Fubar512

On the deck...

The animation ID does not necessarily correlate to the number key, as it can be set to whichever one you want, within the data.ini.

1? It's the animation number that the developer assigned to the model, for folding wings. It does, As you've noticed, vary by the model.

Lemme see, this can't be that hard..... Forger Hover Test.wmv

And to think that "Ahnold" made this look so damned easy in True Lies....

Rog the Dodge...

The answer's in the SF2 knowlege base. You must edit the start and end dates in the options.ini file, in order to allow missions within the desired date range. Otherwise, you'll be limited the title's default years.

Paint.net is set to use the proper 32-bit alpha channels in TGA files, by default. And, best of all, it's free

If you meant a "Shrike" missile, then it requires no additional guidance, other than pointing the nose of your aircraft at any ground-based radar sources (preferably a SAM radar) that are within range. BTW, Shrikes, Standard ARMs (etc), are referred to as ARMs, or Anti-Radiation Missiles. As Cocas stated, there is no provision for locking up ground targets on radar. Also, there is no key that locks up a target for an ARM. It will guide to its radar source of choice, irregardless of what key you may decide to push.

Absolutely not. You're confusing the term "reverse-engineered" in a way that implies that another such tool was already in existence. Skypat's CAT extraction tool was the only game in town for years. Besides, game and sim enthusiasts have been creating unofficial utilities for a looooong time. Go to any Jane's, Eagle Dynamics, (etc.) fan-site, and chances are that you'll find unofficial extraction tools and other utilities for just about all of their titles.

BTW, Wrench told me that he encountered a carrier's escorts merrily traipsing through the "jungles" of Great Exuma Cay, on the OTC map

Well, look at the bright side. Unlike the "anti-landyacht" missions, at least CAS didn't have you searching for amphibious T-72s...

As I mentioned in the first post, it is tomorrow, somewhere on the planet! (blame ICQ)

I may be getting old, but someone's evidently quite blind

It's Wrench's birthday!!!! (at least it is, somwehere on the other side of the planet) Where's Baghdad Bob when you need him? Happy Birthday Kevin!

LOL!

inversion fog = smog

I've not been able to find any reliable sources online, that is, any that provide actual, verifiable data. I do recall reading an anecdotal piece claiming that an A-6 in clean configuration had a roll rate that was superior to that of an F-4 Phantom, and that it was certainly way better in that regard than the MiG-17 (that last one was proven to be true in combat). I also recall someone favorably comparing (again, in obviously clean configuration), the A-6 to the F-86 Sabre! We do have at least one member here at CA with time-in-type. Perhaps he'll chime in....

I'd hate to see another "old hand" toss in the towel, but I can sympathize with you, hi ho silver. IMO, TW made a bad decision in not using an independent beta test team to help sort things out, and now that decision is coming back to haunt them.

Are you referring to the first, or the ten-thousandth time that this question has been answered?

Fixed virtual aircraft on a virtual cat, with no launch time, allows you to have working nav and deck lights on ships in scripted missions.

You dont have to build anything in Max. The data.ini will work without a model file.

That would probably work, but it's going to hell hand placing one on every airfield in the X_terrain_data.ini file