Cliff7600

Sometimes, when you're testing a mod, you see weird things. A wingman overshooting the targets.

S-3 pit repainted / edited Sun tails Two more to go and I'm done

It's the author's choice ^^

If you have the floating pilot it means that the position and all the ini edits are working. So you change PilotModelName= to PilotModelName=Photo and then you should have the photograph where the floating pilot was, unless something is wrong with the Photo (3D model) folder.

Okay, it's possible But there's many things to do. It's a mod designed for 1st generation install, not for SF2. So if you follow the instructions you have 0 chance of making it work. - use an ini file made for SF2 - create a "Photo" folder for the all files provided in the mod and put it in the Pilots folder - create a TGA file with the bmp file, and reverse the photo upside down (Any problem PM me) Then you can follow the instructions of the mod readme and it will need tens of "launch game / check /exit game / adjust" to have the photo where you want it. If you have a doubt, try with [Photo] SystemType=PILOT_COCKPIT Position=(here the position figures you want) PilotModelName= SeatID=3 (or SeatID=2 if it's a single seater, or more 4-5... if it's a multiple crew aircraft or using fakepilot trick) and you shoud have a pilot floating in the cockpit. The pilot is easier to check than the photo and as there's no LOD indicated it will be the stock pilot by default. If you don't see the pilot something is wrong. It's a tricky mod to use, but it's brilliant lol

It's a 1st gen mod It's based on the "OpenCockpit=TRUE" cockpit with a 3D model photograph as a fake pilot.

..so it works. Then try this : [GunnerCanopy] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_SPEED Setting[1].Angle=0.0 Setting[1].DeployValue=59 Setting[1].RetractValue=60 Setting[2].Angle=30.0 Setting[2].DeployValue=60 Setting[2].RetractValue=59 MaxDeflection=30.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=2.0 AnimationID=9 The ModelNodeName is only needed if you want to add some aero coefficients, as drag for example (just my guess).

Let's go ! THAT is speed Covered by the fury of six mighty J-93, you cannot hear the "StructuralFactor" strongly expressing his disagreement. Once he lost patience ...hit's a wall.

The Twin Otter on the apron ? It's the Range terrain but nothing is really unmodded in my install. If it's doing ferry flights, it's just flying here and there until the night comes (or ends), as there's no refuelling in game. I did it with the P-2H or the Belfast (9 hours).

I need an advice : What fuel tank from the stock install to use as a 250 US gal tank ? I'm planning to put 6 of them in the cargo bay. It's an option for ferry flight.

S-2 + E-1 = "track a trace" There's definitely Tracker's traces, and the other stuff behind the whale is surely a turtle, no doubt about it Mandatory Screenshot :

I have a fix to test It's not a real suggestion, it's just something to test. In the FA-18E_DATA.ini file : [Engine1] ... ThrustPosition=-0.4912,-6.7577,0.0 [Engine2] ... ThrustPosition=0.4912,-6.7577,0.0

Congrats to the winner and all the contestants. I have a boundless admiration for the guy who voted for the F2Y, a true modern hero, boldest of the boldest, a legend among his contemporaries

No such issues, I misspoke. I wanted to say that the F-86 cockpit doesn't have the double set of gauges for both engines, like the Javelin, the Meteor or the G-91Y cockpits. And it doesn't have a range counter. It's a quick fix, as the RPM gauge has a double set of needles, one small one large, so each engine has its own needle. And it doesn't make a difference in game. And I doubled the values on the fuel flow texture, 0 to 24 instead of 0 to 12. As for the range counter, I converted the side slip needle to a 0 - 60 NM indicator. The original F-86 fuel flow indicator setting should be : [FuelFlowIndicator] Type=FUEL_FLOW_INDICATOR NodeName=needle_fuelflow MovementType=ROTATION_Z Set[01].Position=0.0 Set[01].Value=0.0 Set[02].Position=80.0 Set[02].Value=0.278 Set[03].Position=159.0 Set[03].Value=0.556 Set[04].Position=242.0 Set[04].Value=0.8333 Set[05].Position=330.0 Set[05].Value=3.333 ValueUnit=LB

Empire of Paran 1981 Approaching the landing pattern of P14, near the start of the "StarWars canyon" (AI aircraft)

Thanks ! Now it has the right gunsight. I use the tga from the old Canberra pit, and just enhanced the colour. The double engine gauges are missing, as well as a DME counter, but the size of the dashboard is ok for the model.

No wonder it won't calm down

Kingdom of Dhimar 1979

On my side I made a repaint of Zurawski's F-86F cockpit. The main difference is I used the OpenCockpit entry, with its pros and cons.

You did the right move. In the "What it is next" thread there's a post : "just a tip...you might not want to waste votes on tandem Jag or Mohawk...just saying..." So you didn't waste your vote on the tandem jag ^^

RAF Canucks B flight leader scored a kill My turn. So many debris ! Little weapons mod for the CF-100 Canuck in RAF livery by Spinners. What-if the ground crew found some paint ?

Yes when I talk about it I see it as an option, no more. I'm used to it the vote for the CL-215 is mine xD

I don't "want" anything (I had few minutes to write an answer during my lunch break, hence the lack of explanation). It's just that 27% of votes for the winner make 73% of the voters disappointed. This is due to the number of competitors. The idea behind the second round would be to make more people voting for the winner. If you make a vote with 3 contestants, it will increase the percentage of the winner (at least 33.333% if it's a tie, and the first round score would make the difference). So, yes an higher majority to support the winner. More people behind the elected one. I have nothing against the leading contestant. But at the end, winning with a "low" score can leave more disappointed people than happy people. Then, if the percentage is "low" after a second round, it should be the winner anyway, unless the rules of the vote don't allow it (and that's not the case). And if the winner of the second round was also the winner of the first round, it will enhance his status as winner for all participants as well. I fully agree with you on this point. And I noticed that you said that the winner will be the aircraft with the most votes.

The majority is 50% or more. Take 1000 or 10 people, 25% is not the majority. Unless it's a relative majority. The difference is to deal with 750 / 7.5 disappointed people, or with 500 / 5, or less, disappointed people. Then don't bother, it's your choice. I don't make the rules. It's just you retained a part of my suggestion of vote, and not the entire idea. The aircrafts I have chosen wouldn't have been in a second round anyway.