Crawford

16 hours ago, VonS said:

Usually it's just simpler to paste a link to the original post, but I am nonetheless flattered to see you ventriloquating on my behalf Crawford. 

Cheers all and happy posting in various voices,

Don't pull my leg.

Everything can be. I have my own "Knowledge Base", consisting of text files under names recognizable to me, and usually the authors of the saved quotes are not indicated there. Sometimes these files come in handy as answers to "frequently asked questions"

Anyway, all credit to you, of course. I don’t need other people’s laurels, because my own laurels will last me for the rest of my life.

So you took offense anyway?

Hi Chugster,

have now double-checked the Options.ini file that resides in the main user directory for SF2 and there are two entries, at the bottom - that are maybe worth tinkering with so that they point to another drive. Default values there are:

[Mods]
ModsEnabled=TRUE
Directory=C:\Users\Yourusername\Saved Games\ThirdWire\StrikeFighters2
Editors=StrikeFighters2

[ScreenShots]
Directory=C:\Users\Yourusername\Saved Games\ThirdWire\StrikeFighters2\ScreenShots
Format=JPG

Might be worth setting the directory for those two entries from "C:\" to "D:\," or really any drive that you commonly use. Then save the Options.ini file - and have the user directory "StrikeFighters2" folder in the correct directory/path. Load up SF2 to test, and if all of your mods./aircraft are visible in the in-sim. menu, this indicates that the new drive path works.

13 hours ago, GKABS said:

I think it is just Crawford installed model as it works great with me.

Well, I do not know ...    I have this glitch manifests itself, even when the shadow settings are set to Unlimited. Perhaps the problem in my ancient system? ...

if this nuisance exists only with me, it does not matter. It's time to update the video card.

In general, I apologize for a false alarm.

P.S. Once again, sorry for the annoying misunderstanding! This is entirely my oversight, even the system has nothing to do with it. The fact is that when I played with the skin, adding stickers, I needed to start the game quickly. Therefore, I tested a Bayraktar in FE2. This module loads much faster. But the FE2 engine is somewhat weaker than the SF2 series, which has more recent updates. I just forgot about it. Now that I've placed the Bayraktar in SF2 everything works great and there are no shadow issues.

Another good shots, which shows that stencils (obviously, stickers) on the aileron really have, as well as on tail rudders. The factory shield on the ending of the wing is also visible.

48 minutes ago, GKABS said:

Thanks a gain added as to be fixed next update.

This picture shows that warning stencils are also on the rudders, fuselage (left side) and wings. Presumably - on the ailerons. It can be seen that identification marks are also used on the wings.

3 hours ago, GKABS said:

I will take these in consideration when making the next update.

I'm looking forward to it. If this helps to speed up the development of the Bayraktar update, I will add that in the existing download the files GK-BAYRAKTAR-TB2.LOD and GK-BAYRAKTAR-TB2_LOD2.LOD are the same (in theory, _LOD2 should weigh less)

In the folder with the drone there are two different TGAs for the propeller  (TB_SlowPropSpin and TB2_FastPropSpin ), but the LOD uses only one .

National insignia on the fin

The shape of the shield in its lower part is different from the State Emblem, but on many aircraft of the Ukrainian Air Force the State Emblem is depicted. This is Ukraine, baby 

Well, I downloaded this drone and tried it in the game. What can I say? This is truly a fantastic model!

Thank you GCABS for a great job!

But, of course, there are small differences from the prototype.

As you can see, there are a little more stencils on the skin (alas, I don’t know what is written there, but at this scale it is permissible to simply imitate).

And in the Ukrainian version, the upper red stencil on the beams in Ukrainian: And in the Ukrainian version, the upper red stencil on the beams in Ukrainian:

НЕБЕЗПЕЧНО ПРОПЕЛЕР

DANGER PROPELLER

Interestingly, there are Bayraktars with a three-bladed propeller.

Happy New Year to all brothers at canvas wings!  :)

18 hours ago, RUSTYMORLEY said:

Ah Well.......... I can only continue to dream that one day my desire will be fulfilled. As to when..... is anybody's guess. 

Why not? It is quite possible that someone will come up with a bright idea to create a new model of the "Walfisch" for FE. Now we have to take our hats off to Stephen, because with Geezer gone, he is actually the only Modder who creates models for FE. From what I understand, Stephen has quite a few plans on his list, but he only has two hands. In addition, he does not like very much when he is "kicked in the back" and being rushed. .

On 17.12.2021 at 9:38 PM, RUSTYMORLEY said:

I assume this is a model for use with First Eagles 2.  Sadly I am still stuck with first generation offerings.

In vain do you assume so. This is a fairly old model created as an addition to the 1-st generation game.

Not perfect, of course. But in three versions: the early "Walfisch" (without a course machine gun), then the version used by Richthofen ( a field mod with an asynchronous machine gun firing over the propeller) and - a later version with a synchronous machine gun.

9 hours ago, Stephen1918 said:

Are you saying that I should stop uploading files because they're made for a slower computer?

Is my opinion so valuable to you? No, on the contrary, I only said about my approach to this issue and that I have a slow computer. That is, the "perfect" load includes something that works quickly in my configuration, but at the same time, nothing prevents me from showing a more "rounded" higher poly version as an additional option.

All difference in the way. You don't want showing off how much detail you can make. In turn, I consider it normal for any moderator - show how much details he can make. The main thing is that the frame-rate on slow PC does not suffer with my approach.

But, of course, you are free to do how you think. And, naturally, I didn't tell you any "stop".

4 hours ago, Stephen1918 said:

I make everything to work well on my machine. For me, playing the game is more important than showing off how much detail I can make. I include as much detail as I can without slowing down my computer too much, and that's  what I upload. Of course, when you make yours, you can make it the way you want.

Why did you get so angry? As always, no one forces you to do something contrary to your principles. "I'm an artist, I see it that way!" (c) is a fundamental rule.
And, of course, IF I do mine, I will do it the way I want. For what is the point of making a detailed model and not showing it to anyone, because "my machine" does not produce a sufficient frame rate.

On 15.12.2021 at 10:19 PM, Stephen1918 said:

The file size is much larger that I like, I'll try to bring the size down.

Is there a need for this?

Not everyone has preserved such ancient PCs as mine, and the rivet counters would have rejoiced in the abundance of details. ))

If you remember, we talked about this when you were preparing your gorgeous Triplane for release. You have removed some detail so that those with lower-end systems to be able to enjoy the game.

Quote

Do I want to look at the plane, or do I want to play the game? (с)

But you can go the other way. For example, include a "heavier" high-poly LOD in the download, but add the following Note in the Installation Instructions:

Quote

 

===========================================

A frame-rate friendly option for those with older hardware is to use the Next level of Detail Model as the primary external model. This simply involves changing the first line in the SopwithTriplane.ini from this:

[LOD001]

Filename = SopwithTriplane_HR.LOD <--- Higher resolution

 

to that:

 

[LOD001]

Filename = SopwithTriplane.LOD <--- 1.06 MB

 

Please take advantage of this option should you experience frame-rate issues.

===========================================

 

49 minutes ago, RUSTYMORLEY said:

Please, Please, Please.

Would be so nice to have this gracing the skies in FE . !!!

We already have it.

True, this is an outdated model by Capun (the A-Team Skunkworks) with an ugly rear gunner. Of course, we could use a more realistic modern model, but where can we get it? 

13 hours ago, VonS said:

The Balilla had slightly worse performance than the SVA5 (about 10 kph slower top speed and slightly slower rate of climb).

The Balilla was fast, but inert, clumsy and difficult to fly. In fact, it did not correspond to the tactics of "dogfighting" on the turns that prevailed then. The plane sharply lost altitude on turns and could hardly get out of the dive -  this became the cause of many disasters.
And if we add a very capricious engine to this "bouquet", then the picture will become quite sad... Fortunately, in FE our engines are always reliable 

13 hours ago, VonS said:

Surprising, however, is that the Balilla seems to have been produced longer than the SVA5 - well into the 1920s.

 This is so, but not quite so.   As for the Balilla, after WWI it was produced only by the Poles in 1921-1924. The Polish copy turned out to be even more unsuccessful than the original, so only 57 aircraft were built instead of the originally ordered 100. Already in 1925 the Balillas began to be removed from service and replaced with the SPAD-51. The last Balilla were written off by the Poles in 1927.

On 13.12.2021 at 11:13 PM, Wilches said:

Hi Sir! I´m almost sure that this plane came across your mind one day. It´s badly needed.

Nice plane, but ... a loser plane. An example of how competent PR can make candy even from shit.

However, the modest participation of "Balilla" in the Soviet-Polish war was perhaps the brightest page in the history of this aircraft.

http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fww1/a1.html

http://www.airwar.ru/other/draw/ansaldoa1_aiv.html

On 12.12.2021 at 5:34 PM, Stephen1918 said:

I used a two man crew so there would be enough room for the gunner to move. Otherwise his range of motion is too limited.

Yes, this is understandable, in principle. Another thing is that firing from the Machine-gun cart at planes is a futile occupation. ;)
When we talked about the carriage and so on, we meant a Tatchanka on the march.

Apparently, the Tatchanka in First Eagles can only play the role of an entourage, like the same cavalry, for example.

On 12.12.2021 at 5:04 PM, Gepard said:

Two horse tatchankas were as common as Troikas or Quadrigas. It depended a lot wheter enough horses were available. In the time of civil war both sides used what they had. Of course a quadriga tatchanka looked much better.

The crew were always 3 men. One driver( is this the correct term?), one shooter and one for the ammo belt to prevent ammo jam.

Polish Tatchanka

Soviet Tatchanka used as Flak.

 

You're right. But the photo is not the topic.

This is the late 1920s and 1930s, not the Soviet-Polish campaign

On 30.10.2021 at 6:05 PM, Stephen1918 said:

Since it fires to the rear, it couldn't be used as a tank in First Eagles,...

Of course, in the war it happened in different ways. But "shooting to the rear" is a mistaken stereotype. In fact, the cart served only for the quick transfer of machine gun units. When approaching the battlefield, the crew removed the machine gun from the cart and manually moved it to position. Shooting directly from the cart was provided in exceptional cases, since in this case the horses fell under enemy fire.

And in this picture, the elevator control cables, which I mentioned above, are clearly visible.

By the way, an interesting version of the sight on this French-built Russian Nieuport-21

On 09.12.2021 at 10:57 PM, Stephen1918 said:

 

Stephen, the carriage of the Machine-gun cart usually consisted of three people, and there were usually four horses. Although, of course, there could be three horses, two or even one, but this is already an exception to the general rule. ))

On 07.12.2021 at 8:06 PM, Eugene2 said:

Screenshots with "Work In Progress" skins - Albatros D.V, Albatros D.Va, Fokker D.II, Pfalz D.XII and re-edited SPAD VII.

Your skins are always a work of art. Of course, I'm can't wait to try them on in the game.