logan4

You can use Mue's LodViewer to find the general locations in X,Y,Z, (checking positions from all axis/view with mouse coordinates of the place you want the effect to show up) then you have to fine tune them through the game. For the LodViewer you can get quite accurate placement info, so no major adjustments will be needed..

It is possible to view them. What you need to do is to change the lod callout in the AC.ini for the pit lod, this assumes that you already looked at the given AC's cockpit.ini and you do know the given lod's name. In the AC. ini you need to show this line: [LOD001] Filename=F-15A_pit.LOD Distance=120 The name comes from the AC_cockpit.ini: [CockpitSeat001] ModelName=F-15A_pit.LOD <--------

Based on my experience not the simple tga way as it is established, you need a separate mesh for that in the pit.lod, then it will work. That is how the Su27 and Mig29 pits were made with it.

Gatling, Perfectly understand your "issue", and I can tell you we had a very lengthy debate and discussion about the "power" of the engines. We used the spitperformance site also for information and whatever else we could scrape up on the net, and we had perfectly matching speed values according to available data. Only we run into one thing, we also wanted to make the handling characteristics as close we could, on most difficulty settings, which required seemingly more power. There are several ways to achieve them, but the shortest and easiest solution was to add that extra power. On the other hand, other currently released WW2 aircraft on the opposite side were/are mostly overpowered and was not "fun" to fight against them, when historically they should be on par with AC-s in this or upcoming packs. Since it is a game, we chose the fun factor more important than a couple of HP-s. If you have the time and interest to make a perfected FM that solves every "issue" you may run into (power,speed,handling on normal and hard settings), you are welcome to do so. We work on the Spit family in our spare time we scrape from the other 4-5 projects we work on in parallel with this, so we welcome any helping hand that makes our work easier, faster or more realistic.

Unfortunately, big money never cares about the people or any damage/turmoil their activity might cause. I might be wrong but it could take life of several people before it gets really looked at by the decision makers.

If the rails built into the model those 'positions' are set by the model. By changing the "attachmentposition" value you can only change the appearance position of the loaded weapon but not the built in mesh's location.

Mostly depend on the model though there is a possibility set "OnGroundPitchAngle=" in the 'AircraftData' section. Positive value raises nose, negative lowers it. You also have to keep in mind one thing: the way the model was built might prohibit such so visually might result in gear sinking.

Something I draw up first back in the early 90's, then refined it around 2001/2 or so, it has the name FLM-189 "Peble" in my drawingbook.. Not fully complete and misses dedicated pit ATM..

Met a friendly guy on the way home... both of us lone survivors...

I can be wrong here, but the 5k limit is close - you can be slightly above but not by much. I think only you have to look at the number the exporter generates in the .out file as for some reason or parameter it doubles the poly count compared to what the mesh itself has in 3dsmax. For example, I made a mesh that 2522 (2592 faces) vertices in 3dsmax, when exported the poly count is 5040, in the out file. Your mesh is 6594, that is probably a bit much, for the game itself. The lod viewer does not have a mesh vertices limitation for displaying as I think it uses a bit different graphic "system/method" compared to what was implemented in the game. Not sure if your mesh can be simplified or to not loose any detail split into smaller sections so the vertice count comes down to the range of 2500 in 3dsmax, then should show up in game OK. I know inconvenient, but these are our only options to work within the game engine limitations. The 19782 comes from a texture being assigned to the mesh and it is exported with "decals" option of the exporter, that part does not limit or influence any displaying regarding poly/vertice count as far as I have noticed. Since I'm not the most experienced around here, please take it with a grain of salt, as I can be off the truth..

If you go to the FORUM page, it has a registration link, then follow it. http://cplengineeringllc.com/SFP1/

In the cockpit.ini if it is set with a dial then yes, can be made to "work" correctly - to stop at a certain altitude (position), but if it is a counter (digital or analog) then it will always show the actual value in this game. Something we have to live with.

If I good remember it is like that since day 1. Probably originally there was some intention to include this function as working, but either was overlooked, or realized that actual AC Hud always show the real radar altitude constantly. So don't lose your sleep over it.

On your first pic without the patch.tga you would have 3 decals of the same type like you can see on the 3rd. The reason you can only see 2 because the patch.tga did work, but it is set for =bottom. I assume that the Left/right side tga-s show up because that matches more the parameter of the mesh/decalfacing call out and the game just overrides the other one. I think the location of the decal and complex shape of the f15 fuselage behaves a bit different compared to the round C141 (I guess that is that bird). In the 2nd pic the area marked with yellow is due to the mesh curvature is behind the other mesh section from looking from the bottom, so the patch decal would probably not "cover" that.

Actually it is not decal bleeding. It is caused by the fact that there are 2 surfaces of the same mesh facing the same direction so the game applies the decal on the given coordinates to any surface section that faces the given parameters. If the model would have "left/right intakes" separated and not just a single mesh "fuselage", then the issue would be gone. I battled the same issue on the upcoming S37 also. Splitting the mesh did solve it, so there were no double "areas". That is why moving the decal onto a location that has no secondary sections "in sight" "solved" the symptom.

I made this one addon a while back for a request, if it is suitable for you guys.. template is included in it. A37addon.zip

Thats odd.... Can you make an entry for test only with this.. [HUD_BankIndicator2] SymbolType=ROLL_INDICATOR ImageFilename=cockpit\HUD\HUD_bankindic.tga ImagePosition=0.0,0.05 ImageSize=0.25 FixedScale=TRUE MinValue=-45 MaxValue=45

Its the fault of the tga. You can use this with the parameters bellow. [HUD_BankIndicator] SymbolType=ROLL_INDICATOR ImageFilename=cockpit\HUD\HUD_BKI.tga ImagePosition=0.0,0.0 ImageSize=0.35 ScaleImageFilename=cockpit\HUD\HUD_bankindic.tga ScaleImageSize=0.10 ScaleImagePosition=0.0,0.0 Scale=1.0 HorizontalAlignment=CENTER VerticalAlignment=CENTER HUD_bankindic.rar

The pivot points of the slats are in the middle of the fuselage, so which ever way you try to set that up would not work right. Go with the planed virtual way as you intended.

I have the project 33 at about 65% in the making, both layout.

Not sure about "components", could be limited somewhat like weapon stations where you can only have 32 of. I understand your commitment, personally I would not bother to remove the landing lights. Since there are only 10 allocated weapon station entries in the data.ini you can try to trick the game to hide it. You can add it as a weapon station and put the mesh name in place of the "ModelNodeName=" and leave the 'AllowedWeaponClass=' empty so it will never be loaded. The only thing you will need to add the weapon station system call outs to some major part of the model. Put the "StationGroupID=" to 7 so it will never show up in the loadout screen. Also if you put the modelnodename of the wingtip pylons onto the weapon station entries (left/rightouterstation) the game will hide them by default if nothing is loaded onto them so that frees up 2 more slots for you.

I do understand where you want to go with it, but on my experience you can go supersonic in this game easily in a 35-40 degree dive while the throttle is set to 0%. Not sure your game setup and the plane set you got, the pic is from a stock F16 which have machlimit 0,98 in the data.ini. As you can see it can hit 1,11 actually was 1,12 just missed the point as started to get bellow 4500m and the air started to slow it down. With an other AC that has no dry limits set I got 1,24, on an other that has 1,14 for limit in the data.ini it reached 1,32 under the "same" conditions (starting at 42kft, 0,96M, no throttle, 1-1 IRMs on wings, 35-40deg dive). And bellow 4500 you really start to feel the effect of the slowing, by ground level speed was bellow 0,96 or less - still no input from the engine(s). On a personal note, the parameter might have something to do with supercruise capability simulation/integration into the game.

Actually the 0,98 is quite close to what the bird can do in dry mode, though altitude dependent. The pic is from an F-104S flight manual, remember it shows a clean AC performance data.

I wish speedy recovery for all effected by this events. ----------------------------- This situation can not be solved with black and white paradigms or solutions. There is none like that. These events have many aspects and layers to work with and work through. The virus is only a tool in this equation, not the problem. If you were in the military then you know even the BCN gear could only provide 99% safety, it is only getting close to 100% if procedures are kept in every aspect, but even then there is always a chance for hell to get lose. So ordinary masks will not protect you per say, only lessen the chance to get infected, the ratio is depend on the type you use - and it is also recommended to change it in every 3 hours otherwise your own bacilli will effect you adversely... On the other hand, among healthy people why to wear masks? (Shut up and obey??) Society can not exists if everyone stays home and retire into their shells. There will be always people on the line whom have to take the burden for the goodwill of others, you can't avoid that. If it was a thousand or 2 years earlier, it would be a different scenario, today our way of life makes it impossible to go into full lock downs, does not matter what anyone thinks. Power stations not go alone, water treatment plants not function alone, bakeries not work without people and transportation of goods certainly not automatic and cities will vanish if county folks not work on the fields/farms... Beside its good effect for some, vaccination will also not solve most of the problem, as you can still transmit the virus onto others, even if you not get sick for a certain amount of time, not to mention the possible chronic side effects that different people could develop due to reactions to the components contained in it. Lesser known/promoted fact that hundred years ago during the spanish flu about half the dead were due to the reactions to the vaccine. Also comes the question how often you need to be re-vaccinated due to the new and future mutations of the virus? So both side have pros and cons which are equally valid on their own. Last year's agenda to create fear in population is mostly accomplished, for those whom not decided yet, comes the more viral "news/virus" version. This year's agenda is to divide even further the gap between groups of people to lessen the chance for real collaboration among in order to solve the problem. So comes vaccinated versus non-vaccinated and their various mix of mask and virus believers/non-believers, vaccination passports, etc. Divide and conquer.... Strap in your seats, the next few months will go even deeper in the pit hole they dug for us whether you believe it or not. This situation will take 2 kinds as its victim, those whom immune system is weak and the stupid careless... Everyone will have to decide what is important for them in life.. fame, money, greed, warmongering, fake treatments, exploitation of others and the environment or live in harmony, peace, kindness, eat healthy non-toxicant food, actual cure of illnesses and in harmony with the planet and its ecosystem. And nobody can sit this one out on the sidelines, everyone is affected whether through actual contact with the virus or just being in a society that makes life less and less practical in general that soon become dictatorships of a sort... There is a saying, George Orwell's 1984 was a warning, not a handbook to follow...