snowburn

I wonder if a camera pod could be modded into the game. I remember those photo reconnaissance missions in F-19 Stealth Fighter. The recon mission would be completed as soon as you reach the waypoint, but having a camera pod (and maybe a TV display) could add some extra flavor to it.

Also, I'm sure he's still down in his dungeon, monitoring every post made on this forum.

Be prepared to find a website that looked outdated even by 2000s standards, run by a senile administrator who seems like he hasn’t touched it in decades.

I love it! is there any news on this project?

I wonder if it would be legal to create some kind of "DLL patcher" for the original game. The idea would be to have a standalone executable that takes something like Avionics60.dll (or another SF2 DLL) as input, analyzes/decompiles it, replaces the incorrect or problematic parts, and then generates a new patched DLL. In other words, rather than modifying the original DLL manually every time, the tool would automate the process of applying known fixes and produce a patched version of the library. I'm wondering whether something like this would be legally feasible, assuming the tool itself does not distribute any original SF2 code or DLLs, and the user has to provide their own copy of the original library.

Any news on this? I've been thinking about the possibility of building some kind of telemetry/instrumentation tool that could hook into the Aircraft Objects DLL and expose the aircraft's internal flight-model state. If we could get access to the values being used internally by the flight model — things like airspeed, AoA, sideslip, G forces, angular rates, engine output, control inputs, forces and moments, etc. — it might be possible to automate a large part of the process of studying and eventually recreating the flight model. For example, the tool could load a particular aircraft and run a series of controlled tests while changing specific values in its _DATA.ini: change CLift / CD / Cm-related values change AoA tables change Mach scalars change control-surface effectiveness change engine parameters change mass and inertia change damping/stability parameters Then it could automatically run the aircraft through a predefined set of flight conditions and record the resulting telemetry. Something along the lines of: Aircraft_DATA.ini ↓ SF2 / Aircraft Objects DLL ↓ Instrumentation / Telemetry hook ↓ Flight test ↓ CSV / binary telemetry ↓ Analysis / graphs The really interesting part would be being able to run the same test repeatedly while changing only one parameter at a time. That would let us build a sort of empirical map of how SF2's flight model actually responds to its INI parameters. For example, we could start with something very simple: Spawn an aircraft at a fixed altitude and speed. Set throttle and control inputs to known values. Record the aircraft's state over time. Change only one aerodynamic parameter. Run the exact same test again. Compare the two telemetry streams. From there, we could gradually determine things such as: CL vs AoA CD vs AoA Cm vs AoA Mach effects control-surface authority induced drag damping engine thrust vs altitude/Mach mass and inertia effects stall and post-stall behaviour effects of damage and stores on the flight model Eventually, this could provide enough information to build an independent flight-model implementation rather than simply trying to reproduce the equations from disassembly. The ideal result would be something like an SF2 flight-test harness: ┌───────────────────────────────┐ │ Aircraft DATA.ini │ └───────────────┬───────────────┘ ↓ SF2 Aircraft Object ↓ Flight Model Tick ↓ ┌─────────┴─────────┐ │ │ Inputs Outputs │ │ └─────────┬─────────┘ ↓ Telemetry ↓ CSV / graphs ↓ Flight-model analysis Once enough of the internal state was understood, the same test suite could then be run against a reimplementation of the flight model and the results compared directly against SF2. That might actually be a more manageable way of reconstructing the flight model: instead of trying to understand the entire thing from the disassembly at once, we could treat the original SF2 flight model as a black box, instrument it, and progressively turn it into a measurable specification. Given the recent work on the Aircraft Objects DLL and the discovery of additional INI tokens, classes and functions, I wonder if something along these lines would now be technically feasible. Even a relatively simple first version that could hook the aircraft object and dump its state once per simulation tick would probably be extremely useful.

What a coincidence! A few days ago, I was wondering about the steps involved in creating a reimplementation of the SF2 flight model. One of those steps would be making an .ini validator, something like: A few years ago, I also made a C# Aircraft_Data inspector. Maybe I can dig up my old code and try to fix its bugs.

im sure 90% of the "default airplanes coming back" happens when the game tries to spawn a Red side aircraft of a country or timeframe and didnt found any match.

Tierra del Fuego has gone Hot Aden 30mm beats Magic 1? Near collision between Hunter and Huanquero Bonus Track: Armed Uruguayan BO-105 attacking trucks in Rio de la Plata

BAM Río Gallegos uses the same runway as Aeropuerto Internacional Piloto Civil Norberto Fernández. In 1980, it hosted the first trans-Antarctic flight from Río Gallegos to Auckland. Later, in 1987, this became a regular route operated with Boeing 747 aircraft. Sadly, the route was cancelled in 2014. https://www.marambio.aq/vueloaerolineas.html https://www.aviacionline.com/tbt-el-vuelo-transpolar-de-aerolineas-argentinas-en-1987 (links in spanish, sorry)

Great!! i hope you can share it

I think the only missing plane will be: DH.115 Vampire dual seat, maybe a single seater DH-110 with Chilean Air Force skin can be a temporal replacement

Sorry, i didnt knew how to explain. I dont know if the .LOD format is owned by TW or it can be used without paying royalties. If the .lod format can be used without paying it would be nice to have a new flightsim using some community assets, the quantity and quality of some of them is very good and superior to some comercial proyects. A new game (commercial or open source) 100% compatible with the currents assets, datafiles, and so on will have a gigantic amount of user generated content, i wonder if it would be legally possible. If it was, it can also be used on personal projects, like the one i did following this great initial tutorial from Why465 (creator of the excelent Tiny Combat Arena) making a semi realistic flight mode in unity (great engine but not the best for a flight simulator, it lacks 64bits transforms and it can make problemas son big worlds, larger than 20x20kms) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOSNYa2RwLM&list=PLdjDhgESYQQaXgtz03l2rqDnPxVyqIZlY&index=2) I made a few improvements (will upload a video soon) but im still years appart of making the 10% of that game, im sure this group have much better developers than me. Im not trying to stole nobody work!! i was just wondering if a company or group can use the content saved on that format (excluding TW content and having permisions from each modder) Sorry for my english!

Hello everyone!! I was reading the old discution about "hacking" the avionics DLLs and i have a question... how legal would be making al alternative open source game 100% compatible with third party LODs and Terrain Tiles? im sure TW will never realease the source code of SF2 and his artwork is protected by law, so the idea was to use the community models (with each modder permission), the .INI datafiles, Decals, and so on.. Something like this... step 1- Basic flight model in 3rd person view / animations / decals / _data.INI step 2- Terrain Rendering, Target Areas, Object Spawn, Airbases, Parked Aircrafts step 3- Cockpit view with functional gauges step 4- Weapons, Load limits, years, MER, TER, Rails, functional AG Dumb bombs Thanks