Leaderboard

Hello guys, I contacted chizh about PROPERLY implementing a Mig 21 into the game. He replied back saying this: -------------------------------------------------------------------- Despite that we extremely busy with helicopters and around issues, we can spend some time for inserting AI MiG-21 if anybody finished it with proper animation and at least basic damages. Although by the highest standards will good to rework model because shape isn’t correct in some parts, for example very incorrect forward part of canopy. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Comeon guys, everyone knows this is a classic. Imgine the movie like scenarios we can make. Considering that bS is lomac's last addon...its now or never. Once ED start working on their new project...who knows when they will bother with lomac again. I searched up the threads and found achlatoon's files: http://www.alegtoon.nl/files/ http://www.alegtoon.nl/files/mig21.zip get it and the model should be right in the first directory. Walmis, I know you are making the F-15 and you are busy with it. But consider adding the good old Mig 21 to the game....one of the famous planes of history. Comeon guys, I wouldn't ask if I knew how to model. Just finish up the damage model as chizh says and the animations too...and atleast let them implement whatever we have so far. We can probably get someone to change the model later on if necessary. Atleast let us get a proper MIG 21 implementation from ED directly. Instead of us messing up the meinit..etc... ED know how to properly model it...they can add the right systems etc. I agree to do the skinning if someone finishes the models. :P And I agree to give you a bribe of 1 full rep for finishing the model as well. :p cheers, Aquarius_varun

So, here it goes, finally ready for release. EDIT: DL in my sig :) enjoy!

Making and Installing Skins in to the CDDS files For this we will make a new CDDS file for the A-10 changing the file size in the CDDS from 1024x1024 to 2048x2048 1 .Down Load Teaka Teaka’s Modman patch http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=16860 and follow the instruction for installation this allows you to install Modman skin packs into the CDDS files 2. Down Load CDDS studio for creating textures CDDS files http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=18234 Install the CDDS studio into the C drive you will do all of your work Creating new CDDS files on the C drive. 3.Down Load all of Mitch Janssen A-10 2048x2048 skin from Lock on Files http://www.lockonfiles.com/index.php you have to put a skin in for each slot you fill .you can make the cdds file with one or all 8 bitmap skin files. I think he has made all of them if not just pick another file that is 2048x2048 rename it to what ever you don’t have and proceed. Make a work folder name for what ever aircraft your working on i.e. A-10-Upgrade no spaces in the name Put all of the bitmaps 24 or TGA files, Bitmaps and TGA should be kept separate thought when making CDDS files, for your new CDDS file in to this folder. Name the files with out the size in the name the naming for the A-10would be A-10-OKRAS-L.bmp A-10-OKRAS-R.bmp A-10-OKRAS-L1.bmp A-10-OKRAS-R1.bmp A-10-OKRAS-L2.bmp A-10-OKRAS-R2.bmp A-10-OKRAS-L3.bmp A-10-OKRAS-R3.bmp A-10-OKRAS-L4.bmp A-10-OKRAS-R4.bmp A-10-OKRAS-L5.bmp A-10-OKRAS-R5.bmp A-10-OKRAS-L6.bmp A-10-OKRAS- R6.bmp A-10-OKRAS-L7.bmp A-10-OKRAS- R7.bmp A-10-OKRAS-L8.bmp A-10-OKRAS- R8.bmp 4.Open the CDDS Studio Left Click on Edit at the top left On the drop down menu left click on Add files the Select image box will open chouse the file you named for the project your working on i.e. A-10-Upgrade Select all of the BMP or TGA file you want to make into the CDDS file. Left click on open The files you selected will now appear in the CDDS studio 5.Left click on the Save as Icon Third from the left looks like a floppy disk save the file as A-10-Upgrade 6.Left click on Edit top left on the drop down Menu Left click on Build CDDS a DOS window will open and list files that are compressed at the end it will ask you to press ant button. 7. Now look in the folder you named A-10-Upgrade you will have a file named A-10-Upgrade and another file named A-10-Upgrade.cdds this is your new CDDS file 8. Take the new A-10-Upgrade.cdds file and place it in C:\Program Files\Ubisoft\Eagle Dynamics\Lock On\Bazar\World 9.Now in C:\Program Files\Ubisoft\Eagle Dynamics\Lock On\Config open the graphic CFG file with Word pad and add common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\A-10-UpGrade.cdds"; where you see it below the new file name must be placed above the old CDDS file name TextureCollections { highFolder = ".\\Bazar\\TempTextures\\"; common = ".\\Bazar\\Terrain\\Surface\\High\\LandTexturesBMP.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\Terrain\\Surface\\High\\LandTexturesTGA.cdds"; spring = ".\\Bazar\\Terrain\\Surface\\High\\LandTexturesSprBMP.cdds"; spring = ".\\Bazar\\Terrain\\Surface\\High\\LandTexturesSprTGA.cdds"; common=".\\Bazar\\Terrain\\Surface\\High\\LandTexturesSumBMP.cdds"; common=".\\Bazar\\Terrain\\Surface\\High\\LandTexturesSumTGA.cdds"; autumn = ".\\Bazar\\Terrain\\Surface\\High\\LandTexturesAutBMP.cdds"; autumn = ".\\Bazar\\Terrain\\Surface\\High\\LandTexturesAutTGA.cdds"; winter = ".\\Bazar\\Terrain\\Surface\\High\\LandTexturesWinBMP.cdds"; winter = ".\\Bazar\\Terrain\\Surface\\High\\LandTexturesWinTGA.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\Terrain\\Surface\\High\\MapTexturesBMP.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\Effects\\EffectTexturesTGA.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\A-10-UpGrade.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\New-F-15.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\TexturesBMP_weapons.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\WorldTexturesTGA2.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\WorldTexturesTGA.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\WorldTexturesBMP2.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\WorldTexturesBMP.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\WorldTexturesBMP1.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\ShipTexturesBMP.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\ShipTexturesTGA.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\CockpitsTexturesBMP.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\CockpitsTexturesTGA.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\Effects\\effects.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\Cockpit-SU25T-TexturesBMP.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\Cockpit-SU25T-TexturesTGA.cdds"; common = ".\\Bazar\\World\\WorldTexturesTGA1.cdds"; To install a new skin with mod man in to your new CDDS file, make or down load the skin with the same size as you CDDS file now 2048x2048. Correctly make the file name use bitmap 24bit open Modman 5 open ADD on Maker open the file with you Bitmaps and add them to the new package Modman should automatically direct your bitmaps to Install folder Bazar\TempTextures\ and Catalog file Bazar\World\A-10-UpGrade.cdds make the Modman file as normal. If you down load a Modman file it may be directed to a different Catalog file so you may have to open the down loaded Modman Skin pack with the Modman Add on make and redirect the files to the proper Catalog file Finally Down load and Install Team speak so you can enjoy your new skins on line and speak with your fellow Pilots Typing and attacking ground targets just is not easy If I screwed up any part of this typing wile drinking a beer is just not that easy Hope this helps Deadman

I think we have reached the cut-off point in history for enjoyable and realistic jet combat sims. Next generation fighters like the F22 fight BVR with an adversary that probably finds himself in a hopeless SA environment. Hardly a kick-ass good time on HyperLobby. Also, avionics will be guess-work for many years to come. That's why, IMO, a game designer bent on realism as ED has been needs to keep improving realism with the older, established models they know about. ED seems to know quite a bit about Russia's stable of aircraft--they should stay with what they know. The Helo (I would rather have seen the Hind) is a much better addition because it brings a very important aspect of the air war to the game. The F/A 18 brings nothing new to the game other than a carrier born western design. Smokin'Hole

more http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y166/Dicus63/Aviacija/204/?start=20

With respect to the IR Jammer - I asked and one of the DEV team said there's no warm up modelled. In real-life it does take 5-10 minutes to warm up but not in LO:FC. Fuel usage: I had created a mission in a campaign(Adler Secured) and people reported back that they ran out of fuel. So I did some testing After Further testing (per 10KM) - 3500 for non-take-off maneorving 90% throttle and 90% throttle Full Loadout @ 100% - 100 kg ==> 350 km 175km range(little loiter) Full Loadout @ 90% - 75-80 kg ==> 450 km 225km range(little loiter) Stripped @ 100% - 85 kg ==> 410 km 200km range(little loiter) Stripped @ 90% - 65-70 kg ==> 520 km 260km range(little loiter) GLiding downwards at reduced speed subtract 5-10 kg for 10km for 100km trip as in my campaign - 200 kg difference in ingress at full throttle versus slower speed. And when you're over the mountains, you can glide downwards at lower throttle for extra savings. And on egress you can dump your weapons The full discussion is this thread here. Also check out the Up-to-Speed Guide for Su-25T for cannons and gunpods co-ordination. The Guide on my web-site is the latest version.

Hi Zaelu, Ah, thought this would happen cos of the way LO implements its skins (sigh). Ok, what you need to do is...in all those '.skins' files, change the 'value' for the Viggen skin to a higher number (like 1.8 or something). Then open your meint.xml file, search for the FIRST section where it lists the Viggen skin and change the 'ID' in the line below.... ...from 6 (which matches '0.6' from the .skins files) to whatever value you chose in the '.skins' files...so in my example I chose 1.8 earlier, so in here you would insert '18'... You may also need to change the CLSID....in which case just amend the last two digits so it doesn't match any other CLSID listed in the <colorschemes> section... ...next search for the SECOND section in the meint.xml file and you need to amend the CLSID here to match the number you chose when editing just above. The reason why is the first <colorschemes> section determines what skins LO recognises, and the second <colorschemes> section adds the skin reference so you can choose it in the payload screen. Rememeber there are TWO places in the meint file and that they need to match! (I always forget the second one and spend ages wondering why a skin doesnt work!). Hope this works, its kinda hard to (quickly) explain...which would be why no-one explained it to me when I asked at the start of this thread! If you get stuck give me a shout....sorry installing skins is such a pain but thats LO...why they didn't just do what IL2 does and have folders for skins I don't know....but you'll ALWAYS have a potential conflict when installing skins from the community, because its easy to have conflicting IDs :( Anyways, hope it all goes well, glad you like the skin.

do you have 2nd skin on israeli side? And when you installed with the installer the times it didnt work, did it say "Parsing meinit.xml..." ?

Какой-какой, простите, Германии? Раз уж такой оффтоп попёр, то, похоже, что он не закончится до тех пор пока, кто-то не расставит все точки над i. RU не может сделать этого сам, поскольку забанен. Тогда этим кем-то буду я. Понимаю, что в Литве и на Украине (не знаю как теперь будет правильно "на Украине" или "в Украине", напишу, так как меня в школе учили на уроках русского языка, поскольку на этом форуме принято изъясняться либо по английски, либо по русски) историю чужих государств изучать не принято. А и действительно, зачем изучать историю государства, к которому не имеешь никакого отношения? Так вот для тех, кто не знает: На аватаре RU изображён некий лётчик типа "пилот", идентифицировать личность которого не удалось. Этот пилот изображён на фоне русского гербового флага, который был введён указом Императора Всероссийского Александра II Николаевича Романова от 11 июня 1858 года. Объяснение геральдики этого флага содержится в тексте указа (Полное собрание законов Российской Империи, т.XXXIII, №33289) и звучит следующим образом (цитата): "Описание Высочайше утверждённого рисунка расположения гербовых цветов Империи на знамёнах, флагах и других предметах, употребляемых для украшения при торжественных случаях. Расположение сих цветов горизонтальное, верхняя полоса чёрная, средняя жёлтая (или золотая), а нижняя белая (или серебряная). Первые полосы соответствуют чёрному государственному орлу в жёлтом или золотом поле и кокарда из сих двух цветов была основана Императором Павлом I , между тем как знамёна и другие украшения из сих цветов употреблялись уже во время Императрицы Анны Иоанновны. Нижняя полоса белая или серебряная соответствует кокарде Петра Великого и Императрицы Екатерины II; Император же Александр I, после взятия Парижа в 1814 году, соединил правильную гербовую кокарду с древнею Петра Великого, которая соответствует белому или серебряному всаднику (Св. Георгию) в Московском гербе". (конец цитаты) На текущий момент времени этот флаг является официальным флагом неформальной общественной организации под названием "Православный Российский монархический Орден-Союз". Все предыдущие выпады в адрес аватара RU и голословные обвинения в пропоганде фашистской символики считаю абсолютно несостоятельными, но отношу их к незнанию истории чужого государства, а не к стремлению внести разобщение и как призыв к национальной непримиримости. Однако, несмотря на это, считаю, что удаление аватара RU и его устранение, пусть и временное с форума, обоснованное только незнанием исторической национальной символики чужого государства, является оскорблением национальных чувств всех, кто имеет отношение к этой символике, и разжиганию национальной непримиримости вопреки правилам этого форума. Посмотрите хотя бы на то, как отнеслось к этому большинство посетителей этой ветки, сами же своим незнанием провоцируете оффтоп, люди вместо того чтобы по делу писать, занимаются устранением белых дыр в вашем образовании. Неужели в гугл трудно заглянуть? А если бы RU был, скажем, масульманином и вы удалили бы их религиозную символику, что сразу "джехад" и 200 заложников? Вот от того, что кто-то не подумал и начинается потом. Глянуть в гугл, это потерять 10 минут от силы, это не то же самое, что "потерять лицо" в переносном смысле или ещё хуже того, голову в прямом. Моё личное мнение, что бан RU и есть самое вопиющее проявление национализма, как неуважение к символике и реликвиям чужого народа. Вопрос о символе "солнцеворот" (иногда "коловорот", четырёх-, шести-, восьми- лучевом кресте с загнутыми лучами), относящемся к древне-славянской символике вроде бы уже и до меня обсудили. А что, уважаемый Oleksandr, гербу, на вашем аватаре сколько сотен лет? Я вот историей Незалежной Украины (прошу прощения, не знаю как сейчас правильно это государство называется), к сожалению, не особо интересовался, хотя историю Киевской Руси знаю на мой взгляд неплохо. Поэтому не могу понять символики, изображённой на нём и могу, опять же по случайности или незнанию, найти там скрытую фашистскую символику пропагандирующую национальную непримиримость. Это я в качестве самообразования спрашиваю, дабы заткнуть дыру. ННЛ, СЗОТ и всё ИМХО. :smartass: Можно не отвечать, поскольку всё равно оффтоп. И эта, с правилами я ознакомлен, конкретных ссылок на пункты правил: 2.1 3.2 3.3 4.2 4.4 4.5 давать не стану, а то вообще погрязнем в разборках.

While I agree with your points, I still believe that you can have missiles that fly and navigate to the target with proper physics and all that, but if in the end it's too stupid to hit anything, than there's really no point. ED can put WAFM into the radar missiles and they will *still* be porked IMO - so you get a missile that flies to the target like a real missile, but it might as well be a ballistic rocket because it STILL can't hit targets in its NEZ worth a damn. End-game behaviour should take first priority, since the problem now is the fact that the target can swim through overlapping NEZs with a high degree of security if the pilot knows what he is doing. F-pole, A-pole, get higher/faster, etc. - these *real* BVR tactics really don't have a lot of significance in Lock On. A missile is just as easily dodged when fired from the NEZ than in the outer portions of the MEZ. A $30 PC entertainment product like Lock On cannot possibly be realistic in EVERY part of the missile modelling equation, and IMO, it shouldn't try to be. As long as I can fly and fight realistically, I could care less about the specifics of the AMRAAM - it's certain that the facts we need are going to be classified anyway.

You should not see any differences between 24 and 32bit bmps. The extra 8bit is for alpha channel and you don't need it from the beginning. You will see changes between bmps and dds though, especially when the images have vivid colors like pure red. You will see ugly blocky edges.

Since I haven't tried LOMAC online, I can't really comment on how big a problem AMRAAM-spamming is, nor how uber the F-15 is. However, if the game or match is unbalanced, then that's a design flaw in the setup and that should be addressed by modifying the setup of the match (or scenario.) The answer (this applies to wargames as well as simulations) to this is to change the setup to be more balanced rather than to change the parameters of the platforms and weapons. For example, if the F-15 + AMRAAM really is (and I'm not saying it is or not) at a significant advantage over the Su-27 in real life, then that should be reflected in the game. So to make it balanced, rather than trying to fiddle with the AIM-120 parameters to make it less useful, rather the Russian side should probably get more Su-27's or an AWACS or some other advantage to make it balanced. If the game developer started messing with parameters of missiles to make the game more "balanced" rather than realistic, then the game would cease to be a simulation of anything. Heck, in that case, you might as well just replace the skin of the F-15 3-d model with the model of the Su-27 and pretend it's the Su-27. That said, if the game allows unrealistic tactics to be used (missile-spamming, for example) successfully and without any penalty, then that's a design problem with the game that should be addressed if possible. A good sim design would reward good, realistic tactics with success and punish unrealistic or bad tactics.

Very great work Walmis !!! Grtz....Ross....

спасибо, так и есть! Вообщем все что смог сделал, осталось его постарить, но видимо способностей не хватает у меня, не получается :( Может кто сделает? За одно теплейт отдам на МиГ-23МЛД...

Well put, I agree. However... ...I don't think that using such general terms as "overmodeling" is going to be helpful. For example, Flanker 2.0's missiles had a much higher Pk, and were even less popular. tflash is more on the right path IMHO, in trying to break this discussion down into salient points. Look at the main points brought up in the first post of this topic: (a) I should be able to beam in look-up (b) I should not be able to beam in look-down Do we really agree with this as the definition of "overmodeling?" Does it even make sense? What are we trying to say here? Trying to rush into a realistic ECM/ECCM/IRCM/HUD/ACM tactics model when we don't even have a solid foundation in basic aerodynamics is just going to add layers of new bad code onto old bad code, making the whole thing a complex buggy mess to which making changes or additions becomes ever more impossible. In fact, we arguably passed that point long ago. We need to get back to basics and start with something simple, get it right and start building on that. e.g.: 1. Get the Sidewinder to fly pure pursuit, straight at the target 2. Now make the Sidewinder fly PN, increasing its drag and decreasing its range as it maneuvers 3. Now make the target IR signature depend on aspect, and 4. make the Sidewinder lock range depend on the IR signature 5. Now make the Sidewinder seeker able to lock onto vehicles, hot rocks, the sun, etc. 6. Now when the Sidewinder can lock onto heat sources, provide the target with flares and/or IRCM 7. Now when the target can use flares, provide the Sidewinder with IRCCM For example - we can skip step 3, by making the Sidewinder lock range depend directly on target aspect, rather than on an IR signature that depends on target aspect. But if we make that shortcut, then we can't make it to step 5 - hot rocks and the sun can't compete with the target IR signature, when the target has no IR signature! And that's why we are where we are today, with IRH missiles that can't lock onto ground targets, and no plans to see that feature in the future. The case for radar missiles is similar, but even more complex of a mess, what with illumination, PRFs, different types of ECM, etc. I agree with tflash, that we need to go back and get more basic stuff fixed first. -SK

Thank you for this link. Very interesting. As we see, the mach disk are the inner part of the flame, but the flame outer part is a limiter wave. So in our game, the best approach, the best way is the two ring flame version. If we look an afterburner takeoff, we see a vibration in the nozzle, we see a really fast vibration of the limiter wave in the outer part of flame, and the huge blur of heat. But the mach disk almost stabil, moveing only forward-backward little when the fuel injection are changed. (throttle positon are changed).

Yes, big issues. What's wrong with trying to get close? But there are those of us who do and want to see it get better. So we got our hands on this 'Missile Simulation Handbook for the Military' which seems to be good enough for the military in certain cases ... Hmm, sounds supiciously like WAFM ... ;) So are we betting $30? ;) No, he's really trying to say 'I wish missiles reacted to their invoronment more realistically'. That will never be the case, but aircraft will have their definite sets of advantages and disadvantages, from airframe to weapons systems. use'em wrong and you get splashed. That's all. Yes it is. That's why 'guestimate'. Various sims get things right, and other wrong. Some better so than others. So far neither LOMAC, JF18, or Falcon have gotten missiles quite right in any respect. Today, we have more information than was available to devs at that time. It isn't the price I'd worry about, I'd worry about the cray you'd need to buy to run it on - I mean, if we're going to start talking airflow calculations, radar raytracing etc ;) I don't think this is quite right. Depends on what you're trying to simulate ... LOMAC does not require airflow simulation because it isn't trying to simulate aerodynamic properties of a certain surface to that depth - the 'general behavior of the aircraft' is desired instead, and this can be done fairly well. yes there has to be, and it isn't your idea of 'leave it alone' which seems to be what you are implying here - not a slam, just how your post comes across. There's zero reason to accept that things won't change from what they are now, especially when the algorithmic changes required are conceptually simple. Yes we do, and yes it is possible. We have plenty of historical evidence, research material, and so on and so forth to help make things moreaccurate. Yes, it is possible - we're aware of a lot of issues concerning all sorts of aspects of missiles, and if you're on his side, you're being pretty discouraging, sorry :) ED knows, and the manufacturers know - if they can't simulate them, then how do you think they come up with the DLZs, loft firing solutions, and so on and so forth? There is -much- that can be improved, and in some cases it will take a lot work (most cases actually) but that work is already 'on the list' to be done. We don't have to and we should not accept 'sim lite' solutions, nor does ED seem to want this sort of thing: They're aiming for as much accuracy as they can get. In black shark you'll find that air to air gunnery for example, is different now ...

Some fighters swich off doppler and go simple continuous wave when looking up to avoid loosing lock with beaming such as you described. LOMAC doesnt model missile targeting too realisticaly however lets not forget that the real missile may not even see the target in such downwards looking beaming target either. Its has a much smaller antenna than the fighters. Thing is, it should know the targets last position and speed and make a prediction, much like the barrel roll filter. Then it also must predict where the target would be visible again after the beam. Good logic should put the nose aiming at the point where the target should be by the time it can reaquire. And we're talking about few seconds here. For the missile the target is probably blinking on an off in that beam. Each contact adding for a more precise estimate of the targets speed and position untill the reaquitition is stable again. We have no such thing in LOMAC. Thus both simulated and real missiles may break lock but the real missile is smarter and meets the target again as for LOMAC's missile will go just straight ahead. Falcon 4 (dunno about F/a-18 ) missile implementation is severely overmodeled as oposed to LOMAC. Max AMRAAM range is nearly the NEZ. Usualy who fires the AMRAAM first gets the kill. No escape zone for the real deal should be arround 8-10 miles. In falcon 4 is just under the 25 miles required for a shot, maybe 20 whole miles. Its realy hard to even turn full 180 at 20 miles and outrun it. Its juts insane. The biggest issue here is missile drag and resistence to chaff, but not too much. It is obvious to me that the AMRAAM shouldnt miss head on 5 miles like it does, but by no means should be a death ray at 20. It is possible to give a good fix for this without being too picky about the weapon sensor modeling untill we get the whole enchilada in a future SIM.

So far I have tweeked 2 versions. 1 is the realism mod the other is for anyone that has the Black/US skins installed and wants the realism mod. Just unzip the file an place into the ME folder in the main Lock-on directory (back-up the old one first) Realistic weapons mod 112a.zip Realism mod + skinpack.zip

That is my plan! I will be out on the road from mid January to mid february and when I return, I am buying SLI motherboard and single video card. Sometime later this year, I will buy the second video card.