Swordsman422

I don't think we're looking at an Iran-Iraq conflict because it falls outside the timeframe TK likes to play in. Plus, he gave a major hint on the Thirdwire Facebook that while the pictures of the Tomcat (wearing US gull grey-over-white) was on the SF2:I terrain, the campaign in the next game would take place further north. I think we're looking at a potential North Cape situation that is a stand-alone expansion of the campaigns we get in SF2:E. Either way, there's a Tomcat in that box. I'm buying on day 1.

Okay, so I kinda already announced these on the Southern Watch Campaign thread in the campaigns forum, but I suppose I'll post them here, too. These are WIP skins for the Mirage Factory's awesome F-14A. Markings are for VF-41, the Black Aces, during their final deployment including Operation Enduring Freedom and VF-211, the Checkmates, for their final deployment in the tomcat supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom Phase 2 and Operation Enduring Freedom Phase 2. Full markings including CAG and CO birds will be included in each set based on Paul Nortness's excellent decal layout. BuNo's and Modex numbers will be accurate thanks to Osprey Publishings F-14 Tomcat Units of Operation Enduring Freedom and F-14 Tomcat Units of Operation Iraqi Freedom, bot by Peter Davies (excellent books, BTW). There will be two sets of Modex numbers, one in numerical order and another in random order for campaign use. VF-41 VF-211 Still a few kinks to be worked out, but they are 99% ready for prime time. Thanks for looking.

Glad to help any way I can. 1st reference for carrier deployments for me has always been the Navysite.de website. From here, you can look at carriers by clas and read a list of their deployments and what CVW was carried along with. I do believe OSW was kicked off by USS Kitty Hawk and CVW-15 in late 1992 or early 1993. Any Tomcat squadrons you want skins for that don't exist yet, I can do them, but I'm limited to Tomcat squadrons. Other tacjets will have to be covered by someone else. Just let me know what you need.

This would be very interesting. I can see it as a low intensity campaign stretching from around 1993 to early 2001. The DS map would have to be modified so that the mobile air defense units and SAM traps would be active for a while and then gone, while a new one was active somewhere else. Also, ground transport routes would be limited to below the 33rd. The map would only be usable for this campaign and MAYBE a Desert Fox mini-campaign in 1998 and/or slightly intensified OSW with Response Options post 9/11 and before invasion in 2003. Carrier wings and ships would also be frequently cycled through and replaced, with very little overlap. I can offer assistance in 2 ways; 1) I can tell you on the Navy side what carriers were there when, for how long, and what air wings and squadrons were aboard for the whole run of OSW and 2) I can skin nearly any Tomcat squadron you want. May I submit my resume with these two WIP images: VF211 Checkmates Last Tomcat Cruise VF-41 Black Aces Last Tomcat Cruise

Had a problem similar back in September. PC had a nasty bug come on it. In the process of fixing it one day, the motherboard went arcs and sparks. Harddrives were okay, though. Went out that week and bought a brand new box. I wasn't comfortable with the idea of Win7 and wasn't sure all my stuff would work on it. You can imagine I was delighted that for the most part, Win7 is XP on steroids. It's got all the pretty features of a Mac OS with the functionality and compatibility of Windows. I have WOV and SFP1 working flawlessly on 7, so at least you should have zero probs there.

I haven't tried that terrain, but some of the add-on terrains have trouble with certain aircraft carriers. You might try a different carrier. Another option is that you might have something wrong in your text entry that has the aircraft launching from the ship. Post that entry here as well.

Before we proceed, I need some information: What version of what game are you using? What terrain are you using? Post the squadron and aircraft carrier entries from your campaigndata.ini and also post the carrier station entry from your terrain_targets.ini Once we have that information, it'll be far easier to pin down the problem and walk you through fixing it.

Okay, so after a prolonged absence I've finally come to my senses and am getting back into the TW sims. Never one to be satisfied with campaigns as they are, I'm always finding excuses to add carriers to them. Anyway, I'm having some extremely abnormal issues with the ships in SFP1; the player aircraft based in them will all spawn in a lump on the deck and explode. One would think this is uniform for all carriers on all terrains, but it is not. On some terrains, some carriers will work fine and others will not. Example: In the Taiwan terrain, DO's CVN-75 and Beer's Forestall will be okay, but the problem occurs with every other carrier, even the stock ones. And in the Madagascar terrain, the Forestall will be troublesome while the Kitty Hawk is not. Generally the CVN-75 model is the only one that tends to be universally compatible. The only terrains not giving me migraines are the stock Desert terrain, Iraq, and Vietnam. I thought I was just going to have to be choosy about which units are in a terrain map... until I met Cuba. No carrier of any class will function for me in this terrain. Jets blow up on it no matter what I do it seems. I've not ever seen this complaint before (search function rendered nothing) so it MUST be something I'm doing wrong. I've read the knowledge base entries on the subject and followed them to the letter (plus I've been doing this for long enough that I'm not a stranger to the process) and have had no success. Here are my data entries: From the campaign.ini air unit data omitting weapons entries [AirUnit004] AircraftType=F-14A UnitName=VF-41 Black Aces StartDate=08/28/1999 ForceID=1 Nation=USN CarrierBased=TRUE CarrierNumber=71 DefaultTexture=USNVF41 StartNumber=4 BaseArea=Delta Station RandomChance=100 MaxAircraft=11 StartAircraft=11 MaxPilots=19 StartPilots=19 Experience=100 Morale=100 Supply=50 UpgradeType=NEVER MissionChance[sWEEP]=50 MissionChance[CAP]=50 MissionChance[iNTERCEPT]=30 MissionChance[ESCORT]=50 MissionChance=60 MissionChance[CAS]=60 MissionChance[sEAD]=10 MissionChance[ARMED_RECON]=60 MissionChance[ANTI_SHIP]=05 MissionChance[RECON]=20 Carrier unit data [CarrierUnit001] CarrierType=CVN75 CarrierNumber=71 UnitName=USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71) DefaultTexture=CVN-71 ForceID=1 Nation=USN BaseArea=Delta Station NumSquadron=10 BaseSize=MEDIUM Experience=100 Morale=100 Supply=100 Intelligence=100 UpgradeType=NEVER Terrain targets.ini entry for this station [TargetArea094] Name=Delta Station Position=368282,453825 Radius=5657 ActiveYear=0 Location=1 Alignment=FRIENDLY CarrierStation=TRUE I'm having the same problem in the OTC campaign as well, and I cannot figure out where I may be going wrong. I am secure in the knowledge that these MODs are quality and that the creators would not have released them without knowing they work, so this is MY fault, I just cannot figure where I've gone wrong. In a word: help?

Userlist.ini? I'm willing to try anything once. Where might I find that and what does it do?

Ah, so I'm not the only one who is having this problem. I was absolutely certain that I was at fault. Shame that it isn't just me. Could it be the terrains aren't compatible with the latest patches and that is the root of the issue? I doubt this would be the case though.

Any player navy aircraft assigned to the carriers, though I'm a tomcat addict by nature. All aircraft that may be in question have the CarrierBased=TRUE in the aircraft_data.ini. And to be sure, the carrier ground object names all match properly. ALL of the carriers and aircraft function correctly in the stock terrains under all patches, it's the add-on terrains that are being troublesome and Cuba in particular.

DAVE! Awesome to be back. I've been okay. I spent some time cheating on my beloved Thirdwire games. I've been pretty good so far. Women have changed, computers have changed, and I'm generally in a better spot than I was. How have you been? Anyway, I'm current on my patches for SFP1. Sorry that I forgot to mention that. My bad.

Figured this one out. Here's the strike load that I wrote and they work fine. An entry for the TER was absent. This is based of a harrier picture I saw. Copy and paste it over the strike set on your loadout.ini for the jet. You'll need to modify the centerline rack in the data.ini to use a DLP. Or you can just take what you need from this. Either way, the jet needs a designator on it to use the GBUs anyway. Loadout[01].WeaponType=AIM-9L Loadout[01].Quantity=1 Loadout[02].WeaponType=AIM-9L Loadout[02].Quantity=1 Loadout[03].WeaponType=AGM-65D Loadout[03].Quantity=1 Loadout[04].WeaponType=AGM-65D Loadout[04].Quantity=1 Loadout[05].WeaponType=AV8_Tank300 Loadout[05].Quantity=1 Loadout[06].WeaponType=GBU-12 Loadout[06].Quantity=3 Loadout[06].RackType=TER Loadout[07].WeaponType=AAQ-14 Loadout[07].Quantity=1

Man, I can't wait til we have a D model to put these on. Lookin' good!

Ah, okay. I had heard unfortunate rumors about the a2g capabilities of the F-22. I actually like the F/A designator. it may be a bit of a mouthful but I like that the designator indicates it can kill something anywhere.

The F/A doesn't sound too Navy, but by dropping the A I guess Lockheed is also admitting it doesn't have realistic a2g expectations. No bombs to ruin the radar return. Which, isn't mud-moving one of the roles of the -35 anyway? BTW, I've been taking a look at the Joint Helmet Mounted Cuing System and it's "look at it/shoot at it capabilities". Like something out of Firefox. Kinda scary stuff, considering that we're just now getting that and other countries have had it for a while.

Oh, nothing against the F/A-22 really. Just the developement issues present in every new aircraft, as well as a little friendly elbowing. And at least the problem was uncovered NOW, and not, say, when the aircraft in question happened to wander across the date line in the midst of aerial combat. I think, for the war we have now, the Superhornet was a smart decision. But in a larger-scale conflict against a well-equipped and trained enemy, choosing the Superhornet alone may prove a regrettable decision. I also think it entirely regrettable that we're letting PLAN officers crawl all over the USS Harry Truman.

At least the Super Hornet can cross the International Date Line without the flight computer crashing from a program error.

What? Ridden on a horse?! Yes! You're using coconuts! What? You've got two empty coconut shells and you're bangin' 'em together! So? We have ridden since the snows of winter covered this land, through the kingdom of Mercia, through... Where'd you get the coconuts? We found them. Found them? In Mercia? The coconut's tropical! What do you mean? Well, this is a temperate zone! The swallow may fly south with the sun or the house martin or the plover may seek warmer climes in winter, yet these are not strangers to our land! Are you suggesting coconuts migrate!? (Sorry, back from a recent viewing of Spamalot!)

I can't believe that I actually want this one. Go ahead Dave, smack me on the back of the head.

A shame that the punishment will actually help her. A better punishment would be to keep her in for duration so that when she's out, the clock will have run down on her fifteen minutes of fame and there will be no money.

I'm in the same boat. Personally, I think a post minimum is just asking for a lot of spam posts and trouble for the moderators. Go to the announcement thread and vote.

Not cold enough for snow, which is the only good reason to have cold weather anyway. I remembr living in Oklahoma where I would go to school and on either side of the walkways would be snow waist deep. Here in Georgia, if the weatherman so much as mentions off-hand the possibility of it, everything shuts down and all the bread and milk are gone from the stores. And then nothing happens.

Actually, Buff, I was thinking of you poor guys who have to go through locking, deleting, or taking out these posts. And with more people buying SFP1, WOV, WOE, and First Eagles and looking for mods, more of these gimme-types are going to come here and do crap like that. They could quite possibly drown out any real discussion with make-up posts.

The primary problem with requiring a mimimum number of posts to download is that we'll get a lot of nonsense posts made by people who just want to download the stuff. I'm all for having to skip through a random ad instead of having to make five posts about nothing.