SupGen

Ah, Zipper skins, I've been waiting to hear someone say that. Can't wait. As far as the Data.inis go, I've been comparing the F-104C_61 to the stock F-104G and, as far as positions go, they are about 98% the same; some minor differences in wing stations (as you would expect; the G's wings were a little bigger), in fact the stock F-104G cockpit position seems to work fine in the F-104C, too. (The pilots seat position is exactly the same, so why not?) There are some minor things, the fuel tank layout is wrong, the stall and landing speeds seem much too low (maybe for the AI pilots?), but like I said, minor. The animations are all the same, and you can make the nose wheel steerable the same way: CastoringNodeName=lg_front_piston. The one thing I've noticed is most of the entries relating to the flight model are much more detailed; here is one entry from the right wing of the G model: CL0MachTableNumData=7 CL0MachTableDeltaX=0.40 CL0MachTableStartX=0.00 CL0MachTableData=0.973,1.000,1.104,1.269,0.970,0.743,0.604 And the same entry from the C: CL0MachTableNumData=24 CL0MachTableDeltaX=0.10 CL0MachTableStartX=0.00 CL0MachTableData=0.977,0.979,0.983,0.990,1.000,1.014,1.031,1.054,1.083,1.083,1.301,1.246,1.230,1.203,1.125,1.027,0.948,0.883,0.826,0.773,0.728,0.688,0.652,0.620 Now I don't know that much about FMs, I couldn't tell you what each of those numbers means, but the increase in number of data points deliniating the same thing would seem to indicate a more "refined" flight model, with smaller transitions. Notice I didn't say correct, because I don't know, however I would be hesitant to just "swap out" things because it might be felt that the plane is too agile or responsive, as I've seen suggested; I'm not sure what we might be losing. There are also entries relating to Stalls, etc. that have no corallary in the G models FM entries. This is also true in the Engine section. I don't know if these "extras" were just not modelled in SFP1 or if this is more "refinement". In short (Hah!), this part of the Data.ini needs a Flight Model expert. Streak, one should never regret not being a drone.

Well, this is just my opinion, but I don't think TK started this whole thing as a way to make money, at least not to get rich. He used to work for ED, right? He probably made a decent salery and had a fair amount of job security, what he didn't have was creative freedom. I mean, look at the time period he chose; I think the big name development houses skip this period because their "focus groups" show more interest in WWll or ultra-modern FA-18, Raptor, PakFa, helmet mounted sights, can't miss missiles, etc. The period StrikeFighters covers is unique in the history of air combat because all those "ultra-modern" things (BVR and missile combat in general) were in their infancy, the jet fighter was "coming of age" and beginning to live up to it's potential. Jet combat prior to that was "WWll Redux", only faster. Again, this is only me, but I think SF is as much a "Labor of Love" for TK as anything else. One other point, Streak, I think TK's got a lot more in common with you than you might think; what aircraft has been in this series from the very beginning yet still benefits from updates, (the latest patch added slotted tailplanes for the F-4N), DLCs, DLC skinpacks, etc. Yessir, the Phabulous Phantom. In its purest form, and especially before NA, StrikeFighters IS Rhinotown, USA, and I think that's how TK likes it. Everything else is supporting cast.

Thanks Paulo, I'm definitely going to check that out.

My condolences to you and yours.

No, that means you have to change Exported=FALSE to Exported=TRUE.

I'm using this right now and it looks okay: Position=0.00,5.781,0.616

Not only can you drop flaps at 550kts, the leading edge flaps are linked to them. Sweet!

I think the slats are open on takeoff by default. I'm using this temporarily just to see how they work; they open and close between 128 and 140 kts. [LeftSlat] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE CLiftdc=-0.0403 CDdc=0.0023 Cmdc=-0.0025 DeltaStallAlpha=1.59 AreaRatio=1.006 DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_AERODYNAMIC_LOAD Setting[1].Angle=15.0 Setting[1].DeployValue=51.47 //Setting[1].RetractValue=102.9 Setting[1].RetractValue=72.9 MaxDeflection=15.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=4.0 AnimationID=9 ModelNodeName=slat_L SmoothDeployment=TRUE [RightSlat] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE CLiftdc=-0.0403 CDdc=0.0023 Cmdc=-0.0025 DeltaStallAlpha=1.59 AreaRatio=1.006 DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_AERODYNAMIC_LOAD Setting[1].Angle=15.0 Setting[1].DeployValue=51.47 //Setting[1].RetractValue=102.9 Setting[1].RetractValue=72.9 MaxDeflection=15.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=4.0 AnimationID=8 ModelNodeName=slat_R SmoothDeployment=TRUE I'm pretty sure the original values were fairly close to correct; the aircraft had a fairly small, highly loaded wing; with the original values they should open/close around 190/200 kts. when you figure they had a top speed in the 350 kt. range, that's probably about right.

Yeah, that's WaltBJ in the link I posted above; according to him (and several other sources) you can drop flaps (to the first notch) at up to 550KIAS; of course, you can't leave 'em out there forever, but it'll definitely boost your turn rate.

Try enabling the flaps on the S-99; aside from the effed-up pivot point, (I guess that's why they're commented out) they buck like broncos. And I'd hate to have to adjust shockstroke etc., in every aircraft in my install.

March2012 had definite Control.ini issues. Check the KB. Onboard graphics chips are not sufficent to run the Iceland terrain. You should probably go to a later patch, and definitely get a dedicated graphics card.

Mac, I think the Zippers were another plane that got a bad rep from people who didn't know how to fly it properly, check this out: http://www.916-starfighter.de/Sounding%20off%20about%20the%20Zipper.htm . Lots of other good stuff at the site. A lot of aircraft don't respond well to the "yank and crank, pull harder on the pole" method of ACM, the F-104 was definitely one of them. Hell, "everybody" knows the F-4, for instance, turns like a brick; and it does if you just yank on the stick and try to follow a MiG-17 through a level turn. Put it into the vertical though, and fight the Rhinos' fight and it was very often a different story. Aircraft lose energy quickly in sustained hard maneuvering, having a high thrust to weight ratio allows you to maintain energy and therefore speed, and as we all know, Speed is Life! Anyway, click that link and enjoy yourself.

They all work except the PD. Try them on the ground. They're actually a brake chute for landing. The entries for them are at the bottom of the Data.ini files.

These are real nice. Nice skins, the F-104C has the missile catamaran as part of the .lod, what's not to like?

Thanks, DA, I figured it out. I have my mod folders on my F: Drive so I have to have a duplicate in C:\SavedGames with an Options.ini pointing to the folder on F:. The method I've been using to prevent Patches/DLCs from overwriting everything is to change the pointer to C: while I update. Worked flawlessly for the new patch, once I ran all the .exes I changed the pointer back to F: and, Voila! May2013. The DLCs seem to act just like other Objects/Aircraft; they only generate the first time you run the .exe. It's actually an advantage; I can just extract and install only the ones I want in any particular mod folder. Pretty cool.

Two things: One, the "in the air, near base thing. If you noticed, eburger enabled the "Turn off lens flare" on the Options page, in game, I think with just edits in the .ini. Perhaps this could be done the same way? Two, I picked up the F-4N DLC; when I installed it, it only installed to SF2NA. All the Version.inis showed it, but I had to manualy drop the Main.ini into all my other mod folders. Any idea why?

You don't need decals; in the skin folders with no D folder, the Decal.inis call for "stock" decals: Insignia and SovietNum. These are in the games' Cat files.

Okey doke, I'll have to be patient.

Ic, you can't rename the .EXE; you've got to make a copy of it and rename that. It's freezing because you no longer have a game called StrikeFighters2/Vietnam on your computer.

Updated to May2013, no problem here.

Do they show up as EARLY_WARNING missions?

Thank you DA! I was just about to make the same mistake.

What did you change the skin names to? I think they should be AA-6.bmp.

How much do we know about the EARLY_WARNING mission in single missions? I know it's not an option for player flyables; I just want the mission to generate; in other words, for the aircraft to be on the map, doing it's job. An alternative title for this thread was, "What's the E-2C got that other AEW aircraft don't got"? I've got both a DAT EC-121K (NAVY) and RC-121D (AIR FORCE) in the game; added the E-2C DetectSystem statements to the Data.inis and tried both with the stock avionics (Avionics60.DLL and a ground mapping radar), the EasyAvionics from the E-767 uploaded recently, and Avionics70.DLL and a modified F-15 radar. If NavalMap is true and it's after the E-2Cs start date I always get an E-2C AEW mission; whether NavalMap is true or false, no matter what the start date, I sometimes get one of the 121s as a NAVAL_SEARCH mission but never as AEW. Anyone got any ideas?

Yeah, my favorite target, too.