Gocad

There it is..shows up even with low objects setting. On a side note: EF-2000 with full AB at about 100 m over Berlin.

What's the point of playing a mission where there is actually no need to achieve anything? Besides, you can already order your wingman to destroy the primary target using the 'attack my target' order. It's also possible that other flight groups are assigned to attack 'your' primary target as well. Bear in mind that it's a 'lite' sim, which apparently also means no micro-management of your flight group. Furthermore I would say that some requests here have already been shot down by TK. Personally I would not expect a TW game (at least not one using the current engine) that would focus on air combat (A-A or A-G) after 1990...and to be honest I don't have a problem with that. I shut up now.

Nice. :yes:

Which would make perfect sense as most of the stock campaigns take place before 1977. EDIT: Yeah, ok. There were some aircraft (E-2 or even the EC-121) before 1977 that served in a similar function as the E-3, which was introduced in 1977. But I don't think that TK wants to specify what kind of airborne warning & control equipment (if any) each nation has available. Thus I do think that the ground- (or ship-) based controller (aka Red Crown) is more representative than an AWACS. Nothing wrong with Red Crown in WOV, just the female voice (I can't believe I'm saying this) is out of place there. Since this is make a wish thread: - Make the AI use smart weapons properly. I don't consider the fact that they can't do this to be a major problem, but it would be nice if they could.

Well, if it's WOE you don't need to extract everything because the F-4B files are already in WOE's object.cat. What you do need are the F-4B.ini, loadout.ini and a cockpit folder. You could even use the F-4D directory as reference... (read: make a copy of it and rename everything to F-4B)

Nice!

It sounds like that you did not load the edited weapondata into Thirdwire's weaponeditor. Only after you saved your edits there the changes will take place. Because the game does not use the weapondata text file, but the .dat file as reference. New skins add themselves to the skin list of that aircraft (provided that they come with their own textureset.ini)

It's the same process. Bear in mind that you have to edit the textureset.ini (which can be found inside the skin folder) of the skins for those aircraft as well.

Yeah, the Phantom skins by mytai don't look like they are demanding much space on your hard drive...but apparently tgas and bmps can be packed quite well.

Yes, yes, it was just a matter of time that someone would bring this up (again, in fact USAFMTL has already made one eons ago). But with the release of upgraded SoCal terrain by Wrench such a campaign seems to be quite doable. In fact it was just the terrain that was missing...well, that's at least my point of view here. Of course, Wrench's SoCal isn't really set up for a Top Gun campaign, after all, no time to play games when there's a real war going on. Restoring peace in Southern California isn't very difficult, though, and the same could be said about rounding up the participants. Tomcats, Phantoms and Crusaders (Surprise! ) here and Super Echos and perhaps a few Tigers there. BAM! Another campaign done. Unfortunately this is where the problems begin. Sure, getting all the items is easy, after all, terrain, planes and skins exist already, of course, you would need the permission of the respective creators to use (and edit) them for this campaign. The problem with such a camapign, however, would be that it's necessary to limit the capabilities of the aircraft involved, otherwise it quite hard to simulate the issue dissimilar air combat training focuses on...dogfighting, that is. Guns only. This can be done by modifiying the loadout file of the aircraft, but doing so makes them unuseable for everything else. There are two workarounds for this problem, either create a standalone-install for this campaign or create custom versions of the aircraft. The former may be the easiest way, however the question would be whether this scenario is interesting enough to do that. The second option would not require a stand-alone install, but the modified aircraft might turn up in other random single missions. Finally, there is the question whether a Top Gun campaign does really make sense, because every mission would have the same objective: Fighting with aggressor aircraft. And to be honest, I don't think that this something you would want to do over and over again. Bottom line: Yes, it can be done, but for me the question is, whether it's really worth doing it. So, what do YOU think?

I think I've said it on the previous page already...read the articles regarding carriers & campaigns in the KB! Oh yeah, there's nothing wrong with the campaign or the carriers (if you update them according to the instructions you'll find in the article (link) I have posted in the KB. There, capun's Oriskany somewhere near the Korean coast.

Ouch.

I think I did come up with an explanation in the article I posted in knowledge base why you can't take off from aircraft carriers in a generated single mission...IMHO the bottom line is that the aircraft carrier isn't part of the terrain, therefore it's not available as a base to operate from.

And it's well known that computer games are the perfect source for determining the capabilities of real weapon systems.

I think there's something else you could try...set the LoadLimit of the F-16's weaponstation to '910'. You may need to rearrange the attachment points of the TER, but in the end it should provide you with the desired results...well, at least as long as you use the CBU-87, 94 or 97.

AFAIK it is determined by the aircraft itself which nation you fly for...you'll need to check the aircraft_data. First line should be 'NationName'. Bear in mind, though that changing the NationName entry could mess up your default loadout. Same with the skins...check TextureSet.ini

Maybe I misunderstand something here, but you cannot use a skin made for Wolf's Corsair with the MF Corsair, because the skin mapping is different.

You know, it isn't really necessary to build another rack for this. All you have to do is add the line I've marked down there to the weapon station of the F-16. Right pylon of the F-8E by the Mirage Factory: [RightPylone] SystemType=WEAPON_STATION StationID=8 StationGroupID=3 StationType=EXTERNAL AttachmentPosition= 1.73,0.532,0.25 AttachmentAngles=0.0,0.0,-5.0 LoadLimit=1800 AllowedWeaponClass=BOMB,TER,MER,RP,CGR AttachmentType=NATO,USN ModelNodeName=RightInnerPylon PylonMass=81.19 PylonDragArea=0.04 MovingPylon=true RotatingPylon=True RackLimitOutsideOnly=TRUE Just in case you didn't know this already...

For Korean War Corsairs there can be only one choice and that's the AU-1 (DO WANT TEMPLATE! ) by the Mirage Factory. How come it isn't uploaded here? Regarding the exploding plane issue...please consult the knowledge base. I do think that the articles about carriers & campaigns should provide you with a guideline how to make it work without problems.

Good question. Why did you remove the pylon information? Here's something to look at My (actually more like FastCargo's) dual AHM rack: [WeaponData842] TypeName=LAU-116 FullName=LAU-116 DRA ModelName=LAU-105 Mass=73.029999 Diameter=0.100000 Length=2.800000 AttachmentType=NATO,USAF,USN NationName=USN StartYear=0 EndYear=0 Availability=2 BaseQuantity=4 Exported=TRUE ExportStartYear=0 ExportEndYear=0 ExportAvailability=2 WeaponDataType=6 WeaponsRackType=2AR NumWeapons=2 LoadLimit=325.000000 LengthLimit=3.900000 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 and here's a working dual AHM station (MF F/A-18 Hornet) [RightInnerWingAHMStation] //SUU-63 Pylon SystemType=WEAPON_STATION StationID=19 StationGroupID=3 StationType=EXTERNAL AttachmentPosition= 2.227,-1.3,-0.725 AttachmentAngles=0.0,-1.0,0.0 LoadLimit=2280 AllowedWeaponClass=AHM,2AR AttachmentType=USN ModelNodeName=RightPyl LaunchRailNodeName=LAU-105 PylonMass=123.8 PylonDragArea=0.03 In theory all this should work with other rack models or aircraft. EDIT: Wait, I have found something: You can't load AMRAAMs on this rack because they exceed the length limit. You'll need to set the length value to at least '3.700000'.

I would say that it shouldn't be a problem to create another missile rack by reusing ,let's say, a dual bomb rack, but what won't work is creating a dual Sparrow rack, since there isn't a rack type for it. (2IR is for IRMs and 2AR for AHMs only)

I've redone the entire tailfin, but it wasn't that much work, now that I knew how it had to be done. From here on it's smooth sailing...I just need to add the squadron markings, but I guess the paint job pretty much gives it away which unit this Crusader belongs to.

Sounds like you didn't install the RAF pilot that was part of the Typhoon package. IIRC the afterburner effect used by the Typhoon is that of the F-15E addon. You have two opinions now, either d/l the F-15E or edit the Typhoon_data by replacing 'F15EAfterburnerEmitter' with 'AfterburnerEmitter'.

RNG love!