FastCargo

The cockpits are a separate download. FastCargo

Here's a question. I don't know how hard it would be to do code wise and legal wise. What if we 'dumbed' down the Falcon 4.0 engine. In other words, built a new theatre (Vietnam), upped the graphics, but got rid of a lot of avionics modes with building the F-4 and MiG-21. A lot of the other pieces already exist in that engine. Just a random thought. FastCargo

Hey, they have two... Glad things turned out well. FastCargo

Awesome work! Have to admit, this is why WoE is my favorite among the TW sims.... FastCargo

Nice effects...works perfect for certain weapons. Awesome on the ASAT prototype I'm making... FastCargo

Okay, I forgot...got a bit busy. Anyway, here's the 'workaround'...it's actually more of a fix. First, take a look at your Weapondata.ini file. Lets say for today we want to fix our IRM rails (2IR). [WeaponData600] TypeName=LAU-105 FullName=LAU-105 DRA ModelName=LAU-105 Mass=73.029999 Diameter=0.100000 Length=2.800000 AttachmentType=NATO,USAF,USN NationName=USAF StartYear=0 EndYear=0 Availability=2 BaseQuantity=4 Exported=TRUE ExportStartYear=0 ExportEndYear=0 ExportAvailability=2 WeaponDataType=6 WeaponsRackType=2IR NumWeapons=2 LoadLimit=95.000000 LengthLimit=3.000000 MaxFuelAmount=0.000000 Attachment01Position=0.282000,0.000000,-0.020000 Attachment01Angle=0.000000,0.000000,-5156.620156 Attachment02Position=-0.282000,0.000000,-0.020000 Attachment02Angle=0.000000,0.000000,5156.620156 [WeaponData800] TypeName=ATAL FullName=2 Pack Stinger Rack ModelName=ATAL Mass=20.000000 Diameter=0.200000 Length=1.600000 AttachmentType=USAF NationName=USAF StartYear=1978 EndYear=2020 Availability=2 BaseQuantity=12 Exported=TRUE ExportStartYear=1978 ExportEndYear=2020 ExportAvailability=2 WeaponDataType=6 WeaponsRackType=2IR NumWeapons=2 LoadLimit=50.000000 LengthLimit=1.600000 MaxFuelAmount=0.000000 Attachment01Position=0.137000,0.000000,0.034500 Attachment01Angle=0.000000,0.000000,0.000000 Attachment02Position=-0.137000,0.000000,0.034500 Attachment02Angle=0.000000,0.000000,0.000000 Note the bolded areas...these are important. Now, the situation currently as you see it. There are 2IR rails in this order. If you were to go into your loadout menu to load two Stingers, it would use the LAU-105 rail, because it comes first in the weapondata.ini (actually weapondata.dat...but that's another story)...which would result in Stingers hanging on a Sidewinder rail...silly looking. However, notice that it would not happen the other way around...because of the LoadLimit and LengthLimit restrictions...you couldn't load a 'winder on a Stinger rail unless you 'forced it' via the Loadout.ini. So, here's how to fix it. Backup your weapondata.ini first!!!! First, find all the weapondata.ini entries of the same type...in this case WeaponsRackType=2IR. Find each weapon entry of that type, copy and paste all into a new text file. Then, sort them. A) By AttachmentType B) Then by LengthLimit C) Then by LoadLimit A few notes. For those racks that do not have Length/LoadLimit entries, you may want to consider making some that match the largest weapon that rack will carry. This will help prevent weird loadouts and will also help sorting. Renumber the entries so that the reordered entries plug into the previous slots using copy and overwrite. Finish by doing the weapon editor dance. You should now have entries that will help avoid mismatched racks/missiles. The more restrictive your AttachmentType entries are (for the aircraft, rack, and weapon) the less chance of getting a mismatch. Also, by sorting your racks as above, the engine will not attempt to load a rack that the weapon cannot fit on. FastCargo

And visiting our Canadian friends: FastCargo

And then farther north: FastCargo

Hey dudes. Finally got around to having my slides scanned...photographs I did back before I switched to digital. Most of these are from a west coast tour back in 2001... FastCargo

That's a bummer...I sort of 'grew up' watching the 63rd at MacDill AFB in the 80s (2 miles from the house)...even got a F-16 ride back in 1990 with those guys. FastCargo

When it is ready it will be released and we will let the community know. Thanks for your interest. FastCargo

Yep, just go to the loadout screen and unselect everything (including no ammo). You'll end up with a 'slick' aircraft. FastCargo

If it's programmed in a compiler type code (most are), it tends to look like your old style BASIC stuff (more complex of course...I use BASIC as the example because that's my more familar ref point). Until it gets 'compiled'...then it looks like hex code. Compiled code is what is released...the 'source code' is what is kept. FastCargo

Well, in a sense he already has. Because the license is based individually (ie buying the game). The problem is that licensing the engine wouldn't change certain aspects of the engine (MP limitations, avionics limitations, etc). C5 is looking to change certain aspects of the game...which essentially is rewriting code. That's no longer the same game engine at that point...and that's what TK was addressing...at least I think so. FastCargo

I'd definitely advocate a multi-role aircraft...I liked F-14 FD back in the day...but compared to F-15 SE III, it got sort of old after a while. I'd also advocate a 'verses' scenario. And it has to have a wide as possible fan base. Finally, prefer that it hasn't been done before in recent memory. With all of that, plus C5's conditions, narrows the field pretty much... 1. F-4 2. MiG-21 3. Harrier Having said that, the CF-105 story is pretty popular in Canada. You might get a lot of Canuck sales if someone made a dedicated CF-105 sim...and I mean a LOT of them. FastCargo