Gunrunner

6) Weapons We'll also need some very specific weapons that we lack in both TMF WP and the Bunyap's WP. Forget about the RPK, just when I tested it I found one already done -_- What we'll also need, especially for our first squadron, is the AS-37 AR, an anti-radar missile, fortunately that one is easy too as we already have his evolution, the AS-37 ARMAT, using (almost) exactly the same airframe, so our job will only be to duplicate the ARMAT and change it into its predecessor. Of course, these new weapons, and those already existing would be nothing if we don't edit the Pylons and Loadouts of our Mirage 5F to take advantage of these weapons and ignore those she never used.

Take all the time you need, I'll go forward with my own parts too.

The plan is to release only parts and a how-to, so people can do it themselves, a little DIY project of sorts, so we don't have to redistribute anything but our own work.

Only the tail ones are missing from the Nesher/Mirage 5D LOD I'm using as a basis.

Always used Hard, might explain it... Yep, you're right, it works in normal mode, almost too easy even...

I'd need a set of VOR antennas for my Mirage 5F placeholder (and I'm in the process of posting the step by step procedure needed for it, so anyone can benefit and the complete beginners can get a quick idea of the most basic operations). Here are a few pictures of the part while I'm searching for a drawing and better references for dimension : They are the small horizontal antennas on both sides of the vertical tail (way up), should be easy, but between writing the how to and placing rivets on a template (and knowing how clumsy I am when it comes to 3D modelling)... It's neither urgent nor important, I would understand if that doesn't interest you at all.

Nice ^^ mmmm Blackbird, when you have a few minutes to spare, may I interest you in something even simpler than those pylons ?

The stock flight model doesn't allow it, a few 3rd party aircraft do it, but they are very optimised to obtain vertical take-off/landing (the MV-22 and Yak-141 for instance) and require some practice and finesse to obtain that. The stock Harrier doesn't even have enough thrust to do it unloaded IIRC.

Do you know the model of your card ? The quickest (if not entirely reliable) way would be to right click on your desktop, chose Properties, then parameters and read what you have in the pull down menu, it should tell you the name of your card (even though it won't tell you the amount of memory and frequencies, it gives a useful baseline, since I can't navigate you through menus, I only know the french names and shortcuts -_-).

Quite frankly, it's a small leap, the GT would be a better choice (even though it's more noisy), for usually around $3 or 5 more (maybe more, I tend to think in euros). If you can spend more, are really concerned about performances but don't want to change everything, ATI/AMD has the HD 3850 in AGP for around $140. On quality, it depends on your visual criteria, your display, settings and drivers, also it varies from generation to generation, nVidia having the advantage of offering less lemon (nVidia's failings are usually cards that are too noisy, too hot or too power hungry, while ATI's cards are often too underperforming for their segment or way too unstable) than ATI (nVidia lemons being mostly their very high end, while ATI can be over the whole range) and somewhat more convinving drivers (even though ATI's performances in the domain have definitely improved and nVidia's not what it once was).

Exactly what I was searching for to change that in the Nesher model (well, I still have to figure out which entry is the nose, and which value is used on the rest of the plane, but that should be easy now that I know what I'm looking for) and make it a placeholder Mirage 5F (until the release of the TMF one), now if only I knew how to delete the belly pylons (without crashing the game or making a nice rendition of Wonder Woman's jet). OR... I can stop being a dimwit and use the Mirage5D LOD instead as it already has a nose with the same specular/gloss all over...

We are witnessing people reinventing the wheel because they didn't spend time to 1) read the manual 2) read TW's forum, 3) read Ca's forums and KB and 4) gather documentation and knowledge prior to tinkering. So there is a great deal of excitation, experimentation, "new" knowledge being found, but to those with a some more hours in the series, it sounds outlandish... In their defense, the search functions around here and TW are quite ineffective and a great deal of things I remember being in the KB still seems to be missing.

You missed nothing, the pylons and the canards are one piece, if you delete the entry for the canards, the canards won't show up, but the pylons won't too, even though there will be "phantom" pylons as they are still present in the INI file.

No, FC has pylons, and yes, I forgot he bundled both pylons and canards into the same LOD, which is inelegant even thouh more efficient, and means you are right.

The pylon is already there... always was, all you have to make sure is that you follow FC's instruction and copy and rename one of the wings' BMP to Su27Pylons.bmp and copy it at the root of the Aircraft folder.

It's a very simple INI edition, nothing magical or requiring FC's intervention... Just correct me if I'm wrong, what you want is a Su-27S with the [side]InnerStation2 of the Su-33 to simulate a Su-27SM ? If you really have no clue how to do it, I'll post what you have to do, if someone else doesn't before I get the time to.

Basher, that's normal... it is the procedure, unless they have guardian angels, strike aircrafts jumped by bandits will jettison loads and flee, or fight if they have no other choice, it is easier and less costly to launch another strike than replace a plane and pilot, and with full load, the strike aircraft would stand no chance (the weapons not only add drag, but also weight, inertia, also most of these weapons and attachments have G limits, meaning that the plane can not maneuver as necessary in case an attachement breaks or the ordnance "breaks", meaning that even if he survives the engagement, there would be a chance that his missile wouldn't fire (electronics too shaken up, data link disconnected), would be a dud, or simply won't leave its rail (a part deformed due to the stress of the hanging weight at high G), also there would be the risk of weapons detaching under high G, and hitting parts of the plane, which is dangerous). Once again, it's not a problem, but a more proper simulation of procedures than what you envision.

Nah, the terrain's too repetitive and a little unrealistic...

Ultramax, that's a picture of the real thing, which he took when refueling it, just as inspiration and reference for bobrock.

Dave> Especially when you count your installs by the dozen, doing it for one was enough -_-

You have to use the latest Weapon Editor for it to work (version 2.xxx), but appartently you already do, you should use the WoI WP first, then merge the WoE WP, then finally merge Bunyap's WP (and eventually merge whatever still missing). That's the only way to benefit from the latest and most compatible versions where available without ressorting to a long an painful manual edition. The process has a problem though, it will add the national versions of Bunyap's WP, to the old standard, but take the generic versions from one of the MF pack, meaning that a generic AIM-9B will not have the same stats than a Chilean AIM-9B (at the time Bunyap's decision made sense but now, with WoI new restrictions on loadouts and a lot of historic, it makes maintenance and upgrade a real nightmare). Take note that for the files (LOD, TGA, BMP) you have to merge in reverse order, first adding those from Bunyap, then overwriting them with WoE MF Pack, then overwriting them with WoI MF WP, then adding whatever is still missing. Unfortunately I can't send you my files as mine are manually built and modded and lack a lot of things I don't use. For the planes, you can import anything, the ShortName is a nice feature but you can omit it, the shadows are important if you play with them, the new pylon codes can be important if you plan on rebuilding loadouts manually, and you'll have to import a lot of extracted content in order to get cockpits to work, decals to show up or nationalities and service dates to be ok (as the MiGs are now by default egyptian with egyptian service dates, so you might want to change that). Porting the old games to the new engine is feasible, but requires a lot of careful work.

I was the first to download it. Nice first beta, smoothing some relief, adding objectives and eye candy (some geysers maybe... one reaching up to 200ft) and you have one very nice map to play with. It also would be the perfect candidate for using seasons with the new engine (meaning twice or even more work as you'd have to duplicate tiles for each season) as Iceland in Summer and in Winter are very different places.

Starfighter2> I know -_-' the answer was for Silverbolt... eraser_tr> Maybe it's time we drop the topic and paranoia around it, right. Knowing Blackbird, I guess he just added parts, canards are easily added parts, as is the nose cone, and as would be the air intake (except there would be visual overlap with the nose gear). Blackbird is after all one of the most enthusiastic user of this modding technique, have a look at his nice what-if L-29 project.

Ok, while continuing to get as much WoI features to WoE (using WoI engine) I was working with shadows, unfortunately, the new shadow system doesn't seem to solve what I call the Peter Pan shadow bug. It is a bug that affects some 3rd party planes, as well as a handful of TW models, aircrafts and ground objects, creating long shadows out of parts of the model incredibly long, linking to the ground shadow for plane models. Here are 3 exemples, ground object, 3rd party plane and stock plane : For ground objects affected it appears whatever the angle you see the object from. For some aircrafts they appear whatever the attitude and view angle are (ie. the F-105D), for others, only when the plane is in a given position and viewed from certain angles (ie. the F-15D, when in reverse), the shadow linking where the gound shadow would be appears, whatever altitude you're at. So far I didn't find a way to solve them and have no sure theory on what happens (probably some specifity of some parts of the LOD that the engine doesn't interpret properly when processing shadows). It seems to appear on every graphic settings as long as shadows are here, and was already there with the old engine (WoE). Am I the only one with this bug, if not, is it or is it nor GPU dependent (ie. happening on some video cards but not others), has anyone solved it ?

The air intake is below, F-16-style, a triangular shape...