Lexx_Luthor

mmm.... I don't know, I never had that in my PF .... ...I use the stock ThirdWire MiG-17F, but add the PF and PFU noses, add some avionics -- for now, F-94 avionics and radar for PF, and Pasko's PFU avionics for PFU. I now use streakeagle's or Fubar's "hardcore" -17F data file flight model (forgot who did that).

Okay, my nucs don't change anything in the Enviro file, and in the latest updated nucs, I have taken out the optional Enviro changes as they caused confusion -- they were simply not required and I shouldn't have put them in. That's when I started doing the seperate Siberian Sun mod, which is an Enviro meatgrinder. If I recall, the nucs require only one FlightEngine variable change -- FarClipDistance -- and it does not have to be nearly as large as I make it (see above).

here... Element[02].ElementType=HOLD_EMITTER Element[02].ElementName=SkyGlow-KT030 Element[02].StartTime=10.0 Element[02].StartTimeDeviation=0.0 Element[02].EjectTime=0.1 Element[02].EjectTimeDeviation=0.0 Also, disabling this should let you decrease the radical FarClipDistance=5000000.0 to something more traditional.

Ya, I've totally changed my install Enviro, among other things, way way bizzaro. What are some of the things it messes with that may be eased up? I always hope for feedback too improve things for others. All I get so far is applause, reminds me of the RAF Firestreak missle program with perfect test firings and nobody learned a thing, or so I read, until the tests started acting "normal." PS:: eraser -- just thought of something the other day...most simmers fly in daytime, but my nuc's have this huge SkyGlow which is really made for strategic night ops. If you want, try disabling the SkyGlow for daytime missions, see how it looks, better or worse. I just tried it, and I am going to disable it for my day missions. To disable, easiest way is to set the StartTime greater than the EjectTime. Just set StartTime=10 should take care of it. The SkyGlow is supposed to simulate the glow in the night sky visible to perhaps a thousand kilometers, and this requires a major change that may be one of USAFMTL's things he don't want messed with. SkyGlow is not needed in daytime, and the whole thing looks *alot* better without it during daytime. I didn't think of this before. Dopey Dope.

Clouds...yes I was wondering about that for visibility distances. Defensive gunnery formation. Refueling Clouds None of them are done with significant manuevering, nor inches from wingtips.

Yough Man I just got off from work. Later

Czech is cool. I heard about the Stress Team, is that correct? Colorful MiGs ~> http://www.samolet.co.uk/czmigs.html The brick wall painted landing gear well knocked me out. Two Stresses hit each other mid-air...I never saw the reason for close formation flying when its not needed (like in WW2 bomber groups for defensive fire, or air-refueling, etc...). We just lost a Blue Angel F-18 over here, but collide with trees.

mmm, if I recall, you Export the heightfield HFD file as a bmp file -- basically a picture. Then you can paint pixels on the picture...the colour defines the height. Then using TE you Import from bmp ... this loads your bmp file as heightfield. Experiment. Try painting a wide single colour stripe on the bmp. After importing it, the TE elevation display will show all the same height in the wide path you painted. Basically, you just cut a wide constant elevation path on the map. Tip, always keep a backup folder of any terrain you are working with. You know why.

ewwh, if you are talking about flatten specific areas, its not so simple. You can export the heightmap to bmp and edit to taste in a PhotoPaint program. Polak taught me how to do that, and its not easy. You can tone down the height variations across the map by adjusting the height scale in TE when you import the DEM, that's what I though you were asking.

gillig:: Is there a way to flatten terrain? Its right there in front of you in TE, but if ya bump up the old thread, I'll tell ya there.

kukulino:: I found it some time ago. Look in all the Cabina folders for Cabina_MiG-21PF.lod and Cabina_MiG-21PFM.lod PF Canopy open.....PF Canopy closed. I found this and PFM side opening cockpit hiding in one of the MiG Cabina folders. I never heard them before. I was stunned. Fantastic work. Just amazing. The PF/PFM radar boot is real nice, long 3D shape. When you sit close enough to the panel, you can't use the radar unless you look down into the 3D cockpit and look into the boot. THIS IS COOL.

Congratulations kukulino. To poast pics, sign up for PhotoBucket here ~> http://photobucket.com/ They make it easy to poast pics on webboards, and they don't eat the bandwidth of the webboard!! Like this... This is with new Environment and lighting effects, the images last page seem cartoonish to me now.

Found it....17PF Nose http://www.avsim.com/ ..... goto File Library -- StrikeFighters Mods, Utilities and Patches -- To make it *easy* , Change View from Normal Mode to Scan Mode -- this lists all 370 downloads in only 4 pages with no pictures. Macaddie's -17PF nose is buried deep inside More MiGs[ by Lucas Sexton, on page 3 in Scan Mode. kuk:: hehe yes....Pitchfork, ouch

P-51Doras and P-47Doras made prime air superiority fighters despite, nay, because of their almost bomber~esque mass. If the Ussian Air Force needed an air superiority fighter in 1960, particularly one with unmatched speed and range, they would have turned to the existing F-105 and field it with...heaven forbid...Hysterical Incorrect Loadout including racks packed full of dependable and reliable AIM-9B Sidewinders as demonstrated high over China in 1958. One of the most effective combat tactical support aircraft was the Su-7B and beyond, although the original Su-7 was designed as pure guns/rocket only frontline tactical air superiority fighter. T'was very popular, and maybe about 60 of these were fielded before the basic design was molded into the tactical strike role in response to the F-105, and MiG-21 chosen as tac fighter instead, a somewhat wrong choice in my opinion.

mmm, make sure any defined rocket pods also have their rockets defined for them in the weapon file. I don't think this is what you are worried about, but its something that stumped solid me when I first played with adding rocket pods to my personal weapon file...I "forgot" to add the rockets.

Hawker:: No Copy and Paste the game folder as many times as you like, wherever you like, re-name them whoever you like. But, I do suggest installing a fresh virgin un-Patched, un-Modded, game install. Keep it unPatched, unModded, and unUsed until you may need it. You will never again have to install from CD. My working StrikeFighter game folder is simply...D:\SF ...hehe Most people still have their game in... C:\Programs\.....etc\ThudWire\etc...\.. \StrikeFighter\etc...\etc...\endless subfolders\etc...confused yet? ... all games seem to do this. TK knows his sims need seperate installs for all the 3rd Party moddatons, so he keeps it easy to make backups.

NBell:: You just made me think, a conversation like this is rapidly becoming impossible for a World War 1 sim webboard. Thanks for sharing your stuff.

Woe that looks nice. You know, one of the great pains an SF experimenter faces is the tiring arm work needed to move the mouse between the widely scattered menu buttons. I changed my SF menu so the game starts with the mouse in screen center, just click and the mouse is already on Single Mission (my most used game function), click that and the mouse is already on ACCEPT button. Click that and the mouse is already on the FLY button. No mouse movement needed to get into the mission for 99% of my game testing. All my EXIT buttons are in the same place a few pixels beneath the above button set -- just a few clicks and I get out of the game menu without moving a single mouse.

Nicholas Bell:: I don't know if it will stop the problem, but be sure to edit the HAWK missile to enable TOJ. Perhaps not losing lock will stop the self-destruct. It was our ace up the sleeve. Jam us, please - then we don't need to maintain lock. (note to self - remember to blink ECM when flying <G>) That's a good tip, however I don't want HOJ for early SAMs. But some trick or hack might work here with some creative thought bubbles. Solid expanding flame.....in the second pic, we see a game engine compromise for simplicity (I *think*)-- the flame gets longer in direct porportion to the missile speed, causing the small flame particles to be visibly distinct, so it may be a bit too long here. Shucks, at launch, the entire flame is a round ball, as I didn't get the particle ejection velocity to work here with missile exhaust like it works for afterburner exhausts. I might could try again, perhaps look more closely at how TK does it. As the speed gets higher, and the flame gets longer, the particles begin to seperate. Below you can see the first particle behind the missile and its distinct from the others. This is a crazy shot, a direct hit in another millisecond or so. The altitude is 14km and the V-750 model's solid first stage is still attached because here I am using it for the liquid single stage V-300. Polak poasted a pic of the real thing he/she is working on at the ThudWire... Polak's 3D model and skin ~> http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.p...54&start=24 I suggest using the stock Flash.tga and experimenting with particle time duration, size, and colour. I'm using my own flash-like tga file. I could upload it but honestly, my effects are made for long range visibility (100km or so) of many dozens of these things visible from the player's cockpit for strategic operations in day and night -- the compromises I make to save framerates are not always close-up cameo screenshot friendly. ** I could add more flame particles for better static screenshot, but I budget everything in the sim for framerates and grafix particle resources, and the just visible distinct particles seen in the long flame pic above are never noticeable in strategic operations gameplay when in the cockpit -- if the missile is close, it flies too fast to really see the flame in detail -- if the missile is far away, the player sees only a slowly moving bright yellow hairline 50km away -- etc... stuff like that. **** I get a rather noticeable round flame ball at launch on this missile because I'm launching almost vertically at very low acceleration -- about 3 gees -- so it takes a few seconds for the missile to pick up speed and get a nice long flame. From a player's cockpit at 14km altitude none of this really noticeable, so I'm okay here.

herman:: Just now getting into SAM experiments, and I've seem to have found that ECM can cause a missile to lose track, and when that happens the missile self-destructs by detonating the warhead, even just after launch. This is a HUGE problem with nucular warhead SAMs. That might be what you are seeing. Does the target aircraft have good ECM?

I may have seen something strange, in the stock desert terrain TARGETS file.... Whenever TK puts more than one SAM site in a target area, there seems to be another non-sam related object between the SAM site declarations (I may have missed some target areas). The game seemed to ignore SAM sites not seperated by another type of object, but when I inserted an object between the SAM declarations, everything showed up. I didn't check WoV and I don't have WoE, just the SF.

allen:: hehe it gets alot worse. Lacking F-14s, NAVY might could convert A-6s into the modern version of the Missileer subsonic standoff fleet defender with Phoenix+ missiles. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ : : Originally, the Navy had planned to meet this FAD ((Fleet Air Defence)) requirement with the Douglas F6D-1 Missileer. The F6D-1 was a subsonic aircraft that looked a lot like a scaled-up F3D Skyknight. It was to be powered by two 10,000 lb.s.t. Pratt & Whitney TF30-P-2 turbofans, and was to carry a three-man crew (pilot, co-pilot, and weapons system operator). The Missileer was to be capable of remaining on patrol for up to six hours, tracking targets at long range using its powerful Hughes pulsed-Doppler track-while-scan radar and attacking threats with its six long-range Bendix XAAM-10 Eagle air-to-air missiles. The Eagle was a massive long-range air-to-air missile with a maximum speed of Mach 4. It was equipped with an advanced pulse-Doppler active radar homer. The warhead of the Eagle could be either conventional or nuclear. The F6D aircraft was considered by the Navy to be too costly and too specialized, and was thought to be too slow to be capable of defending itself once its missiles had been launched. Consequently, the F6D and its Eagle missiles were both cancelled in December of 1960 in the last waning days of the Eisenhower administration. This still left the FAD requirement unfulfilled. : : F-111A ~ http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f111_1.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ You know, anything that looks a lot like a scaled up F3D Skynight would resemble an A-6.

mmm, interesting. In FlightEngine file, play with this value...for the three option blocks. I assume you are trying the high detail settings. DetailMeshSize=10 It *might* work for buildings and trees. I found that this value, doubled if I recall, gives the distance to where terrain hills and mountains cuts off grafix like my contrails and cirrus clouds. Beyond that distance (20km in this case), my sky effects show through the terrain. At significantly higher values, framerates begin suffering however. It also makes a limit (doubled too) to how close any camera view position, including player in cockpit, may approach the north/south map table edge boundary without crashing the game. But that is usually below the Border= setting (default 80km) so the player normally cannot approach the map edge. But I often set the border region negative to test things far off map.

Crusader:: Think about a "fantasy" B-58 strategic strike campaign into Siberia with F-105s having guns and strike abiility stripped and replaced by drop tanks and sidewinder racks for the long range escort role, before F-4C is available, with F-101A (Jaguar 3d model) having been mauled by Su-7 and MiG-21F day fighters. What-if scenarios often require some common sense changes to Hysterical Correct loadout options. Su-24s carry R-60s. A Kingfisher shot down a Zero. Stuka pilot Frank Neubert may have gotten the first air-air kill in World War 2, a possibilty shared with Stanislaw Skalski in a fighter just as slow as a Stuka.

Not the same people. The 3D model rivet counter bullies don't know how to have fun with anything, or anybody. The oddball loadout people have fun with and explore their sims. But, the oddball people who have fun also know they don't need to bully the 3D modders for missile pylons. If they don't know this, they are pylon rivet counters. ....PS: typically, I "forgot" to add earlier, the droppable F-4 drop tank replacement for F-106 doesn't come with pylons that are never seen from the cockpit anyways. I "forgot" because perfect pylons just don't matter compared to something really important like being able to drop tanks.