malibu43

You know what? I forgot to try it again last night. I'll try to remember tonight!

Wrench, just sent you a PM with the leftwing and rightwing jpgs converted for the F4U-7.

With the GIMP templates I've made, it will literally take me about 30 min to swap the -4/4B skins to the AU-1/F4U-7 mapping. I'll send you the updated leftwing and rightwing .jpgs later today.

Gotcha. So do you still need anything from me? If the -7 skins are mapped the same as the AU-1, I can still use my gimp masks to convert the -4 skins over. edit - LOL. "gimp masks". Maybe I should call them stencils or something...

There actually are a few minor differences. If you compare, for example AU1_Leftwing.jpg with F4U4_leftwing.jpg, you'll see that the wheels are actually in a different spot. However, I already made the masks in gimp so that you can layer all the "extra bits" (wheels, air intakes, etc...) from the AU-1 over the top of the of the F4U4 files, leaving just the main parts (wings, tail, fuse, etc...) showing the F4U4 paint. edit - example. Just layer this (created from AU1_leftwing.jpg) over the top of F4U4_leftwing.jpg in gimp and export as a new AU1_leftwing.jpg. Bam! You've got the F4U-4 skin with all the wheels and stuff from the AU-1. I'll also have to figure out the right place to paint on the .50 cal guns for the F4U-4 since they aren't modelled.

I tried something similar to what you described, Heck, with a path leading down the west side and then one more down the center, but still had the problem of the campaign ending prematurely. I don't know if it was related to a specific node I was using, the nature of the parallel nodes, the ground units/speeds, supply levels, etc... It takes A LOT of time to try different iterations since the nodes have to be rebuilt in the .ini files, and it takes a lot of time to make sure they are all connected the way you want them to be before you even test them out. I have the nodes set up like this right now, it the campaign seems to work: It's not 100% historically accurate, but, because of the way the game engine works, the campaign probably would never play out accurately even with 100% ideal nodes set up. I will post this to let people test it sometime in the next week or so (after I've played with it a little more). Ideally we'll dial in the mission rates and supply levels so that the two sides battle back forth a little around the middle of the map, but neither side really ever runs the whole thing. Worst case, we could have one version of the campaign called "Korea (Historical)" or something like that with the ground war disabled so people can play a campaign that runs the historically accurate time with a static frontline where no one "wins". Then we could have a second version called "Korea (Fictional)" where the entire peninsula can be won or lost with lots of ground battles and front line movement.

OK. I'll check it out later. In the meantime, I came up with another (very much more complicated and time consuming) plan. I turned the AU-1 into an F4U-4B via .ini edits, then renamed the F4U-4B skins appropriately and copied them over. There are some parts of the skin that don't match up (wheels, wheel wells, struts, etc..), but I think I have a plan correct that by making a template in gimp using the AU-1 skins that I can just place on top of all the F4U-4B skins. I also was able to hide the 20mm cannons with the hide component trick, which means the AU-1 could be bashed into an F4U-4 as well. Of course, all of that is unnecessary if Wilche's entry really fixes the prop. I just forgot to try that last night, and ended up working on the above strategy instead.

I wish I knew what unit he was with. (Unfortunately he passed away a week ago.) He never really seemed very interested in talking about his time flying in the navy, until recently. I was hoping to get to talk to him about it more, but I didn't get the chance. I know he flew TMB's, Corsairs, and Skyraiders in Korea. I asked him what his squadron was a while ago and I thought he said VS-1, but I was never able to find any info on it. He then went on to fly helicopters in Vietnam. If I want to try to make the "prop-seat", do just make a transparent disk in GMAX? (never done any sort of modeling for flight sims before. just used Solidworks for work).

Well, I scaled back the nodes so there is just one path from base to base, and the ground war seems to work. But every time I've tried to expand some additional routes/nodes over to the east side of the penninsula, the campaign ends in defeat after the first mission. I'm have no idea what's causing it and I'm out of time, so I'm going to sit on the simplified ground war for a little bit and then I'll post it for testing.

Ya, but even if you just had a static, mostly transparent prop-disc type looking thing, it would be better than the other options we have, which are a nearly obscured view or no prop at all. Just throwing ideas out. My grandfather flew USN F4U-4's in Korea, which is why I'm focusing so much on those get those two sorted out (as opposed to just enjoying the rest of the awesome stuff in the KAW mod!). If I had any idea how to do it myself, I would.

Does that actually give you a more transparent prop at high RPMs or does it just hide/remove the prop completely (at high RPMs)?

Totally forgot to look at this. I'll try to do it tonight if I get a chance.

Well, let us know if you get your hand on them. It would be very appreciated! Any thoughts on my fake pilot method...? Do you think that would work?

Here's another idea... If I set the Nose to showfromcockpit=false, I won't see the prop model from the cockpit. The downside is that I don't see ANYTHING there and it feels like I'm in a jet. BUT, would it be possible to create a "seat" that is just a clear disk with a propdisk texture applied and add it to the fuselage via the fake pilot method? It might look a little odd from the outside (which the plane does already), but things might look good from the cockpit. If someone can could create the seat, I could do the rest...

Ya, I got it now. I'm just trying to learn more about this stuff as I go.

I'm not sure how this helps, but I was able to copy one of the more transparent prop TGAs from the AU-1 and used it to replace all the prop TGAs for the F4U-4 VF24 skin. The new prop TGA actually showed up fine. But the problem appears to be that the actual prop from the aircraft model still displays (spinning really fast) as well. Again, not sure if that helps. I have no idea if there's a way to hid the prop model at high RPMs but still have the new prop TGA show...

Hmmm... Forgive me since I'm not that familiar with how these things work in SF2, but is it not possible to copy a better, more transparent prop disc TGA (from the Skyraiders or Mustangs) and just rename it to match what the Corsairs call out and replace? The game/model has to be pulling that texture from somewhere, right?

Korea:

Was there ever a fix for this? I just downloaded the latest KAW F4U package and two of the four models still have an issue with some sort of "low RPM" looking prop obscuring the view when at high RPMs.

Another question as I get my KAW install set up - I've added the Sea Fury and Bulwark to my install. Any of the USN aircraft will start on carriers in single missions. However, the Royal Navy aircraft (Sea Fury and Firefly) start all their missions from air bases. Both aircraft and the Bulwark are set to RoyalNavy as nation. Both aircraft are set to CarrierBased=True I have change the start date of the Bulwark to 1950 so it's available for single missions. Both aircraft start just fine on the Bulwark in the campaign. As I mentioned, USN aircraft start from carriers in single missions just fine. What am I missing?

Thanks Wrench. It was the date in the names.ini that got me. I pushed that back to 1950 and now my Sea Furys and Firefly's are flying off of carriers in single missions.

Yes, it's the Bulwark form the 9 carriers pak. The Bulwark is the only one I've installed. I just noticed something as I was digging through the .ini's again. I moved the start date to 1950 in the _data.ini file, but there is also a start date in names.ini that is still set to 1954. I'll try setting that to 1954 as well (or just change my options.ini single mission end date to 1955 instead of 1953). *edit - or maybe install some of the RN carriers that have the right start date already...

Well, holy crap. My comment in the other thread about it "looking a little behind SF2" is taken back. This looks NICE!