Swordsman422

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.

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?

I did notice that sometimes I could load 6 Mavericks on the inner pylons, then in game they wouldn't show up, even thought they'd be selected. Like So...

[/img]

I'm gonna have a look into it.

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.

Well that doesn't have anything to do with the F-22 as an aircraft, that has to with some software engineer who should be out of a job by now. I mean lets not tit for tat here, the SH didn't have teething problems? Oh yeah it did...

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.