Cliff7600

Hi If you fly Ravenclaw's Buccaneer you may find some interest here : http://combatace.com/topic/89365-buccaneer-update-minmaxextents/ The file to download is a simple note pad file, so no compatibility issue between SF1 and SF2, though you have to make the edits yourself but it's the mods part of the forum, isn't it ?

You will, that's a part of the process If you take a comparison between aircrafts, be sure that all the parameters are equals : weight, loadout, flaps settings, thrust power, etc... all parameters, check the whole data.ini file, even the things that may be not relevant (and maybe are actually not relevant, but only after you checked it) : landing gear, mass fraction, Xmac, all.

I just took a look at the (old) F-5A data.ini file The Left/Right stabs seem ok (though I wouldn't agree with the Mach tables, but my way would made the issue worse) and to me the problem comes from the fact that the Left/Right wings and Left/Right outerwings don't have Cl0 values and Mach tables. It works as it is, and if you really want your player aircraft to take off on autopilot (???), you have to add those Cl0 values and Mach tables (that don't exist). Live with it, or waste a huge amount of time doing it, it's your choice. OR maybe somebody already did it and is still here at CombatAce, you'd be lucky. or somebody knows something I don't that could be useful... (?) I don't have time enough to deal with the projects I'm already involved in, and I don't fly the F-5 (on autopilot), so I won't do it. "Best call" (or not) would be downloading the lastest SF2 F-5 data.ini and trying to use the same values for your old SF1 F-5 (and sometimes it doesn't work at all) (Don't use the SF2 file, you have to copy/paste or rewrite the entries to your SF1 data.ini file, and keep the original file, as SF2 and SF1/Wox files are not compatibles, at all)

Is there a way to "tell" the autopilot (some file to modify, a parameter, something) which pilots, for the take off sequence, in my place, to get the plane in the air a little earlier, BEFORE it's critical (loses its landing gear) ? -> No, there's no way to do so, the plane takes off as soon as it can. The wingmen don't use the flight model the same way the autopilot does. I guess it has to be some file which one can modify the take off distance on the runaway. -> No, you have to edit the whole flight model (wings and horizontal stabilisers) in the data.ini file. Maybe just editing the Cl0 and Cla values and the Cl0MachTable and the ClaMachTable of the wings and stabs may be enough, but you have to know what you're doing. If not, maybe you can lighten the plane with less ordnance and less fuel (and sometimes it's not enough) ThirdWire FM Notes.rar Have some fun and the knowledge base of the forum is a nice place to learn (though sometimes it's not enough too, just like the F-5 trying to take off)

Is the texture image still "fuse.bmp" or has it been converted to "fuse.jpg" or "fuse.dds" ?

Hi Derk You're welcome ;^) Well, you're right about the lack of response in pitch, it's not good enough as it is now. Should be able to take 7G according to the public figure (so maybe more in real life) In fact, I tried to give the model a better "ini structure" and the doors remedy should be something there. There's no part that fixes the problem. I didn't have the door opening issue with the original file with the A version, and I still have it with the B version. For the B I think it's an animation issue and cannot be fixed only by ini editing. I have various issues with the animation 4, the thrust vector movement. Funny thing is the actual F-35s suffer weapon bay overheating issue, and the fix applied is to open them in flight to cool them down... About the FM behaviour I have to finish what I began : steadiness in leveled flight and turns and during landing (with the AI performing the landing right) Then I think I will search for more agility. I think it's doable. Yeah, I saw the video you posted about the Klu F-35 ;^)

Same files than my previous post, but with better flaps/slats settings (removed cause I did a better one since) and a missing tga for the 524 skin canrrnum003.rar

That won't answer the question about the weapons bay doors, but here's some edited files just in case you would like to try them. They're drafts more than anything else, but I think the MinMaxExtent entries could be re-use on the original file (and maybe the mass fraction too) If you try them, be sure to back up the original files, and use both files because I changed the CG location and it moves the cockpit position. [files updated, see next post] :^)

It's a part of the flight and, as you don't risk your life, I would say it's fun. So no cheating but searching the runway xD Do a 360° turn, and when spotted make a low altitude landing pattern, watching for speed / altitude / variometer / the damn runway...

That would mean : [FlightControl] ... MachLimit=2.5 how fun... Thanks for the info, I will try the "MaxInletTemperature=" way to reproduce the issue... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EDIT : Using the values (slighty modified) from the Baffmeister version gives a good ratio between the Mach 3+ speed and the engines catching fire issue [FlightControl] ... MachLimit=3.2 - - - - - - - - - - - and - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Engine1] and same for [Engine2] ... MaxInletTemperature=290.0 ... GasTempMaxRPM=820.0 GasTempIdleRPM=450.0 GasTempChangeRate=3.0 OverheatTemp=950.0 If it doesn't work it might be related to drag values issues :^l ------------------------------------------------- Still off topic ------------------------------ The blowing up engine issue is quite fun to challenge with (in the game !) but it was nothing compare to the stability issue of the PU and RU trainers ONLY FOR MiG-25 PU or MiG-25 RU (both are the two seaters version) [Fuselage] ... CmqMachTableNumData=15 CmqMachTableDeltaX=0.20 CmqMachTableStartX=0.00 CmqMachTableData=0.000,0.500,0.850,1.000,1.000,1.000,7.000,14.653,16.500,19.811,27.000,35.186,54.076,50.0,-125.0 If it works like it should, you won't have any engine issue ...as long as you respect the Mach 2.65 limit ;^)

Well, I don't see the MiG-25 as a long range interceptor. I would say it carries long range missiles at high speed, but the MiG-31 should be better for patrolling. Though the RB variant has a bigger amount of fuel than the interceptor, the combat radius would be around 675 km (365 NM) and 920 km (495 NM) with auxiliary tank, but flying up to 20000m should give a rather low fuel consumption. About the engines catching fire, maybe that could be useful : [Engine1] ... GasTempMaxRPM=635.0 GasTempIdleRPM=420.0 GasTempChangeRate=1.0 OverheatTemp=950.0 [Engine2] ... GasTempMaxRPM=635.0 GasTempIdleRPM=420.0 GasTempChangeRate=1.0 OverheatTemp=950.0 And if you use the Baffmeister version, you may have parts called [AfterburnerNode1] and [AfterburnerNode2] that may be edited too with "GasTempChangeRate=1.0" The real issue with the Foxbat wasn't engine catching fire in flight (not reported as far as I know) but rather damaged engines with M3.0 speed. I read more about losses of control after missile launches or because of engineering flaws. About the speed, I have the opposite issue, I go too fast with not much throttle, due to temporary drag tables values. So my next step is to increase the drag to keep M2.5++ speed with more realistic throttle settings. And the G limit at 4.5 is another problem... Thanks for sharing, and have fun !

You don't have to pass the WP at the given altitude. But you have to be at less than 1 km (half a nautical mile) in the horizontal plan. Only the WP 5 gives you the success of the mission, but it's hard to be such precise when roaring at M2.5+++ at more than 60000ft. I'm currently spending much of my "flying time" in MiG-25 for editing purpose (PU and RU atm for the fun, to have a decent RB, then a cool PD :^) (M2.5, trying to reach a steady 18000m height, being lined-up something like 40 km before target to drop the bombs. Just being at the right speed, the right altitude, right course is quite a challenge. I didn't hit any ground target yet but I will keep trying... And doing the U-turn at M2.5 is not a simple manoeuvre, just as "cooling things down" for a nice landing) Can you share your mission profile please ? I mean the parameters, climbing, ceiling, cruising speed, throttle settings, fuel remaining...

Does it mean that there won't be any sea trials testplane or time machine version ???

All three are great ! (early, then late tests...) Though the SEA/Blue mix B variant would be perfect for a japanese F-4EJ :^)

I would use it all the time ! Both blue and red sides :^) ...and not a drop to drink !

Never underestimate the capacity of distraction of a russian gir... spy jk

Thunderstruck and Aerodynamic ?

I've already done things like that. Here's my way of dealing with it : If you know where the tank is located in the aircraft, define some min / max extent values (with ruler tools or LOD viewer) Then... take the dimension of the length, width and height of the box. multiply the three values (in meters) and multiply by 1000 => you have the weight for the same amount of water. As it's not water, multiply by the coefficient that fit the best for avgas or jetfuel (something like 0.78 / 0.8) and you have your weight in kg. Do that for all the tanks and edit the values to have the right amount of fuel (because tanks are not boxes all the time, they're cylinder sometimes, and not perfect cylinders) exemple : MinExtentPosition=-0.56,3.09,-0.66 MaxExtentPosition=0.56,4.03,-0.02 0.56 + 0.56 = 1.12 (-0.56 and 0.56 are the same length each side of zero) 4.03 - 3.09 = 0.94 (4.03 and 3.09 are both +) 0.66 - 0.02 = 0.64 (-0.66 and -0.02 are both -) 1.12 x 0.94 x 0.64 = 0.673792 0.673792 x 1000 = 673.792 Liter of water 673.792 x 0.78 = 525.55776 kg of fuel (0.78) so 525.56 kg It may not give the right amount of fuel but it gaves a proportionality between several tanks, to decrease or increase the finale values. Sorry for the maths... :^l

It's the sun... The light is related to the engine and only works when full throttle. I went up to 60 000ft / Mach 2 +

Quite high and fast (I was testing a light in the cockpit xD)

No you cannot switch between front and back seats. It's preset with different ini files before launching the mission. It can be done with an animation in the cockpit 3D model that has to be created by the 3D modder before the LOD is exported. And even this way, only the cockpit moves, you keep the same view of the 3D aircraft model.

Welcome back !

It can be done, but there's a clipping issue As it's not clear to me what the position of pilots/seats are (I've edited mines), can you show the Pilot and Copilot positions and seats positions from the data.ini file ? (can you copy/paste the pilot and copilot part ?)

To hide a node from the cockpit view (most of the time when "opencockpit=true" is used in the cockpit.ini files) In the data.ini of the aircraft [AircraftData] ... Component[xxx]=Hide [Hide] ParentComponentName=Nose ModelNodeName=Back_instrument_panel ShowFromCockpit=FALSE HasAeroCoefficients=FALSE "Hide" is just a name, sometimes I use Hide1, Hide2, ... for several nodes xxx is the next number in sequence "ParentComponentName" is the part of the model (should be in the component[xxx] list) that contains the node you want to hide. "ModelNodeName" is the actual name of the node you want to hide To make a node visible when the parentcomponent is not visible, it's the same with ShowFromCockpit=TRUE Somthing like that...

I can tell that the team is still working. And the model is still improving. As far as I'm concerned, I have to change the current rudder, and that will require some tests. Another part of what I'm doing is [ ] but the settings already found are working well. Real life is slowing the process but one of the version is quite close to be releasable, final checking and fixes still to do (but I already heard that...) And another thing to do is [ ... ] and it requires some time too (but i think it's a good idea lol ) Thanks for asking ;^)