malibu43

That's nuts... ...I mean balls...

Quite impressive it was...

Well, 1 in 10 was an estimate. The point was that they're a lot less accurate than I think they were before. However, to your point, after I posted, I found some stats that indicated during various campaigns in Vietnam, the accuracy was as low as 1.5% and up to 5-8%, I think. So maybe this change does make things much more realistic. I still haven't found any info on the accuracy of SA-9's and or SA-13's. I know for sure that these are far less accurate after the latest patch (at least that's what my testing shows...). I'll keep looking...

Has anyone else noticed that SAM's in general seem to be a lot less accurate after the sept patch? Fly an Iron Hand mission in WOV, set air defenses to heavy. Hit the autopilot to fly straight and level, and watch as the SA-2's take off all around you, but seem to by aimed/guided poorly. Flying straight and level, I'd say about 1 in 10 will actually hit. Try this with the old patch and you won't last long at all. I've seen similar issues with the SA-9 and SA-13; pre-patch if you flew straight and level over one you'd get toasted. Now they're nothing more than entertaining to watch as the smoke trails flail aimlessly around and behind your aircraft. The data.ini's for the launchers and missiles used are the same pre and post patch, so is it possible this is something that's hardcoded into the sept 08 patch? I haven't decided if I like the new SAM's or not. It makes missions over Hanoi a little more survivable, but Germany's less dense air defenses suffer from this. Maybe it's a little more realistic... I don't know. But I question if there's a point to adding SA-9's and SA-13's if they're just replacing a ZSU that has a better chance of hitting you...

You mean like an MFD kind of display? I don't think there's an easy way to do that... You'd have to modify the cockpit and do all sorts of things I'm not familiar with. Did F-111F's have MFD's in real life? I don't know where/if they actually were able to view what the laser designator was looking at. Maybe some of the resident experts will chime in...

Hey folks, Let me preface this by saying I know nothing about effects modding. I was wondering if there's an effect available or if someone could tell me what to modify to get a bright, glowing SAM exhaust. This seems to be something that's come up very often when reading about vietnam, and the stock effects as well as the ones from the MF weps pack don't really seem to include this at all. Thanks!

Yeah, I already did that. I was trying to figure out if they had the same bright exhaust as the SA-2 in real life. Thanks for your help!

This is covered in the knowledgebase if you look around in there...

Yes! Exactly what I was looking for! Thanks. One more question... does anyone know if SA-3's and SA-6's had/have the same bright exhaust visible at night? I know there isn't nearly as much experience with them, but I couldn't find this info anywhere. Thanks!

Wouldn't think of touching the .dll's... So you're pretty much saying there's no easy way to accomplish this? (and by "this", I mean making SAM's easy to spot at night, which is how I believe they are/were...)

I am definitely not ready, willing, or able to take on any sort of challenge... What I'm thinking would be adding something similar to aircraft nav lights. Just a white "flame" that is visible at night from long distances... Something like that shouldn't be too difficult... I found the light entries in an Aircraft data.ini, but I have no idea how to get them to be part of/associated with the emmitter...?

You have to also add a Fansong radar, since that's the radar that controls the SA-2.

The f-111 pit for download has a TV screen that works in the radar screen; you don't have to update the avionics. Flogger23: Look here for fixes for the F-111's. http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=18346 I think you might have to correct some data.ini stuff to get the pavetack to work.

I didn't set up any specific missions, but I did fly around in external view and watch for launches/radio calls, and used the 'R' key to find the SAM launch immediately after it was called. I can now confirm also that the call signs, numbers, and clock positions seemed to be wrong most of the time. Maybe just the call sign will work, with no numbers or clock position...? That would actually be the most realistic, probably. I'll give it a try... *edit* - Just random call signs again... There aren't any speech files in the speech folder that match anything called out in the speechsystem.ini file, which tells me that there's a ddl or something somewhere else that tells the game how to play speech files based on what it reads in the speechsystem.ini, and I'm wondering if that's what's not working properly...

Huh... I never noticed that they use random call signs in the newer comm mod. I just gave it a try, and I got some with my call sign for sure, but there were a lot of other call signs mentioned, and I didn't see that many other aircraft around. *edit* - it seems like it wouldn't be that hard to add the location and call sign to the begining of the radio call for most stuff (sam launches, bandit calls), but it's also hard to tell exactly what's going here. Here are the SAM launch entries from both versions of the comm mod: [Concept058] //MSN_SPC_AI_SAM_WARNING, Priority=TRUE TargetFragmentID=SPC_FAC_LEAD_CALLSIGN CallerFragmentID=SPC_WING_NUMBER BodyFragment001=SPC_WING_NUMBER BodyFragment002=SPC_AI_SAM_WARNING [Concept058] //MSN_SPC_AI_SAM_WARNING, Priority=TRUE TargetFragmentID=SPC_LDR_NUMBER CallerFragmentID=SPC_WING_NUMBER BodyFragment001=SPC_LDR_CALLSIGN BodyFragment002=SPC_WING_NUMBER BodyFragment003=SPC_AI_SAM_WARNING BodyFragment004=SPC_WING_POSITION BodyFragment005=SPC_WING_DISTANCE For example, I think if you added the last two lines to the first mod, you would get something like "One, SAM launch! 10 O'clock, 2 miles". However, based on my reasoning, you'd think you would get the correct call sign as well with the entire second entry... Anyone want to take a stab at it?

Hey King Albert, I just read your design document, and I have a couple comments: 1. No ground war?!?! For some people, myself included, CAS missions are the most fun to fly, and the ground war gives the campaign more of a sense of purpose. For me personally, I feel like without a ground war I may as well just play a bunch of randomly generated single missions with the aircraft and missions type I want, verses playing through an entire campaign. 2. As you said yourself, the time frame and aircraft you're using are from the "Desert Storm" era. A big group of guys is (hopefully soon) releasing a stand alone install for this conflict that is very much anticipated. I don't think this means in any way that someone else who is interested should not attempt their own mod concerning similar aircraft/time frame/theaters, but you did mention specifically that you wanted to create a buzz about your next project. In my opinion (and that's all it is), having a well hyped competing mod comming out around the same time combined with the lack of a ground war might result in not getting the buzz you're looking for. I hope these comments aren't perceived as being too negative and I really don't want to discourage anyone from modding. I've spent lots of time re-doing something someone else has already done just because I wanted something specific done a little differently, and I see nothing wrong with that and don't think you shouldn't do it if that's what you want to do. Just wanted to put my 2 cents in, though... Looking forward to seeing what you come up with!

Hey all, I recently pieced together a Forward Operating Base and placed in my vietnamSEA_targets.ini file to use in a modern campaign. Everything works pretty well, except whenever my flight starts from the "takeofftail" position, my aircraft's autopilot as well as all the AI turn about 10-15 degrees to the right and then take off through a field and then take off. If I start from the "takeoffhead" position, everyone tracks down the runway just fine. does anyone know what would cause this? here's the FOB airfield data... [Runway001] Heading=0 Offset=0,0 Length=400 Width=25 TouchDownHead=0,120.0 TouchDownTail=0,-520.0 TakeOffHead=0,125 TakeOffTail=0,-500 TaxiHead[01].Heading=180 TaxiHead[01].Offset=0,150 TaxiHead[02].Heading=180 TaxiHead[02].Offset=0,170 TaxiHead[03].Heading=180 TaxiHead[03].Offset=0,190 TaxiHead[04].Heading=180 TaxiHead[04].Offset=0,210 TaxiHead[05].Heading=180 TaxiHead[05].Offset=0,230 TaxiHead[06].Heading=180 TaxiHead[06].Offset=0,240 TaxiHead[07].Heading=180 TaxiHead[07].Offset=0,250 TaxiTail[01].Heading=0 TaxiTail[01].Offset=0,-550 TaxiTail[02].Heading=0 TaxiTail[02].Offset=0,-570 TaxiTail[03].Heading=0 TaxiTail[03].Offset=0,-590 TaxiTail[04].Heading=0 TaxiTail[04].Offset=0,-610 TaxiTail[04].Heading=0 TaxiTail[04].Offset=0,-630 TaxiTail[04].Heading=0 TaxiTail[04].Offset=0,-650 TaxiTail[04].Heading=0 TaxiTail[04].Offset=0,-670 TaxiTail[04].Heading=0 TaxiTail[04].Offset=0,-690 Thanks! *edit* - also, if I start straight down the runway myself and then hit autopilot, he'll keep going straight...

Just for the record, adjusting the runway length made the difference. Thanks for your help, guys.

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention the probability. Most of the stock airfields have them around 60-70 percent, I think. The thing that makes me think something is different about my Linebacker III install is that I ran 2 missions into a campaign in patched WOV and got static aircraft. I ran several missions into campaigns with a couple different types of aircraft in LBIII and saw no parked aircraft. I'll keep toying with it...

I don't think this has been asked already, since I haven't seen it. But sorry if it has... What factors contol if aircraft are parked at bases or not? I've got a separate WOE install (sept08 patch) with the stock WOV 08 patched terrain that I use for my linebackerIII campaign. I'm not getting any static aircraft at all. The install has almost exclusively add-on aircraft in it, but I don't think that should matter. I've extracted the airfield.ini files from the cat file and made sure they are the updated ones with the parking entries. I've also gone back and made sure all the dll's and the .exe are the ones from the latest patch. I've got A-10's and F-16's in there, so even the parking spots with the smaller wingspan limits should have something. Is there something I'm missing? I'm cool with parked aircraft not showing up; I just want to make sure my install isn't porked! Thanks!

Can you post the changes you've made for us to look at? I've added and changed squadrons in WOV and WOE with no problems at all, even post-patch.

Well, putting the windsock on the runway didn't make a difference, so I don't know if it's that. FOB_extension is listed as a small runway. However, I did notice that in the FOB_data.ini I posted above that the runway length is 400. With the taxi positions the way they are, that puts the taxitail postions and takeofftail position off the end of the runway. Maybe that could explain why they seem to head off in their own direction when taking off from that direction. I changed the runway length to 800, but haven't gotten a mission in inclemnet weather yet, which is when I usually take off from the other direction, so I can't confirm if this made a difference or not. So, maybe that was it. I'll let you know if it was or wasn't. Looking forward to the updated WOE highway airfields, BTW. The original was my inspiration for trying this out... Good work

Here: I hope this is what you wanted. The aircraft are heading 90 degrees, and the windsocks seem to be blowing the same direction.

Here's the airfield data, if it helps at all: [TargetArea148] Name=DMZ South FOB Position=568619,550640 Radius=2000 ActiveYear=0 Location=1 Alignment=FRIENDLY AirfieldDataFile=FOB_Data.INI NumSquadrons=1 Target[001].Type=FOB Target[001].Offset=0,0 Target[001].Heading=90 Target[002].Type=CamonetParking Target[002].Offset=-60,202 ... Target[071].Heading=27 Target[072].Type=FOB_extension Target[072].Offset=-0,400 Target[072].Heading=180 Target[073].Type=windsock Target[073].Offset=0,0 Target[074].Type=windsock Target[074].Offset=0,100 Target[075].Type=windsock Target[075].Offset=0,-100

I'll work on that... I can tell you that the wind is normally at 210, and when I have start from the other end of the field and have problems, it's at about 300 (according to the tower...) The reason I did that is that the actual FOB runway was too short, and the jet's would always run off the end. So I added a "runway extension" at one end, that looks like runway, but actually is just an object placed at the end of the runway. That's why the tail and head values are different. Maybe that could have something to do with it... I don't know.