FastCargo

Sure, you keep believing that. Not that there weren't internal issues in the Diefenbaker government or at Avro or anything.... FC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_CF-105_Arrow FC

Yea, and then you had to tweak even more if you wanted the hidef models when the Hornet add-on came out.... FC

Now tell me that wouldn't't have looked sweet sitting on the ramp..... FC

In terms of complexity, this is true. I was meaning that the amount/variety of stuff offered at a DLC price point seems about right. But, yes, on a complexity level, all the offerings are the same. FC

I vowed to never do a cockpit again after I built one for the T-38A...about gouged my eyes out after that. Though, to be fair, my 3d and mapping skills have improved dramatically since then, and I did do some tweaking on that F-15C cockpit that turned out pretty good. FC

Not sure what you mean there. It seems prices are very elastic...again, the price varies as to what you get for it. Let's again put this in crude economic terms, especially for those who think TK isn't making money off of DLCs. A company, big or small, will not continue to invest in actions knowingly unless A) it has very DEEP pockets to have short term loss for long term gain, B) the people running the company are idiots, C) the company they run is a hobby and they don't ever intend to really make money or D) it makes money! It isn't A. I think we all know that. It probably isn't B. TW has been around for almost a decade...look how many other flight sim companies have either gone out of business...or never got past vaporware (I'm looking at you Fighter Ops). TW is still here. Even Microsoft, a company with VERY deep pockets, has bailed out of the genre. It probably isn't C...I'm not sure TK has a 'real' job outside of TW. So it's probably D...DLCs make money! Go figure, right? Look, whatever floats your boat and works for you is fine. But DCS isn't the second coming and TW isn't the devil. The truth is somewhere in the middle...you will get more out of DCS in the long run, but you will pay more to get it. And until there is enough of a knowledge base in the modding world in DCS that you don't have to feel beholden to the DCS gatekeepers to get assistance, the freeware world will simply not be as big as the TW freeware world is. FC

TW native aircraft don't include OUT files. FC

This right here is why I'm going to wait until the modding community has built a significant presence around DCS. As much grief as TK gets for not helping modders, you can see his boards filled with information from him about what parameters mean, etc. As well as downloads of the tools he uses for building some of the stuff himself. Also, considering that right now everything for DCS is DLC (other than DCS World) or planned to be DLC in the near term, I'm not sure what all the bitching is about TW DLC. I have to laugh that one sim gets complaints about DLC but another which uses the exact same money making model is getting 'ZOMG!!! Awesome!'. And it's not like the DLC pricing isn't reasonable for what you get with either the TW or DCS offerings...you pay more, you get more. FC

Of course they do. So much for that then. FC

I'm taking a 'wait and see' approach. Mainly I want to see how it all fleshes out, and to see how the modding world forms around it first. FC

There probably is a tutorial, but, it is actually very simple. The numbers describe a point in 3 dimensions in meters via X,Y,Z, from negative to positive: X is Left/Right Y is Aft/Forward Z is Down/Up So 0,0,0 is the center of the model, but -3.00,2.00,1.00 would describe a point 3 meters left, 2 meters forward, and 1 meter up. Now, Decals are only 2 dimensional, so depending on which way the decal is pointing, one of the dimensions isn't used: For instance, if a decal is TOP/BOTTOM, then only X,Y is used, FRONT/BACK means only X,Z is used, and LEFT/RIGHT means only Y,Z is used. Hopefully that makes more sense. FC

Currently in OT&E: FC

Second Hotfix, posted by KJakker: CF-105_Hotfix_Mod.7z Replaces the data.ini. Changes WeaponGroups slightly: Group 1 - Large AAMs (Can't use Group 2 or 3) Group 2 - Forward Falcon Bay (Can't use Group 1) Group 3 - Aft Falcon Bay (Can't use Group 1) Group 4 - External Center Pylon This allows you to user select the missile mix if you decide to use Falcons (ie half SARMs, half IRMs, etc). FC

Well, heck, that's all it took...just make duplicates of the decals with a slightly different name... Hmmm..this solves a similar problem with another aircraft too. FC

Well, huh. I just got it to work by using a different serial number file. Maybe it just needs to be a differently named file... FC

Okay, here's a pic: Basically, I'm trying to get that red '11' you see there to also show on the right part of the fuselage, basically symmetrical but mirrored. FC

I don't think TW would ever consider the idea. I'm sure the 3d modeling, texturing, etc isn't that different between TW and DCS. What I'd be curious about is the FM and avionics coding. The fact that avionics have to be coded for each aircraft (vs something like TW where every aircraft uses a common framework) could make coding very complicated. Does anyone know if the FM is table based, shape based, or some combination of the two? FC

Best thing I've read about this all day: Attributed to JStarStar, of The Rocketry Forum. FC

I've seen that site before, some interesting concepts, though there is a mistake folks make in looking at the Mark I and transferring the profile to other Marks. The Mark I and II Arrows were built for different reasons. The Mark I was the aerodynamic validation model, and as such, did not have a radar installed. Because of this, the nose profile is thinner and more conical. Also, the rear end was slightly thinner overall because of the smaller J75s. The Mark II was supposed to be the more definitive production Arrow, with the proper nose profile for the radar, installed defensive avionics suite, and slightly bulker tail for the Orenda engines. I've been thinking about the various what ifs floating around of follow-on Arrows, and have come to some of my own conclusions on what would have happened had the Arrow been produced. FC

Changing them to manual works only for your aircraft...the AIs will shoot through the doors. Okay, here's a hotfix for those who have downloaded the Arrow already: CF-105_Hotfix.7z This includes new data and loadout.inis. It solves the problem by deleting the A2G capability of the internal weapons bay. There may be other options...the easiest conceptually is to increase the restriction in load, length, and diameter to allow mounting of bombs and missiles in the same weapon station. The problem of course is the bay is only so tall...it has to make room for the intake tunnels. The more difficult option is to try to find additional animation slots...however, all of the available ones are currently being used. Any additional slots dedicated to the bomb bay will mean something else has to be let go. I might be able to recover one slot by combining the Falcon missile bays...which means there won't be any 'mix and matching' of weapons in that bay...which isn't how the aircraft would have operated... It may simply mean the current Mark II Arrow will have only very rudimentary A2G capability. FC

Love that scheme!

Nope, it's selecting the proper decals (I use those entries in all my projects now ... has virtually eliminated the 'blank aircraft' issue). Is there a 'mirror decal' entry that can be used? Oh, and let me clarify..one of the entries always shows up, just not the other...in this case, the second entry is the one that works. FC

Okay, I'm hoping folks can answer a question for me... I'm trying to get one decal to show up twice on the same mesh pointing in the same direction at the same DecalLevel. But nothing I do seems to make it work. I know you can have more than one DecalLevel on the same mesh facing the same direction (the Arrow I just released does this for the tail and intake insignia/serial numbers). I know you can have same the same decal at the same DecalLevel facing different directions on the same mesh. I know there are limits to the amount of decals on the same mesh or total amount of decals overall. I'm well within all those limits. Here's an entry example for both decals Is there something I'm missing? FC

Both SF2 and SF1 downloads are categorized. SF1 files have many sub categories, SF2 has them in at least general categories for sorting. FC