DARoot

Oh, Ko! So desu ka! The AI doesn't always use "CM" defined torpedoes correctly? ["Wake effect" in-air from 4,000 feet? That sounds hilarious!] This happens, even with the "[AI Data]" statements in the aircraft's _Data.ini file? Um -- that sounds like a problem (albiet a pretty funny one). I believe I mentioned that the DAT A-Team uses "GuidanceType=7 / ASM" for its Okha piloted suicide bombs. Those things are deadly in- game. All my wingmen fire them OK, and I've experienced a 100% hit/kill rate with them so far. Probably too much for torpedoes ... No, we probably ain't gonna be able to model porpoising, broaching, magnetic proximity detonators (which never worked all that well in WW II historically, anyway), or pattern-running torpedoes (used historically by submarines - dunno about aircraft-launched ones) in SF2. But, have you (or anybody) fiddled with the "Accuracy," "LockonChance," "LaunchReliability," "CapabilityFlags," or any of the "Seekerxx" parameters in the torpedo _data.ini file, to get what you think is representative of WW II torpedo behavior? And I would think that possibly decreasing the "Explosives= " parameter might make them somewhat less "1-shot-1-kill?" [in my SF2 PTO install, the CV-5 and Akagi fleet carriers have hull StructuralFactors between 1000 to 1500, if that suggests anything]. Not that I'm complaining, or anything, you understand. I'm completely happy with 95% accuracy and reliability, if that possibly means an extra second or two to escape after launch. In SF2, it seems even a lone Cargo Ship or Fleet Oiler is armed to the teeth. And attacking an enemy Task Group made up of multiple warships, in your TBD or Vindicator, is a real treat. Bring your adult-size Pampers ... DARoot

Okie-Dokie, now we gettin' someplace! What I was really looking for in this thread was sort of a poll... What are other people using, why are they using it, and how well does it work for them, in the new SF2 environment. I was expecting responses sort of like these -- Reader A: "I'm using the XYZ Weapons Pack for SF2. It has torpedoes set up as "GuidanceType=nnn" and "AllowedWeaponsClass=ABC,DEF,PDQ." I have no problems with it, and my wingmen (and the Enemy AI) seem to use the torpedoes OK. I get about 80% hit probability with them." Or Reader B: "I also have the DAT A-Team's PTO mod, but I could never hit anything with their torpedoes, so I changed all the data entries to what I was used to in my SFP1 PTO install [Right after I ditched their "quasi-Japanese" in-game radio chatter]. Now I'm a happy camper. "GuidanceType=1" / "WGR" never made any sense to me, since for TOW-type weapons it's suicidal to try to keep the target centered in the HUD until weapon impact, when used with proper torpedo launch methods. What were they thinking?" Or even Reader C: "I don't have a WW II PTO install, but I do use the Tu-16T Badger in my SF2 install, carrying the RAT-52 Soviet torpedo, which is set up as "GuidanceType=3" / "CGR,EOGR" and it works fine for me, and my wingmen." To be honest, I've already "edited" my own SF2 PTO install to set up torpedoes to my own personal preferences, so I'm not intending to "look for help" with this thread. [However, I can always be persuaded to change my setup, if someone posts some good ideas]. Rather, I wanted to provide a thread that others can look to for reference and guidance when setting up THEIR game for torpedo attacks and usage. Well, OK, So ... Your [Wrench, with Cocas] Australian Beaufighter has these entries at the TOP of it's "_Data.ini" file: SecondaryRoles=CAS,ARMED_RECON,RECON,ESCORT,CRUISE_MISSILE and [CruiseMissileAI] ReleaseRange=3000.0 ReleaseAlt=50.0 ReleaseInterval=6.0 and later, under [CenterStation] AllowedWeaponClass=IOGR,LGR,EOGR,CGR,WGR,CM So, now we got some more parameters to consider. Any additional information you (or others) would care to contribute concerning these parameters would be greatly appreciated here. -------------------------------------------------- [Casual Readers may wish to skip this next section, since it is primarily addressing Wrench's recent comments, and may be only tangentially relevant to the subject of my Original Post. But, since it's only me and Wrench here at the moment, and this is MY thread, I shall proceed anyway...] I hope you (and other Casual Readers who may have ignored the above warning) will forgive my ignorance. I only recently (7 April 2014) moved up to the SF2 series, and have not yet had time to read every post in every thread in every Community Forum devoted to the SF2 series, nor have I yet had extensive in-game experience with the SF2 series. [Most of my experience has been with the SFP1/FE titles, and the mods made for them. And First Eagles 2 is still my favorite]. I'll eventually get to them all. But the SF1 and SF2 titles have many differences (in more ways than native Vista/Win 7 support, and graphics engine). "CM" is a good illustration. Yes, of course I have SF2 NA [most everything you, and other modders, have released for SF2 PTO setups recommend, if not require, it]. But nowhere in the documentation that came with it [or, so far, have I found on the Thirdwire Forums or the SF2 Knowledge Base thread here], is there a clear explaination of what "Cruise Missile" parameters are, or how they work in-game. THAT knowledge is available, in the brains of End-Users experienced with it [since it was released, in what, 2010? 2011?]. That knowledge [or portions of it] may be available in portions of some 20-30 Forum posts somewhere. And in many cases [this CombatAce Forum included], one must be "logged-in" to enable the Search Engine function, in order to find them. Can't just find them through "casual lurking." People like yourself, Wrench, have been intimately involved in PTO modding of Thirdwire titles continuously, for a very long time. [My SFP1 PTO install is full of your contributions. Thank You, BTW]. You have seen and done it all. People coming "new" to PTO installs in SF2, or even Thirdwire sims in general, do not know what you do. Especially if they have not been continually following developments, and doing "trial-and-error" experiments, over the years. Let's face it -- The DAT A-Team's PTO mega-mod for SF2 is out there, and people are using it. They have a choice, of course. They can choose to set up their SF2 PTO install "from scratch," one resource at a time [like I did for my SFP1 PTO install, back when], with resources available here at CombatAce and other sites, or they can choose the "easy way," by downloading the DAT A-Team SF2 PTO mod [Hey! Somebody else already included all the aircraft, _.ini edits, Terrains, Campaigns, and worked out all the glitches, etc.], if only to serve as a "starting point" for their SF2 PTO experience. I certainly didn't intend to raise any "Red Capes" about differences between DAT A-Team's mods and those available on CombatAce, or exacerbate anything that may be going on "behind the scenes" regarding them and you. [Although, FYI, you ARE mentioned by name in their Credits for their PTO mod, and I sorta though you might have some insights as to why they did what they did in it]. Any further discussion of that might best be done in a PM, and I'd be interested to hear what you have to say, should you choose to do so. I have my own opinions, of course ...] Anyway, since other End-Users may be using their PTO mod, I thought it appropriate to mention it in my Original Post. Oh, Yes! "AOTP" and "1942-PAW" were great fun. (Especially the additional "Carrier Task Force" OPs in "1942-PAW"). Incidentally, that fun can be yours again [as well as Spectrum Holobyte's "Flight of the Intruder" Heh! Heh!] through the wonders of DOSBox, on today's computers. I have all three, and they work fine on Win 8/DirectX 11 (if you can stand the blocky graphics) ... And, I absolutely agree, that "..If it works, don't fix it.." But, that applies if you already have something "that works,", and are happy with it. I'm interested in hearing about what other people "have" and are happy with. -------------------------------------------------- So, anyway, back on-topic -- For me, WW II torpedo bombing should involve: -- "Low and Slow" delivery -- Altitude around 150 ft, Airspeed around 150 kt, pickle at Range about 1,000 to 1,500 m [around 0.5 nm]; -- "Fire and Forget" -- Once launched, the fish either hits or it doesn't. There's nothing more the launching aircraft can do, and now's the time to take evasive action and beat feet outta there, hoping you avoid the flak - which is murderous in SF2 - and can easily end your day before you even reach the launch requirements in Step 1; -- Your AI Wingmen (and Enemy AI) should be able to use them effectively; -- Japanese Type 91 torpedoes should exhibit distinct advantages over American Mk13 torpedoes (at least, early in the war). German, British, Italian, etc. torpedoes probably fall somewhere in between. Using "GuidanceType=5 / "AllowedWeaponClass=EOGR" in SFP1 PTO installs seemed to fulfill those requirements, and work fairly well, at the time. We now have more choices, including "GuidanceType=5 / Allowed WeaponClass= CM." So, what do people think? DARoot [Just an aside -- Y'know, People, in my experience on Internet Forums, when somebody posts something asking for help with something, one of the most annoying responses you can give is "Use the Search Engine." If you know the answer, but cannot be bothered to just give it - or at least, post a direct link to another post that has it -- why bother responding at all? "Go Search" just conveys the message that "I'm smart, you're stupid," and isn't particularly helpful to anyone. [And rather reflects badly on yourself]. THIS thread is NOT a "request for help," so you can feel free to post anything you like here [including saying you think I'm a jerk, if that's what you feel]. I won't mind. [Errr... probably]. Think of it as a potential resource for information [particularly for End-Users in the future, who may be setting up their SF2 PTO install for the first time], and decide for yourselves how your contribution might wish to be viewed ...]

Thank You, Wrench, for your response. However, you may have gotten the wrong impression about what I was intending to get at with this thread, so I guess I should clarify a few things right away -- - I did see your previous post, but it was more about how to USE torpedoes, rather than how they are set up to be used in-game. [Those of us who are veterans of "Aces of the Pacific" and "1942 - PAW" are already familiar with the "historically-correct" [if somewhat suicidal] method used when making torpedo attacks in WW II]. Portraying that in the SF2 GAME, subject to its limitations, is what I intended to encourage discussion about. Example: In theory, laser-guided weapons (LGR, LGB) require the target to be "painted" by a laser designator, so the weapon can "home" in on it. In Thirdwire's Gen 1 sims, this wasn't fully implemented. In the Gen 2 SF series, it more-or-less is. What this means is, in the SF2 X (July 2013 builds) series, it is "assumed" that your Primary Target [the one that shows up in your HUD automatically, when you get near your Mission Objective point] is being "illuminated" by friendly ground forces, or some other friendly asset, so you [and your AI wingmates] can attack it with your LGR weapons. However, if your plane is NOT carrying its own Laser Designator, you CANNOT just designate any ol' "target of opportunity" and expect your LGRs to lock onto it. So, the "proper use" of the weapons available greatly depends upon the weapon's in-game parameters, and how the new SF2 game engine works. [incidentally, I also saw your post to Veltro2k, when he was trying to mount torpedoes on his SM79 WIP - Furthermore, laser guided weapons [Guidancetype=4] require that the target remain "illuminated" [e.g., keep it in your HUD view] until the weapon impacts. So, what? We didn't have those in WW II. Well, we don't have air-to-ground targeting radar implemented in (more modern) SF2 either, so we have to "fake" any radar-guided air- to-ground weapon systems for the more modern eras, by using the in-game parameters we have available in SF2 today. Same for WW II weapons. - Given that there are no active or semi-active radar-, laser-, wire-,IR-, TV-, or other such systems available in WW II weapons, the issue is what's the best way to "fake" it to make them perform as you might want, given the way the game engine does use those parameters. - Different people may have different ideas about this. THAT is what I'm getting at. I just want to hear what other End-Users have to say about it. My initial post gave two examples for WW II torpedoes -- "GuidanceType=5/EOGR" in SF Gen 1, and "Guidance Type=1/WGR" from the DAT A- Team's PTO mod. As well as an example of the "default" SF2 NA (July 2013 build) for ASM missiles, "GuidanceType=7/ASM" [which is also, by the way, used for the DAT A-Team's Okha piloted suicide bomb]. - With the additional (editable) choices now available, what works best (for any given End-User) with WW II torpedoes, in their humble opinion? Well, Wrench, I took your advice and downloaded your recent Australian Beaufighter Mk1c, and checked how you had it set up. - You are using "GuidanceType=5/IOGR,LGR,EOGR,CGR,WGR,CM" and it "..Works for you.." *Ahem* That's what I was looking for. [And incidentally, I do not know what "CM" is supposed to mean, so that sentiment got lost in translation]. And by the way, that brings up another point: [Hey, this is MY thread, so I can wander off-topic or tangentially if I want to.] Your Beaufighter package includes new Weapons folders for the UK "MkXII_Torpedo" and the U.S. "Mk13Torpedo" (as well as other stuff). Both use "GuidanceType=5," consistent with how you have your Beaufighter's Weapon Station "AllowedWeaponClass= " set up. They would, of course, NOT work with the default DAT A-Team's PTO mod, but only with your add-on plane. [since all the DAT A-Team's torpedo-carrying Allied aircraft only allow "WGR" in their weapon station entries]. But, you are an accomplished and experienced modder [and, if I'm not mistaken, part of the DAT A-Team group that produced their PTO mega-mod in the first place], and RE-NAMED your weapon folders (e.g., "Mk13Torpedo") so as not to overwrite the existing DAT A-Team weapons (e.g., "Mk13 Torpedo"). You (and other Readers), I trust, see the potential problems here. Had you not done so, some unsuspecting End-User (who, maybe didn't read the ReadMe thoroughly, or make Backups) could (potentially) discover that, after installing their new plane, none of their other DAT A-Team UK,ANZAC, or US planes have torpedoes (because they've overwritten the original weapon data with new data that is inconsistent). Lesson here for other Modders. And, perhaps, another valid reason for initiating this discussion. I do not want to "seed" this discussion (yet) with my own ideas about WW II torpedoes. I'd rather hear what other people have to say first. DARoot

Greetings, Quack74 Well, since no one else (so far) has responded to your question, I'll go out on a limb, and try ... [at least, you'll know that SOMEBODY read your post ...] Your screenshots suggest, to me, that it is due to the Game Engine trying to render "distant objects" it interprets as being beyond the "horizon distance" you have set in your "Options" configuration. [e.g., no textures, "greyed-out" etc.] Try setting a higher "horizon distance" and see if that makes any difference. DARoot [You wouldn't think, given the appearance of the trees and other objects in your screenshots, but ... Who knows?]

Greetings, keif149 Interesting. I just checked the Downloads section here, and the "Nieuport N 17/23 Family" file (uploaded by Christian59, ver 2.0, release date 07.11.2010) is listed as "for FE2." Yours must be an earlier version. There is also an earlier "Nieuport 17 Megapack" available that appears to have been designed for FE1. Are you, perhaps, encountering problems because you are trying to load FE2-designed files into FE1? Well, we'll deal with that, perhaps, later. I've used both the above Nieuport downloads, and had no problems that I can remember. I can assure you that the "Nieuport N 17/23 Family" does work in FE2. Just drop the files/folders in the correct places, and everything works just fine. Don't even bother with the "Weapons" or "Guns" or "Decals" subfolders -- the planes still show up. [Yeah, they ain't "right," but they do show up, without any editing]. So, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with Christian59's download (at least, the currently-available one). However, I currently use FE2 exclusively, so my responses to you regarding Create Mission in FE1 may seem somewhat "generic," even though I'm trying to help. OK, so if you've tried all the obvious solutions for Create Mission unavailability -- -- Correct files/folders install; -- Aircraft Folder name and Aircraft.ini filename must match exactly, including spelling; -- Valid cockpit file and .ini; -- All .inis are in ANSI format; -- Verified dates of service/availability Now you get to check a few "brainfade" issues (things that one tends to easily overlook), such as: -- In the Aircraft Data.ini, (after you've checked the Service Dates), verify that the Nation matches what you are trying to use in the Create Mission setup, and that the Mission Type (Sweep, Intercept, etc.) you want to use is listed in the Data.ini as a Primary or Secondary Role. [in FE2, this often gets re-set automatically in Create Mission when you pick a different plane. I can't remember if FE1 does that also, or if you have to do it manually]. -- What you see in the Create Mission aircraft picklist is the Aircraft Name/Shortname [from the Aircraft.ini], NOT the Aircraft Folder name [e.g., the "Nieuport23_Lewis" plane is shown as "Nie.23 C.1 Lewis" in Create Mission. That can sometimes be confusing. But, it can easily be edited]. That's sorta the "checklist" that I go through when I can't get a plane to show up in Create Mission. [Missing weapons, guns, pilot .lods, etc. errors usually don't prevent the aircraft from at least appearing]. So, here's a couple things you can try -- (1) Re-name the "Nieuport23" aircraft folder to "N23" and re-name the "Nieuport23.ini" file to "N23.ini." (2) In your new "N23.ini," change the AircraftFullName and ShortName lines to "N23 C.1" This is to make it easy to recognize and find your new plane in Create Mission. (3) Check that the AircraftDataFile and CockpitDataFile lines in your new "N23.ini" match exactly the corresponding filenames in the N23 folder (including spelling). (4) If necessary, copy a couple corresponding files from other plane folders that you KNOW work into your N23 folder, and temporarily change the lines in "N23.ini" to reference THOSE files [Your N23 won't work right, but you'll be narrowing down the possibilities for where the problem may lie]. Probably best to just use "default" stuff, like Spad 13 cockpit/data file references. If you discover that the plane shows up with a different cockpit file or data file, you can then narrow your troubleshooting to that specific file/folder/setup. Most of my issues tend to be when trying to run FE1-designed planes in FE2, but I have had some experience trying to run SF2-designed planes in SF1, and it is always due to differences in the way the AircraftData.ini file is structured. There are others on this Forum better qualified to explain the differences between FE1 and FE2 AircraftData.ini files. And if the problem is with the aircraft .lod files (not likely), you may be out of luck. If you find your N23 shows up if it uses a different Data.ini, you sorta have 2 (3) choices -- (1) You MIGHT be able to find an alternative N23 flightmodel, in one of Peter01's earlier FM downloads for FE1 here. (2) You can go line-by-line, comparing your current N23 data.ini with a different FE1 data.ini (that you know works), and change 1 line/parameter at a time, until the file STOPS working. Then go back, change it back, and proceed to the next line, etc. Not much fun. OR (3) You can wait for someone else on this Forum to offer different, better suggestions. Hope you get it settled. DARoot

These are excellent, Ojcar! Many thanks to you, and to Stephen1918 for the models! The one thing that FE1 and FE2 NEEDED, IMHO, was a viable zeppelin model/FM, to bring back memories of some of those old "Red Baron" missions. (Yes, I know, there are other aircraft "wish list" threads on this Forum. This was one of mine). You have filled that void extremely well. Thank you both again! DARoot [Of course, others may continue to pester you, or others, for further modifications, to make it possible for them to duplicate the scene in "Flyboys," where the dying Flight Leader takes out a Zeppelin by crashing into it, but I like the way you've currently handled AI (or Player) attempts at "ramming." However, there are those big bags of hydrogen....]

Could someone knowledgeable, on these Forums, PLEASE try to explain to me, what is going on in the situation described below? -- I am running FE2. -- I downloaded and installed the "A-Team's" Pfalz D.IIIa add-on plane. [Works fine]. -- Since I didn't care for the "default" Pfalz skins that the A-Team provided, I downloaded and installed a few of the alternative skins that Quack74 has made available (as well as, one of my own, to more-or-less depict the Pfalz shown in the "default" A-team Loading Screen). -- I then deleted the references to the A-Team's "default" skins, in my "PfalzD3a.ini" and made my personal skin ("Jasta56a," for want of a better name) as "[TextureSet001]". [And all of the skins work fine, provided the Player specifically selects them at the beginning of the Mission]. Well, in the "old days" of FE1, one could control the "order" in which alternate skins were displayed (including what the "default" skin would be, for AI planes, when you flew against them, from the "other side") merely by changing their order in "xxPlaneName.ini." -- Apparently, that is no longer the case, with FE2. -- "[TextureSet001]" seems to be IGNORED by FE2. Instead, it insists on listing "Directory=Jasta15 Hptm Berthold" as the first choice (on the Player-selectable dropdown menu, and as the "default" AI skin), then "Directory=Jasta16B; Name=Vziw M Von Holtzem,Jasta 16B,1918" next, and then "Directory=Jasta20; Name=Jasta20" -- leading one to suspect that FE2 is looking at the alphabetical order for the various skinset directories. -- However, even changing the Directory name to "_Jasta56a" (to place that directory at the "top" in Windows Explorer) seems to make no difference. -- In ADDITION, FE2 seems to "re-write" my existing "PfalzD3a.ini" to ADD-IN entries for some of these skinsets, even if it means DUPLICATING an entry for that skinset that already exists (!!) Example: [Yes, this is what my "PfalzD3a.ini" looks like, at the moment -- and I, personally, did NOT make most of these changes ...]: [TexureSet001] Directory=_Jasta56a Name=Jasta56a Nation=GERMANY Squadron= Specular=2.500000 Glossiness=1.500000 Reflection=0.050000 [TexureSet002] Directory=Jasta5 Name=Jasta5 Nation=GERMANY Squadron= Specular=2.500000 Glossiness=1.500000 Reflection=0.050000 [TexureSet003] Directory=Jasta16B Name=Vziw M Von Holtzem,Jasta 16B,1918 Nation=GERMANY Squadron= Specular=0.700000 Glossiness=0.400000 Reflection=0.700000 [TextureSet004] Directory=Jasta29 Name=Jasta29 Nation=GERMANY Squadron= Specular=2.500000 Glossiness=1.500000 Reflection=0.050000 [TextureSet005] Directory=Jasta5 Name=Jasta5 Nation=GERMANY Squadron= Specular=2.500000 Glossiness=1.500000 Reflection=0.050000 [TextureSet006] Directory=Jasta56 Name=Jasta56 Nation=GERMANY Squadron= Specular=2.500000 Glossiness=1.500000 Reflection=0.050000 [TextureSet007] Directory=Jasta77b Name=Jasta77b Nation=GERMANY Specular=2.500000 Glossiness=1.500000 Reflection=0.050000 [TextureSet008] Directory=_Jasta56a Name=Jasta56a Nation=GERMANY Squadron= Specular=2.500000 Glossiness=1.500000 Reflection=0.050000 [TextureSet001] Directory=Jasta15 Hptm Berthold Name=J15 Hptm Berthold Nation=GERMANY Specular=1.800000 Glossiness=1.500000 Reflection=0.100000 [TextureSet002] Directory=Jasta16B Name=Vziw M Von Holtzem,Jasta 16B,1918 Nation=GERMANY Specular=0.700000 Glossiness=0.400000 Reflection=0.700000 [TextureSet003] Directory=Jasta20 Name=Jasta20 Nation=GERMANY Specular=2.500000 Glossiness=1.500000 Reflection=0.050000 Please note the various duplications for [TextureSet001] through [TextureSet003], as well as the duplications for Directories _Jasta56a, Jasta16B, Jasta15 Hptm Berthold,and Jasta 5 [and "re-numbering" Jasta20]. (and, incidentally, at the time FE2 "generated" this .ini file, I had already DELETED the entire "Jasta15 Hptm Berthold" folder -- so where FE2 got the information it added, I have no clue ...). This is ... ridiculous ... and makes NO logical sense to me. Anybody have any comments/suggestions?? DARoot

Oh, I certainly hope not! But, as Sherlock Holmes says, "Once you've eliminated the impossible, what's left must be the truth." Well, you are right -- if nobody else has reported a similar problem, the place to look for the culprit is likely on my own rig. As to "hangs" on ESC, way back in 2007 Charles posted a "fix" for random crashes and "ALT-N" CTDs in FE1, that involved editing (basically, doubling) certain parameters in the "Flightengine.ini" file (found in the FlightData.cat archive). It's probably still here somewhere, in the Knowledge Base somewhere. Anyway, here's the pertinent section from my FE2 "Flightengine.ini" (which is working fine for me) -- [GraphicsSettings] ZBufferDepth=24 MaxVertexCount=16384 MaxIndexCount=32768 MaxTextureCount=4096 <-- Charles recommended 16384 MaxModelType=2024 <-- Charles recommended 2048 MaxMeshPerScene=4096 MaxModelPerScene=2024 <-- Charles recommended 4096 MaxLightPerScene=256 <-- Charles recommended 1024 AspectRatio=1.333333 MinPixelSize=1.0 DARoot

Yes, and it just gets odder. -- I eventually re-named my preferred "default" skin to "Jasta1" (still "fictional," but now it is at the top, numerically, of the installed skins directories). FE2 still "duplicated" its entry in "PfalzD3a.ini" (so now there are two [TextureSet001] entries, both exactly the same). Well, at least it works properly now. -- However, I figured I had better check my other aircraft folders for similar behavior. -- In MOST cases the "order" of the skins entries in the <aircraft>.ini matched the order of the skins folders, and they were in alphabetical/numerical order, top to bottom. -- However, I have both the A-Team's BE-2c and BE-2d, and they both had the same 2 skin sets. So, to differentiate them, I had previously changed the order [putting "2Sqn" as #001 and "45" as #002 on the 2c, and "45" as #001 and "2Sqn" as #002 for the 2d]. And FE2 is fine with that! I have no idea what is going on here. But, it is probably time to spend more time practicing flying and gunnery skills, and less time "tweaking." Thank you again for your assistance. DARoot

Oh, now this is just becoming ... hilarious ... Here is what FE2 did to my "PfalzD3a.ini" after "adding-in" a second alternate skin (Jasta20) -- [TexureSet001] Directory=Jasta56a Name=Jasta56a Nation=GERMANY Squadron= Specular=2.500000 Glossiness=1.500000 Reflection=0.050000 [TextureSet002] Directory=Jasta56a Name=Jasta56a Nation=GERMANY Squadron= Specular=2.500000 Glossiness=1.500000 Reflection=0.050000 [TextureSet001] Directory=Jasta20 Name=Jasta20 Nation=GERMANY Specular=2.500000 Glossiness=1.500000 Reflection=0.050000 And, Yup, "Jasta20" became the new "default" skin on the pre-mission dropdown menu. {and oddly, FE2 failed to include the "Squadron= " line, which is present in the Jasta20 "TextureSet.ini" file, but DID copy that line for its "duplication" of the Jasta56a skin.] Curiouser and curiouser ... DARoot

Thank You, Panama Red and WhiteKnight06604. Much appreciated! [The fact that FE2 was re-writing my "PfalzD3a.ini" really threw me for a loop -- or perhaps, Immelman]. @ WhiteKnight06604 -- Yes, that is exactly what I did to get my skin as "default." [incidentally, I also had to remove (temporarily) all the other alternate skin folders from the aircraft directory, since FE2 seemed to "read" them, and offer them on the dropdown menu at mission start, even if they are not declared in "PfalzD3a.ini"]. Well, today I will start adding them back in (one at a time), and see what happens. Thank you both, again, for taking the time to respond. DARoot

Having spent a day searching this Forum and the SF2 Forum (as well as the A-Team's Forum) to no avail, I shall now ask directly. I have two quick questions, for anyone who might know the answers -- In First Eagles 2, weapons (such as "Bomb11kg") have their own subfolders within the \Objects\Weapons folder, as well as entries in "Weapondata.ini" (and the "Weapondata.dat" compiled file), that contain the same information as that weapon's individual "xx_data.ini" file. 1) If one wants to change a weapon's parameters, is it sufficient to simply just make the changes in the individual xx_data.ini file (in Notepad), or must one also edit "Weapondata.ini" to match, and then recompile "Weapondata.dat" like in FE1 and the SFP1 first-generation sims? [same goes for guns in "Gundata.ini/Gundata.dat" and their individual folders in FE2]. 2) How does one adjust the aim angle/bullet path for Gunpods? Internal guns have a "AimAngles=0.0,0.0,0.0" line in the individual aircraft's data.ini file, that can be edited (if adjusting the cockpit and pilot eyepoint positions don't do the trick). Gunpods do not, and tend to shoot directly in front of wherever they are mounted (judging by their tracer path in-game), not at the center of the aiming reticle. Peter01 has shared with us some great FMs, that allow several different armament configurations (using Gunpods) on the same aircraft model. Unfortunately, I cannot hit anything with them at the moment. Depending on which combination is loaded, each different weapon (gunpod) aims its bullets at a different point in space. For me, I need to "harmonize" my guns (especially for attacking ground objects). [Example: Peter01's "Lewis Balloon" gunpod has the following parmeter in both "Weapondata.ini" and in the "Lewis Balloon_data.ini" found in its individual folder, within the FE2 Objects\Weapons folder: AimDirection=0.000000,1.000000,0.000000 Would changing these numbers work to adjust the bullet path, and if so, would simply changing "Lewis Balloon_data.ini" suffice, or must it also be changed in "Weapondata.ini" (and "Weapondata.dat")?] Any help will be appreciated. DARoot

Greetings, Panama Red Really? One wouldn't know that from Peter01's ReadMes -- [Note: said "Weapons" folder contains the aforementioned Weapondata.ini and .dat, dated 15 March 2010, that are 74kb and 46kb respectively.] In addition, from Peter01's ReadMe for his "FE1 and FE2 FMs and Game Files 2010" [Note: The "Essential FE2" game files includes Weapondata.ini and .dat files dated 9 March 2010 that are 73kb and 45kb respectively. The "Essential FE1" game files, in contrast, includes Weapondata.ini and .dat files dated 11 March 2010, that are 36kb and 26kb respectively.] But, I trust you. [However, I think I'll just move those files to a temporary location for the moment ...] Thanks for the information, and confirmation of the feasibility of the separate gunpod folder method. DARoot

Greetings, Flightdude There's a discussion in the WWII PRop Heads Forum that might be helpful to you -- http://combatace.com/topic/65316-g4m2-tail-and-crew-model/ Basically, Veltro2K is correct. "Pilot" crewmember models always face forward. You need a "Gunner" model for the rear gunner. Scroll down to the discussion in the thread above that shows a snippet from a _Data.ini file with entries for Pilot and Rear Gunners. Look for a .lod (not a folder) in your SFP1 \Objects\Aircraft (or in the Dauntless folder itself) for something named "Gunner" (or including "gunner" in its name) and substitute the name of that file in your Dauntless_data.ini for "PilotWWIINavy" in your rear gunner position. DARoot

Addendum After the euphoria of initial success and making progress, one must face the cold hard reality -- changing the "AimDirection=" parameter in the gunpod's _data.ini will affect every instance of the use of that gunpod in FE2, on every aircraft. The numbers that "work" for the Spad 7 probably won't be right for the Nieuport 17. (Sigh) This leaves us with more or less the same position we started with, except that, like a broken watch [which displays the correct time twice per day], we at least have an accurate gunpod on one aircraft model. So, more work -- 1) Probably try adjusting the "Attachment Angles=" parameter in the individual aircraft's _data.ini first. If one can get the bullet pathway correct, and the resulting placement of the external gunpod model on the external airframe is not too bad, we're done with that specific aircraft. 2) Based on Panama Red's information, one could try duplicating the gunpod folders in \Objects\Weapons and re-naming them for use on specific aircraft [e.g., "Lewis01_S7," "Lewis01_N17," "Lewis Balloon_N16," etc.]. Allows full control over the gunpod's "AimDirection=" parameter for any specific aircraft MODEL [e.g., the Spad7_150 and Spad7_180 share the same model; the Nieuport17s and Nieuport23s share the same model; the Nieuport 11s and Nieuport 16s share the same model, etc.] and preserves Peter01's concept of using various gunpod armaments selectable via Loadout.ini. A single model-specific gunpod should work for all aircraft using the same model. In any event, a dozen individual gunpod subfolders take up a lot less hard drive space than a dozen different Nieuport aircraft folders representing different armaments [although one still needs separate aircraft folders for the variants in engines and performance characteristics]. 3) If all else fails (or, if you prefer a single specific armament all of the time), one can always go back to defining the gun as an [internalGun] in the specific aircraft's _data.ini (and adjust the bullet path there), and define the external gun model as simply a dummy [e.g., fuel tank] to show up on the external view, just like was done originally in FE1. The obvious disadvantage here, of course, is that the gun is permanent [and will still fire, even if the external gun model is not loaded/attached -- unless you turn it off manually with <BACKSPACE> or <;> or <'> -- but, who's gonna do that? And you know the AI won't...] 4) Naturally, one can always forget the whole business, and just learn to live with what we are given. Sometimes I feel that way. [And, I've been known to fire off all of my Lewis ammo on the way to the target area, and not reload, and just rely on my internal Vickers, if the Lewis aim is so far off I cannot compensate, and don't want to be distracted by it during the mission]. Well, we're not about giving up and going home, No, Sir! So, perhaps this discussion can continue with additional input from others in this Community. DARoot

Excellent information! Thank you both! @ Panama Red -- That is Good News, and very helpful. [Didn't make sense to me why Thirdwire would change the file structure for FE2 if one still had to revise/recompile Weapondata.ini and Weapondata.dat in addition to editing separate weapon-specific folder files. You've now cleared that up.] Hmmmm.... So, does that mean I can safely DELETE the additional "Weapondata.ini" and "Weapondata.dat" files that Peter01 supplied with his "REALLY Fixed FE2 Game Files ..etc." download (his files are dated 3/15/2010, whereas my FE2 is the 7/6/2010 version), so they don't (possibly) "...cause [me] grief in the end..." [they don't seem to have.. yet..]??? @ Crusader -- Thank you kindly for the information and clear explanation. Very helpful to me! 1) Yes, I sorta figured the "Attachment Angles=" parameter controlled the position of the whole Gunpod (e.g., as it appears in an External View), and editing those numbers would mess up the intentions of the Modder who worked so hard to get the Gunpod to appear on the airplane model wing or fuselage in the first place. You've now confirmed that. 2) Excellent! The "AimDirection=" parameter does work as you describe. Thankfully, I can now freely do "trial-and-error" experiments with edits in the individual Gunpod data files in FE2, rather than have to keep editing and recompiling "Weapondata.ini" and "Weapondata.dat" [which can add additional possible sources of errors and glitches when experimenting]. Thanks to you both, I can now spend endless hours "tweaking" my FE2 flyable aircraft so they work the way I prefer. [Errr... well, perhaps that's not exactly the way to put it ...] What I mean is, thanks to you, I have a better understanding of FE2, and can save time and effort on what I may wish to do, and work with much more confidence (and fewer false starts and dead-end efforts). Here's an example -- This is the cockpit view of my "stock" FE2 Spad7_180, with an upper-wing-mounted Lewis Gunpod (Peter01's) added. As you can see from this screenshot [or, maybe you can't -- since I fly in "Cockpit Wide" view, the tracer path is kinda small -- but I've confirmed it in the other, close-up views], the tracers from both the Vickers (Internal Gun) and Lewis (add-on gunpod) are now dead-center in the aiming reticle, thanks to you guys. Incidentally, for anyone who is interested, and might not otherwise be aware of it, it is a VERY easy edit to make the aiming reticle (which you see if you turn off the cockpit graphics) appear when the cockpit is turned on (as here). Simply change the entries in your plane's _cockpit.ini file to read: "HasGunsight=TRUE" and "FixedSight=FALSE." [And, if you are editing a 3rd-party _cockpit.ini that has NO gunsight entry, make sure you also add a "Gunsight=GunsightFront" line just above the "Instrument001=" entry]. You can adjust the size (diameter) of the sight by making the entry "GunsightMilSize=" number larger or smaller. Theoretically, if the target's wings fill the ring, you are in range to fire (so, don't make it too small). Then, by adjusting the cockpit Position=, Offset=, and ViewAngles= numbers, you can place the reticle right on the front cowling (or wherever you prefer). [i use a custom "Spad13_Ironsight.tga" with silver highlights around the rings -- makes it easier for my tired old eyes to see it against light (sky) and dark (ground) backgrounds]. There's probably a way to make the "other" ringsight on the left disappear, but since it's part of the default Thirdwire aircraft model .lod, I'd just as soon not try to mess with it. Easier (and safer) just to ignore it. Thank you again for your help. Great to know the Community is there when one needs it. DARoot

And now, the A-Team has recently released an H-16 Albatross! [in the "Beta Models" area] DARoot

Just a little "FYI" for all the float plane lovers out there -- The A-Team has recently posted versions of the Kawanishi H6K "Mavis" and the Grumman J2F-2 "Duck" for SF2 (in the "WWII Planes" section). http://cplengineeringllc.com/SFP1/ As with all A-team stuff, you must be registered on their site to download anything. DARoot

You may not care, but it so happens that I was stationed on the U.S.S. Enterprise back when the movie "Top Gun" was filmed on-board. Tom Cruise was a jerk. (Wouldn't talk to anybody. Nobody liked him). Everyone else was quite nice (I, for one, expected less from the "Hollywood" crowd). Some of my friends/shipmates got "bit parts" (non-speaking) in the movie, and I still get a charge out of seeing them again when I play the DVD. DARoot [Yeah, I'm THAT old ....]

Well, OK, I will post these comments and observations, for the benefit of others, who MAY be wanting to try to set up their own dedicated "Pacific Theater" (PTO) installation of SFP1, for the sake of, perhaps, saving YOU some of the time and trouble I had to go through .... 1) It has been recommended, elsewhere on this Forum, that you "upgrade" to SFP2 NA (or, at least, use "WOE" [Wings Over Europe] as your "base" installation module. I cannot comment on that, as I have neither. It may be your best advice .... 2) Most of the really nifty terrains (and Campaigns) currently available are ... rather old ... AND were designed for earlier versions of the SFP1 Game Engine (between 2004 and 2010). [Wrench, for one, recommends using them with SFP1 patched to NO LATER THAN the August 2006 patch. I must concur.] 3) After fighting with, and fooling around with, various aircraft (that apparently caused CTDs in my SFP1_06 Installation, even when I was NOT flying them), I made a SECOND installation of SFP1, patched to the Oct 2008 level. THAT solved THAT problem. 4) Not to point fingers or anything, but the aircraft models I had problems with in SFP1_06 were -- -- A-Team's "B-26B" (designed and tested in WOE at the 2008 patch level) -- Veltro2K's "PBY-5a Catalina" (with .ini adaptations by Wrench) [designed and tested in SFP2] I INVARIABLY got CTDs (well, "Strike Fighters Has Stopped Working" error messages -- same thing, really...) when these were used, and some times even when NOT used, but otherwise present in the "\Aircraft" folder.. in my SFP1_06 installation. -- To a lesser extent, I also got CTDs (as above) when using the following --> --- A6M2-N (designed for SFP2, but "should work" in SFP1...) --- A6M2-N_Early (designed for SFP2, but "should work" in SFP1...) --- B-17F (designed for "Gen1") --- Pasco's N1K1 "George" (no comments) ALL of the above (except B-26B and B-17F. which are A-Team models, and Pasco's N1K1) are using Wrench's FM modifications. 5) Well, I first found out that the "B-26B Marauder" would work FINE in the A-Team's "Wings Over Russia" install (which REQUIRES SFP1 patched to the Oct 2008 level). [Hurrah! I thought -- Re-install PTO to a SFP1_08 "base," and all will be well!] Not so fast .... Yes, the "B-26B" and the "PBY-5a" DO work fine in the SFP1_08 environment. Problem is, every OTHER airplane (with a few exceptions) in my stable is, for the most part, unflyable in SFP1_08 [blows up on runway, completely uncontrollable, or "..departs from controlled flight..." at various points]. ArmourDave's 4 Japanese aircraft seem to be OK in both. Oddly, most Bomber aircraft appear to be OK in both (but, a bit SLOW in SFP1_08). Wolf257's aircraft FMs are REALLY hosed in SFP1_08 ... (Well, Wrench DID warn us about this ....) In short, switching to SFP1_08 is NOT the answer ... causes more problems than it solves .... Here's a quickie "Test Report" using the PBY-5a as an example, comparing Single Mission results (Anti-Ship -- LOVE firing torpedoes) in my SFP1_06 and SFP1_08 installations (everything is THE SAME in each, except the SFP1 installation used) for whatever insights these provide to the more experienced modders out there -- -- SFP1_06 -- --- Solomons-V3 (terrain) 1942 - CTD on load 1943 - Load OK, "Alt-N" OK, CTD on lineup for torpedo attack 1944 - CTD on load --- Okinawa 1944-45 (terrain) 1943 - Load OK, "Alt-N" OK, CTD on "Esc" after being shot down. 1945 - Load OK, "Alt-N" OK, "Mission Complete" OK, "Approach Home Base" OK, CTD on "DeBrief" Screen. -- SFP1_8 -- --- Solomons-V3 (terrain) 1942 - OK to end 1943 - OK to end 1944 - OK to end --- Okinawa 1944-45 (terrain) 1943 - OK to end 1945 - Crash (my fault), and CTD on "ESC" to End Mission. Make any sense to anybody? [not to me, unfortunately ...] So, I'm asking the more experienced Members of the Community to, perhaps, "step up" and post SOMETHING, SOMEWHERE (in "Knowledge Base," perhaps?) about -- -- How to "reverse engineer" aircraft models and FMs designed for SFP2, or the post-Oct 2008 SFP1/WOE environment, to work consistently in a 2006 SFP1 environment... -- Conversely, how to "upgrade" aircraft models/FMs designed for the 2006 environment, to the latest SFP2/post-Oct 2008 environment. 6) On a (somewhat) related, if tangential, note -- While puttering around with these tests, I could not help but notice that the "Shortland Island Seaplane Base" (Position=428437,495477) in the "Solomons-V3" terrain "Targets" file has some anomalies (most notably, a "tent_round," and an oildrum storage tank, in the middle of the water, some distance from the N and S (E and W?) ends of the "Seepiste" (in-the-water) landing field for this area. [Does this sort of thing bother you? Does me. ESPECIALLY if I'm trying to take-off (in something like a B5N1 "Kate" or A6M2-N "Rufe," which are slo-o-o-ow to begin with) and there's this godforsaken tent right in front of my flightpath ....] -- (a) What th' ??? -- (b) There is probably a good reason for it, as more experienced modders have adopted it, but I do NOT understand why carrier-based WWII fighters/bombers cannot utilize WWII-Era carrier models as their "runways/home bases." I've read (and implemented) the suggestions in "Knowledge Base" about Adding WOV Carriers to SFP1, and have made my own missions for WWII Carrier practice from that tutorial (using the "Akagi" and "A6M2" models, and the "CV-9" and "F4F-4" models) with great success. {If I can fly it, and the Game AI/Autopilot can fly it, it must be OK, Eh?] If there is an explanation as to WHY such stalwart modders as Wrench, Baltika, etc. believe a "Seepiste" (in-the-water) runway is better than an actual carrier model, I, for one, would like to hear their views. (Somebody posted elsewhere that problems with 3rd-party aircraft "blowing up" when trying to take off from 3rd-party carrier models could be solved by changing the length of their "runway length" entry in their "xx_data.ini" file, but I have not yet had occasion to test this, as everything I have done to date in this area has worked flawlessly without it. Yeah, the WWII planes get "catapulted" off the deck in an a-historical manner (when you hit the "B" key), but at least they work ... And landing them is the real test ...) Since someone will invariably ask, I'll post the following System Specs concerning my computer, and the environment in which the above tests were run -- Windows XP, Service Pak 3 100 GB RAM (76.8GB currently available) Integrated Graphics Card (on Motherboard) Everything else (Swap Files, etc.) set to "Normal" or whatever... SFP1 patched to v.08.30.6.9 (August 2006 Update) AND SFP1 patched to v.8.10.0.16 (Oct 2008b Update) In-Game Graphics set to "Medium" (except -- see below**) In-Game "Enemy Activity," etc. set to "Normal" All Terrain set to use "...Desert.cat" and with: //UseEffectShader=TRUE //EffectShaderName=TerrainEffect.fx All aircraft set to: MinBaseSize=SMALL ** I had to disable ALL of Deuces's Enhanced Environmental Effects (which were supplied with some terrain mod or other), because they caused SEVERE frame rate hits in-game, in SFP1_08. NOT a problem with SFP1_06 ... Go Figure... Hope some of this information is helpful to somebody . DARoot [Another aside -- Who changed the Forum Setup, and where did my "avatar" pic go to?]

Greetings, All I have been having a grand time fooling around with "Terrain Editing" recently (nevermind why...). However, I have come across a couple of ... anomalies (?) ... that have raised questions. I've consulted the other posts here, in the "Knowledge Base" section, but none of them seem to focus on these issues I've encountered, so I'm posting a General Question(s), in hopes that the experts (such as Wrench, Baltika, and you others) will read it (them) and, perhaps, respond --- (1) If the Terrain "Targets.ini" (or Campaign file) calls out "AAA" as a Ground Object, is that a specific model, or does the SFP1 Game Engine just pick randomly from whatever AAA-class ground objects are installed and available? The reason I ask is, when checking some of my Terrain edits (using Wrench's suggestion of a specific Single Mission, starting near the area), I noticed that DIFFERENT AAA models are often displayed in the same spot, each time the Mission is flown. To use Edward's WWII "New Guinea" Terrain (updated by Wrench) as an example, Target Area "Alotau" has 3 AAA gun defense emplacements (I added "af1aagun_single" sandbag emplacements for each, so I could easily find them from the air). Sometimes, the AAA gun model looks like a 40mm Bofors [single barrel, 2 crew, 4-wheel carriage]. Sometimes it looks like a German "88" single barrel, gunshield, twin recoil pistons, quadruped carriage, some boxes added nearby -- well, we all know what an "88" looks like...]. Sometimes it looks like a "Type96" (Japanese!) gun [twin barrel, 2 crew, with its own (smaller) whitish sandbag emplacement]. Sometimes, it looks like a single soldier behind (what looks like) a German 37mm AAA gun, or a U.S..50 Cal or .30 Cal (water jacketed) MG, with its own smaller) whitish sandbag emplacement, etc. ????? Is this normal? Please enlighten me.... (2) Again, picking on WWII "New Guinea" and Target Area "Alotau" --- Placing Ground Objects (new) on existing terrain seems to work fine. However, MOVING an existing Target Area from one area of the map to another sometimes results in ground objects becoming "buried" fully or partially under the terrain.[Trying to place a "Liberty Ship" anywhere other than on a "water" tile (z-Level = 0) illustrates this perfectly]. In New Guinea's "Alotau," the terrain the "town" sits on slopes up from water level (it's got PT Boats, Docks and Wharves, as well as the main buildings of the "town," so it's designed to be on a slope). One (and only one) of the "USTruck" objects (parked in front of a building near the middle dock, so it's REAL close to z=0 height) is buried up to it's axles in the existing terrain. [several OTHER trucks, jeeps, etc. are placed elsewhere, further "up-slope," and display normally]. I ended up moving that truck down onto one of the closest dock/wharf areas, since nothing I could do would make it appear "normally" at it's default location. So, what governs how a Ground Object is displayed, visually? -- Adding a "z axis" entry to it's "Offset" value doesn't seem to help [although, I note that some Modders DO add a 3rd "Offset" entry to their Ground Object model callouts...] -- Is this caused by "moving" a Target Area? -- Is this related to the Ground Object mesh/lod/Data parameters, or to the Terrain Heightmap/Tiles parameters, or a combination of both? -- Or something else? ????? Please enlighten me .... (3) Because everybody always asks about the following information, I'll supply it -- -- I am using SFP1, patched to 08/2006 [sFP1.exe v.8.30.6.9] -- Stand-Alone PTO Installation [NO WWII German planes or Ground Objects installed !!! Where that "88" came from?...a mystery] -- Formation.ini, Nations.ini, etc. all set to the most recent versions I could find... -- Windows XP OS, Service Pack 3 (4) Lest I forget, many, many thanks to those modders (we'll mention Wrench, Baltika, Edward, and Gepard, but we intend this for ALL of you) who have done so much over the years to make SFP1 (and it's successors, and SFP2) so interesting! (5) Oh, Yeah! Amidst all that (seeming) frustration, I found time to do a re-skin of one of my A-Team Ki-61 Hien ("Tony") fighters, to try to make it (sort of)resemble the one depicted in the "Loading Screen." http://i1219.photobucket.com/albums/dd424/DARoot1/Miscellaneous/TONY-Y.jpg Came out pretty good, I think. (Simple edits -- paint the spinner yellow, add a 2nd white stripe, and use the "19Sen2Chu" decal from Wrench's Ki-61 SkinPak.) Which brings up another question (but, still related, somewhat, to "Terrain Editing") -- -- I cannot use Christian59's "Ki-61 Family" Data.ini files in New Guinea -- Invariably, the aircraft crash into a mountain when "Alt-N" is utilized to "move things along" -- Doesn't help the Mission Scores.... -- I went back to the original A-Team FMs, then edited them according to Wrench's previous "Knowledge Base" posts (or, was it here, in "PropHeads"?) concerning aircraft "jumping" on runways, and "pitching up" when using Autopilot. That improved things IMMENSELY! [Thank You, Wrench!] -- I also moved the CGPosition [to "=0.0,0.0,0.0"] and played with the Landing Gear spring and damping factors [again, following Wrench's tutorial/suggestions elsewhere here]. -- As a result, the plane flies great, but still it (and, a few other models) will occasionally "End Mission" with an ignominious crash into a mountainside in New Guinea [doesn't seem to be a problem with Solomons, Midway, etc -- Their terrain is pretty flat). Seems to me I remember reading something about Japanese aircrews actually having to do something to "get over" the mountains (Owen Stanley?) in New Guinea in RL, in WWII ....Them mountains can sure be treacherous ...] -- I THINK what I need to do, is edit my "MissionControl.ini" file, to, like, double the [Altitude] values - but I will wait to see what you guys suggest. Well, there it is. Anybody got any suggestions/comments, etc. (besides, "..fly the Mission yourself in real time..."?) ["I once shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas, I'll never know..." -- Groucho Marx] Thanks in advance DARoot

Greetings, again, Gonzaatleti99 If you are willing to accept some advice from a "Junior Member" here, here's a few things for you to think about and consider -- If I do not see weapons available (that should be) in the "Loadout" screen, but am (pretty) sure that my Weapondata.ini and Weapondata.dat files are correct, I start looking at the following -- (1) First (and most easily addressed) is the "StartYear=nnnn" entry for the weapon in Weapondata.ini. If you are trying to play a mission in 1953, but the weapon didn't become available until 1955, it ain't gonna show up. Simple. Obvious. These next involve checking both "Weapondata.ini" and the "xx_Data.ini" for the aircraft you are trying to fly with that weapon. (2) In "Weapondata.ini" -- Mass=65 AttachmentType=USAF NationName=USAF GuidanceType=0 (3) These must match the corresponding entries in your aircraft's "xx_Data.ini" file, under "SystemType=WEAPON_STATION -- " LoadLimit=50 AllowedWeaponClass=GP AttachmentType=Japan If they don't match (as illustrated above), the weapon won't show up in the "Loading" screen. -- The weapon is too heavy for that Station -- The attachment type is wrong -- The weapon is from a different nation -- The weapon class for that Station wants a Gunpod, not a "droppable" weapon [And, if you are dealing with an "Internal" bomb bay, you also need to look at length and diameter for the particular weapon]. Oh, it gets worse ..... (4) "Guidance Type" in Weapondata.ini corresponds to "Allowed WeaponClass" in your aircraft _Data.ini. The sim uses numbers for "GuidanceType" (0 = unguided, "iron" bomb) and letters (in _Data.ini) for the corresponding weapon class allowed ("BOMB" or "GP"). However, when you get into torpedos, missiles, etc., it starts to get confusing. [Can't use the same entries both places - that would make things too easy, Eh?] Using the Mk 13 Torpedo from WWII, for example, some modders consider it "GuidanceType=5" (TV Homing, generally consistent with "EOGR" (Electro-optically guided rocket) entry in "_Data.ini"), while others consider it "GuidanceType=1" (Wire guided, generally consistent with "WGR" entry in "_Data.ini"). [somebody REALLY needs to update the "How to Add a New Weapons" tutorial one of these days ....] Needless to say, if the "GuidanceType" entry in your "Weapondata.ini" and your "AllowedWeaponClass" entry in your aircraft's "xx_Data.ini" file don't match, the weapon will not show up. (5) So, what the heck -- It is much easier to adjust these values in your individual aircraft "_Data.ini" files (simple text-edit in Notepad) than in Weapondata.ini (text edit, plus run through the Editor, and hope you get a valid Weapondata.dat file). Putting something like this in your aircraft's _Data.ini file -- AllowedWeaponClass=EOGR,IOGR,LGR,WGR,BOMB,RP AttachmentType=USAF,USN,UK,WP,Soviet,W_Germany,Japan Is probably overkill, but it won't generally hurt anything (DOES give you a raft of inappropriate alternate weapons to choose from, however). And, once you've got things working like you want (Remember, your aircraft's supplied "Loading.ini" file generally lists the "correct" default loadouts for your missions), you can then "edit out" the superfluous erroneous entries in your _Data.ini file. Always make Backups before editing ANYTHING -- You'll be glad you did ..... (6) And, of course, you always have to be on the lookout for something like this, in your aircraft's _Data.ini file -- // Weapon Stations -------------- // Fuel Tanks -------------------- [LeftWingFuelCell] Means the Mod Author of that particular aircraft chose NOT to allow ANY external stores (including droppable fuel tanks) on that particular model. Hope some of this is helpful to you. DARoot

OK, after reading Wrench's last post in his recent P-39_VVS Release Thread, I'll post this here instead .... A quick suggestion, for Dsawan (and anyone else) who may be having "aesthetic issues" with Wrench's new P-39_VVS -- It is easy to add an alternative texture set to an existing aircraft model. -- Simply find (or make) one you like (using the SAME aircraft .lod and its textures as templates -- in this case, Wolf257's original P-39 model); -- Copy/Add your new texture folder to your "P-39_VVS" aircraft folder, and add the appropriate [TextureSet002] lines to the bottom of your "P-39_VVS.ini" file; -- Make sure to check the "Decals.ini" file (if it has one, within your new texture folder) to make sure each line calls the appropriate path, starting with "P-39_VVS" (e.g., "P-39_VVS\MyTex\D\whateverdecal"). You can then pick and choose whether you want to fly a "weathered, and historically accurate" plane or, perhaps, a "fresh-off-the-Lend-Lease-ship, and possibly speculative" skin, as the spirit moves you. As it just so happens, there IS an alternative skin, exactly like that, available to you free, right here -- http://combatace.com/topic/73817-sfp1-p-39q/ It is based on Wrench's P-400 skin for Wolf257's P-39 (so it's still "all in the family," so to speak). And all the stars are decals, so they're nice and crisp. Use the above guide to extract the texture folder (feel free to throw away the rest of it) and see how you like having the choice. DARoot [incidentally, and FYI for you other P-39 fans, the A-Team came up with a nifty, simple way to remove the outer wing guns on THEIR version of the P-39Q, through simple "RemoveBit" text edits in _Data.ini (and deleting the //Internal Guns ----- entries). Some P-39 versions had only 2 wing MG, rather than 4 (and different gun types as well -- more "historical accuracy"...). I don't think I can post their edits here without permission. So, just letting you know about it. And, of course, THEIR P-39s offer even more "alternative Russian skins," if you happen to have any of their versions. See? No need to ask the Mod Author to "fix" something, when with a bit of practice, you can usually "do-it-yourself" and "have it your way"].

Sometimes, Life can just be weird, ya know? You download somethin' and try it out, and who knows what you might get? Example -- [Oooh, X-Ray Vision! Perfect for shooting the pilot!] Yeah, it's a decal-related thing, I've seen it before.... This one really floored me, however -- Good thing we enjoy tweaking this sim, Eh? It's sorta required .... DARoot

Very Good, Panama Red. Actually, it's very simple. The _Data.ini was calling for bomber crew figures that were not installed properly, so the Game Engine substituted some that it thought were "close enough," with hilarious results. This is what it's supposed to look like -- And does, when all the bits are present and installed correctly. Here's another fun one -- [They tell us the bombers are supposed to be "AI-Only," but, do we listen?] This one is, however, by far my all-time favorite, since I see it all the time -- [Er... What gunsight might that be, perchance?] This is just fun stuff. Nothing serious. All can be fixed (thankfully...). DARoot