Cliff7600

I'd like to underline that, because I really think that you should make a second round with only the highest scores. Otherwise the "most wanted" bird would have been chosen by a quarter of the voting community.

Modding in progress : I wasn't too happy with the handling at slow speed and sometimes the wingmen crashed. I just don't know what happened to this one So I decided to give more lift... but the landings on the aircraft carrier were not good anymore I got rear-ended by a wingman. I thought I should go further on the deck to wait for the wingmen, but the edge is not where it seems ^^ the left wheel is still there. On this one I recreated the issue just for the screenshot xD Wrong settings for a fake engine that I gave up later. Only the regular engines remain. I added some reverse and it worked as wanted with the player aircraft but not with the AI aircrafts who started to crash, so I deleted everything. The purpose of a fake engine at 0,0,0 of the model was to have a reverse sound, and it worked. But it looks like someone was smoking in the cargo bay next to a barrel of gasoline. It's going to take longer than I thought, but as long as the Royal Navy let me use their carrier (in the straits of Dhimar) it's ok.

It's a not serious mod I made from the very good MiG-Ye8ML made by Logan4 and available in the download section, in this pack :

Well, I think I can show you an example with a little hot-rod I made for fun Throttle at 99% Throttle at 100% It doesn't really give an advantage when dogfighting but it sure helps to runaway in a "F-104 style". The good thing is the wingmen use it all the time.

Okay, it was just to test... Many edits later, my wingman with 10000 pounds of payload : With a few more tries I succeeded too Still things to do, but at least it lands on the aircraft carrier And take-off The little grey thingy at the right bottom is my wingman doing rounds on the water with one engine down...

The way I would do things is to complicate things... Are we in a rush ? Maybe not Do we like all those aircrafts ? I guess yes So I would make a poll for each category of aircrafts. Not to decide which aircraft will be created, but to ask people their preference and then take a decision, because I'm fully aware that such a work should have a minimum interest game-wise. Fighters - F-35A - F-35B - F-35C - MiG-19S - F-94C Starfire - Mirage 2000D/N - AMX A-1M - AIDC F-CK-1 - J-20 - J-16 Bombers, patrol & recon - S-2 Tracker - E-1 Tracer - OV-1 Mohawk - A-2 Savage - E-2 A/B Hawkeye - U-2R/S / TR-1 - Mosquito Trainers - Jaguar E/B(T2-T4) - Su-15U - Hunter T7/T8 - Lightning T4/T5 - F9F-8T - Eurofighter Typhoon (2 seater) - Casa C-101 - Alphajet A/E - Aermacchi M-346 Liners & Cargo - Tu-154 - Caravelle - AN-72 / AN-74 - Beluga - 747 cargo - C-1 Trader - YC-14 - Concorde - 727 - DHC-4 Caribou - Do-31 Seaplanes - CL-215 - Martin Mars - Martin Marlin - Martin Mars - CL-415 Prototypes - YF-17 - Mirage G8 - X-32 (with a different wing shape) - X-15 - F2Y - Baroudeur - KF-21 - F-16XL - KAI T-50 - Textron Airland Scorpion - Su-75 - Helwan HA-300 Missiles - SS-N-27 - SS-26 - SS-21 - Thrust SSC - Bloodhound SSC Bonus - Su-34 - Yes please, I wouldn't mind a Su-34 - Oh, you're making a Su-34 ? That's great news ! Okay it's a big mess to organize, but it's not as hard as making a brand new 3D model. Just my grain of salt

I am not a majority but I really think a single seater Hunter and a two seater Hunter are not the same aircraft at all. Even if only the nose is different. Imagine Lightning T4 and T5... Trainers don't really represent any interest game-wise. But, some of them are really beautiful planes (Jaguar B/T2, TF-104G, Mirage F1B, Su-22 UM3K, Mitsubishi T-2, F-5B, and many others...). I edited the files of the old TF-104G to fly from the back seat and that is really fun. Same with the MiG-15 UTI, MiG-21 UM. And some aircrafts are modeled this way, FastCargo's F-5B and T-38, the Mirage 4000B. Go download the Mirage 4000 M2 and try to land on an aircraft carrier from the back seat ^^ It's totally different when you launch the SF2 game as a flight simulator and not as an aerial warfare game. Then, if we had the "Hunter T7 with the proper cockpit" I would fly it just to fly from A to B and land and take off and land somewhere else. Yes Strike Fighter is my Flight Simulator xD Thing is, it doesn't really work without a specific cockpit, because Mirage F1 or MiG-15 are "the same" from the front seat, and you don't have the guns. So I agree not to concentrate on trainers and yet we should make more of them. Speaking about cockpit, I'd like to underline that the F-94C Starfire already has a dedicated cockpit made by Stary more than 7 years ago. And I'd like to volunteer to make the data.ini file for the Canadair CL-215 to make it seaworthy. The CL-415 looks meaner !

Hi Flogger23 has some MiG-21 in development and I know there's something to reproduce this feature (I did it lol ) with overheating and engine explosion when used for too long.

Regarding seaplanes almost everything is to test ^^

Sea planes are ok. They just need proper data.ini and someone to build their 3D models. It's the same trick as the belly landing.

View File Spitfire Mk6b / b Trop --------------- Spitfire for CombatAce --------------- SF2 version 2021 TurboSquid : original 3D model Snapper21 : source file donated to CA Wrench : project development origin and inis Starfighter2 : original Spitfire Mk9 cockpit Logan4 : additionnal 3D parts and model editing to import into TW sims, textures editing, decals and inis. Cliff7600 : textures editing, decals and inis, cockpit editing. Thirdwire : textures and inis. These are the models made for CombatAce from the original TurboSquid 3D source file. It is made to be downloaded for free at CombatAce site only, and not to be used in any other way. The models have been designed for a SF2 / ThirdWire use and nothing else. Not to be merged with other files sharing the same original 3D model. - Spitfire Mk6b - Spitfire Mk6b Trop Submitter Cliff7600 Submitted 02/06/2023 Category Spitfire  

A model with a proper cockpit is always a good addition. Two-seater Jaguar and Su-15 are very interesting ideas I admit the Mirage G8 would be great as well. The three aircrafts I've always dreamed of seeing in game : X-15 and X-15A2 F-94C Starfire F2Y Sea Dart Each one would be a challenging project for the ini aspect (I do ini). The rocket engines and speed of the X-15, the rockets setting of the F-94C and the hull of the F2Y. Ini-wise an X-wing would be fun to do. Any seaplane, just for the fun of making it "float" on the water, and taking-off and land anywhere. and : SE 5000 Baroudeur (land based jet fighter without landing gear) Boeing YC-14 Grumman S-2 Tracker / C-1 Trader / E-1 Tracer would be great for sure. We don't have an OV-1 Mohawk Ju-188 G4M Betty Ki-84 Hayate And talking about liners : Concorde Boeing 727 ( And, totally useless in game but worth a supersonic ride : Thrust SSC or Bloodhound SSC ) xD

That's is correct. You can slow down if you have speed but you cannot go in reverse on the ground.

Still about the canyon S-W of the Desert V4 terrain : Go to P13 and set course at 150 / distance 100 km - 55 NM or P14 and set course at 160 / distance 30 km - 15 NM or Jalamin (Position=248000.00,241000.00 in the target.ini file) and head southeast 10 km - 6NM

I am talking about changing this set of values, in the data.ini file. The position values in the cockpit.ini file has no effect on the center of gravity indeed. But changing the CGPosition in the data.ini file changes also where you sit in the aircraft : TW's Hunter : After adding a "CGPosition=0.0,2.0,0.0" line in the [AircraftData] part in the data.ini file : You're sitting 2 meters forward and I didn't change the position values in the cockpit.ini file.

That's true. You can even use no cockpit at all, as long as there's a cockpit.ini file. A 3D model of a cockpit is not necessary to make an aircraft flyable. The cockpit.ini file is. I almost always change the cockpit position. It's very rare to have it exactly where it should be "straight from the box". If the cockpit has a position there should be a 0,0,0 point to refer to.

In game there's no call like "On l'a rentré" xD (nor "enc... p... de ta r...")

By the loadout.ini file. There's too many weapon stations for the loadout menu, max is 6. You can have more than 6 in the data.ini but they will be set by the loadout.ini file and not the loadout menu. In the data.ini it's the weapon stations with "StationGroupID=7"

For the rolling radius of the wheel it should be the number issued of the 3D model. It needs to be calculated from the coordinates of the wheel. But the ShockStroke value will affect the visual result if the shock animation (if used) has a more little displacement on the 3D model. As far as I know it won't solve poor behaviours on ground. But it needs to be set. I experimented lately that the CG value can improve the handling when taxiing, by increasing the weight on the wheel, as you said. But it won't solve the bounces. And Yakarov is right, at least moving the CG values will change the cockpit position. You'll have to adjust it to have it back where it was, like an offset setting of the cockpit. (And there's also a "Cockpit set CG position" or something like that...) First, the wheels must be symmetrical between left and right. It's a 3D model matter, and if the model has this issue you can stop trying to fix it by ini (or maybe creating fake wheels by ini only ?) Then there's many parts involved : EmptyMass, MassFraction, Reference values, Min/MaxExtentPosition, ShockStroke / SpringFactor / DampingFactor for each wheel, center of the 3D model (3D related), CGposition as you did, and some lift values of components if not set as they should (TW flight models are not optimised for taxiing, just take-off and landing runs), fuel tanks position and weight, and probably other things I forget. As an ini guy the worst for me is the 3D model because I cannot move it. And most of the time there's some Min/MaxExtentPosition values that are correct for the 3D model but makes the ini model touches the ground because of the angle of rotation or the stance on the ground. If the box made from the Min/MaxExtentPosition values touches the ground it can produce bounces. So I would say, check all structural entries using the famous Mue's LOD viewer and then all the FM values that has an effect on the ground (at 0 speed there shouldn't be any lift or drag but that will affects the FM - take-off / landing / stalling / departing / maneuvring and TW's FMs are not optimised for being realistic when not flying) I mentioned TW FM's because they should be taken as a model for third party aircraft, as a starting point at least. In the end, you have no certitude of solving the problem, but that's the deal ^^

Hello You can do it : SystemType=CONTROL_SURFACE InputName=THRUST_VECTOR_CONTROL MaxDeflection=50.0 or any value you want MinDeflection=0.0 ModelNodeName= ---> if two wings not animated / requires one "control surface" part for each wing or AnimationID= ---> if the wings are animated RotationAxis=Z-Axis or Y-Axis or X-Axis (maybe and only if not animated) ReverseModelOrientation=TRUE / FALSE (maybe and only if not animated) and maybe other entries for the movement It doesn't include the aerodynamic entries The reason it never has been done is the thrust vector control key is used only by the player aircraft. The AI / the wingmen aircrafts won't use it.

Battles in the parani sky A F-108 shot down my wingman Two F-101s crossed our border (or maybe it's us). Both wingmen kill each other I quickly maneuvered the leader and it's a gun kill No we don't have F-14s, just like Dhimari don't have AIR-2 nuclear rockets A lonely MiG-23 on patrol

Not a 3D guy myself, but the ini entries are correct. So I would say it's a pivot point issue in the 3D model. Check the pylons first.