see if I can smooth it out a bit. The K had a refueling probe? Any pictures of it in the extended position? FC

Sorry man, I was hoping you had found something I had overlooked. Oh well, hex editing it is. FC

Sort of. Jumbo aircraft (DC-10 and larger) can use a 3 bar VASI that has the aimpoint a little farther down. Otherwise, everything below that size uses the standard 2 bar VASI or PAPI for airports. Pretty much unless the aircraft is unusual (Space Shuttle) or the airport is unusual, all aircraft use roughly the same glideslope. FC

This thread is closed due to redundancy: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=36313 Do not do this sort of thing here. FC

Please don't post the same thing in separate forums fishing for a response. FC

kct, I know you're talking about SFP1/WOx. Have you actually tried this yet? Because I have and it didn't work for me. FC

Uh, not so fast... I actually tried this and it doesn't work. You would think it would... FC

.

I have no problem with threads on OFF3. But I will not have them degenerate into name calling, shilling and bad behavior. That's what happened on the last thread and that's why it was closed. Thanks for the informal review. Very interesting and fills in a lot of questions that I had. FC

This is a side effect of using the OpenCockpit=TRUE line in the cockpit.ini of the aircraft (it's a piece of code used in First Eagles). The advantage is that you can have better visibility on parts of the aircraft close to you. Or in the F-111s case, you can see your WSO sitting right next to you. The disadvantage is what you just noticed. This thread explains it in more detail: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=32148 What's weird is that I don't see this in my own install (the side effect of being IFR in the cockpit) even though I use it myself. FC

Eric, This thread relates to the issue. http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showt...mp;#entry239565 It affects aircraft like the Skyray and the F-106. In effect, I can get away with things like ATFLIR and buddy pod on the SH skins because they are part of the model. The downside is that you can't jettision the tanks. Not a big deal for the ATFLIR and buddy pod...however, not being able to drop a basic fuel tank... So that means the tanks have to be seperate LODs with separate skins. I have an idea to force the tanks off...but it's more problematic and I don't suspect it would work properly. Also, you don't need to keep the skins at 2048 by 2048...I only do that for skinners to work in as great a resolution as they want. I don't expect a skin for a tank to ever need that resolution... FC

Actually, my plan was a little simpler...a simple box with a gun slit (see below): The red and white panels would be illuminated: Then, just depending on your angle to it, you see red or white: You put four boxes side by side at slightly different angles...instant PAPI. FC

Whoops Eric...I realized some of the slimers weren't assigned the 'slimer' material. It's a bug that occasionally crops up in the exporter...fixed by simply closing and reopening MAX, then reexporting. Fixed now...I'll send the newer LODs later. As far as the lights go, illuminated materials can be manipulated like any other mesh, which means you could theorectically activate the slimers by another method (animation, flight control, etc). However, using the light control is still just a 3 position activity...off, constant on, flash. You can change if something shines when the gear is down or not, flash or not, moveable or not. That's about it though. It depends on the aircraft how slimers work. In some aircraft, they use a seperate switch. Total polys are at 41k. Before anyone freaks out, realize that you will never see that many polys in game. A significant amount of these meshes are 'hidden' depending on what weapons are selected or not. This is still a very detailed model nevertheless. FC

Avionics70 has been there since WOE...(which was SP4 I think). You need to have both in your install to insure all your addon aircraft work. FC

I wonder if it would be possible to make mechanically. All you really need is the light bar and ball to be different distances from the aircraft, with the ball 'behind' the light bar...lined up so that when you're on glideslope, the sights are aligned. In theory, the ball should be 'low' if you're low and high if your high. There wouldn't be any wave off capability of course...but for simple glideslope guidance... Give me a few days and I may be able to come up with a PAPI for land use. It probably wouldn't be very bright though... FC

Actually, it's very easy to see older Russian aircraft...they're cheap and plentiful to buy. Hell, there are a couple of privately owned MiG-29s out there...just not in a flyable state at the moment. Owning or getting an older Russian jet isn't an issue...operating it is...ANY aircraft isn't cheap. Jet aircraft even more so...foreign jet aircraft even more than that. Though the L-39 is very popular...they've even had jet air races in them. FC

Funny thing about the doing the Varks, with all the research I found, there was enough differences that of all the 10 variants built or ordered, only 2 pairs could share the same LOD file...otherwise darn near every version had to have it's own unique LOD file. FC

Crop-duster? You mean the same one that was on SimHQ? As Crop-duster/milkweg/meep? It's funny, you always have to ask..."If you hate it here so much, why do you keep coming back?" FC

I really need to get those damn things done... FC

You assume that's just a skin.... FC

Not at the moment. There is a TF mode in the dll, but it isn't currently enabled. FC

Sigh...my observations: 1) Any line you draw between reality and arcade in a sim is arbitrary at best. Period. There are multi million dollar simulators out there for professional and military pilots. The cost of operation per HOUR is more than most people spend on a top of the line PC! Yet, with all this money and technology, what do you think most folks who really operate the aircraft say about the simulator? "It just fly quite the same." or "It just doesn't feel right." or "The aircraft behaves differently in this particular capability." So, seriously, if major aviation companies and governments can't get this right...what makes you think a company (any company) can get it right for far less budget on far less capable machinery. 2) Ever wonder why there are very few (in percentage) real world pilots who fly simulators for fun? Because a lot of times, flying is WORK! That's right, sometimes it's a job! Who wants to relive going to work on their off time? On the flip side, for when flying is fun...a simulator is a pale imitation at best...even on those multi million dollar machines other people pay for. Especially on a home PC, which is like driving using a soda straw for a window, and a calculator for steering. So, if a true hardcore flier (ie someone who does it for real is probably as hardcore as it gets) doesn't bitch about the 'realism' aspects...what makes you think a non fliers opinion about what a sim should have is any more relevant? And to be clear, I'm not putting down folks who don't or can't fly for real, far from it. Y'alls enthusiasm for flying is what helps keep me motivated to sim and hang out. I consider myself lucky that I was in the right place at the right time to be able to fly for a living...and I try to convey the love I have for flying to my friends here everyday, even just a little. Because I remember when I didn't fly, and how much I wanted to. 3) Immersion is different for everyone and again, is arbitrary where that line is drawn. We've seen examples here ... Stiglr being an extreme case, but even milder cases such as (and I'm not calling you out guys) the person who recently was Mab G. going on about having a LABS counter, or DH going on about the lack of robust multiplayer. It isn't 'wrong' or 'right' about what's in a sim that matters. What really matters is if you can enjoy it or not personally. There are folks who love F4, or LOMAC, or the TW series. To each his own...what your opinion is about each of them is exactly that...your opinion, and means precisely zero to anyone else. 4) Stiglr has simply forgotten the 2 reasons simulators are made. First, and foremost, to make money for the company. Second, to enjoy them. I've always noticed that folks with this sort of obsessive behavior on anything usually don't have anything else to fulfill their lives...and feel inadequate with every little slight in their narrow viewpoint. 5) In my opinion, the TW series strikes the balance...the feeling of flight without the tedium of flight. One person's opinion...but hey, what do I know. FC (pilot for 18+ years, flier for 20+ years, simmer for 25+ years)