Cydrych

Noticed this today. When pulling high G and the wings bend the left wing LEF develops a kink near the RWR antenna. The right wing doesn't do this. The kink goes away and the LEF goes back to normal when not pulling G.null

99% of people won't notice this but see screenshot.null

Guys let try to keep it civil and not get personal so ED won't step in and lock thread. There's been some good things discussed here and constructive criticism is an ok thing. Texac pointed out issues with my liveries and they're all valid concerns. I don't take offense to any of it and will incorporate that advice going forward in order to improve the accuracy and quality. We all love the F-16 and want it to be as realistic as possible. ED chose Lee1hy to improve the base liveries. Personally, I don't think they gave enough time for people to submit their liveries for consideration especially considering the high quality ones already on user files but regardless we have to respect ED's decision. Lee1hy, I think there might be some confusion due to the language barrier because no one has said your liveries are bad. They are high quality just some need minor color corrections to bring them closer to the real thing. Not a big deal. Just remember, ED chose you as the guy to improve the F-16. Texac and others (including myself) obviously feel like they missed out on this opportunity and it wasn't fair but, I think it is only natural we chime with feedback so can you can make the most true to life liveries possible to be included in the base game. If ED had chosen someone else we'd be critiquing their liveries too.

That one is mine but I didn't submit it. I don't think ED will use it because isn't a real jet, the color is too dark, it has a few small texture errors, and it has an Oklahoma state paint stamp I added for fun because that's where it was technically "painted." But it is cool seeing someone use the sexiest F-16 livery there is. I have a much better Tulsa Have Glass livery of 88-539 that should be out in a few days. I think it is a major improvement over that one so keep an eye out for it.

Overall I think lee1hy's skins are good and an improvement on the standard ED skins. Yes, some of the have glass ones are too dark or too light and some of the standard blue/gray ones are a little too blue but overall I think he does a good job. We also can't complain too much seeing as they are free and look realistic. It would be a different story if all the skins on user files were pastel colors and covered in anime girls. Speaking of have glass skins I haven't seen anyone successfully replicate the Have Glass V look in DCS. Every have glass skin I've seen including my own are either too dark, too light, too warm in hue, too shiny, not shiny enough etc. Have Glass is very difficult to get right and the color varies greatly depending on angle of the sun, ambient light, weathering etc. Photos online show it can be anywhere between a matte blueish dark gray to light shiny silver gray. That's assuming filters and photoshop wasn't used to enhance the look too. The only real life example I have are the Tulsa F-16s. I see them almost daily. They are Have Glass V and quite dark in real life. However there's photos online of the same jet looking blue gray and silver gray and the only difference was the angle of the sun.

He's alive!!!!!

I found another spot. Discovered in model viewer. Dark Viper livery is easiest to see where. Sun directly overhead. null

I did more testing and I don't think this is a bug. The F-16 A/L and F/R tank capacities are different. A/L tank will fill first and apparently doesn't crossfeed to F/R. When the A/L main tank is full ~2330lbs the left side of the jet's fuel system stops filling the A/L main tank while the right side fuel system keeps filling the F/R main tank to ~2770lbs (440lbs more) causing the right external tank and the right wing tank to keep feeding. This causes the fuel imbalance.

Probably a niche bug but to simulate long missions without flying the whole thing I'll fly with 3 external tanks and set the fuel % in the mission editor to 20%-25%. This will allow air start closer to target with a more realistic fuel load allowing me to skip ramp start and most of the ingress flying. I also do this for AAR practice using 5% fuel load to start with mostly empty tanks to simulate being in the air on a long mission without having to fly around in AB to burn fuel off. It also gives more practice time on the tanker. ED why can't we get a empty tank option like the F14 and F15? Or external tank fuel % sliders? Well, If fuel % is set to 13% (worst case) this gives a mission start fuel weight of 7886 lbs. When the external tanks feed to the main tank, the center tank drains first. When it is empty the 2 wing tanks start to drain. Problem is when the left/right 370 gal tanks reach about 500lbs on each side the left tank stops feeding while the right one will continue to drain until it is almost empty. This causes a 500lbs fuel imbalance until the engine burns it off. You'd never see this scenario in real life but I would think they should drain at equal rates until empty. It happens in all maps. Air start, ramp start, runway start. 13% fuel is the worst case and setting higher fuel % values just means the right tank won't drain as much. It does not happen if you start the mission with full fuel load and the jet burns it off normally which tells me this only happens when large fuel transfers occur.

I'm using the -mt version of model viewer in the bin-mt folder and have experienced constant issues with the textures, args, and model drop down windows getting "frozen" and I can't select them. I can still move the model around just fine so it is like windows stop detecting mouse inputs. I also have problems closing windows and not being able to reopen them like the move object, liveries, connectors, etc. I can try to open them from the menu bar at the top but the window never appears. If I restart modelviewer with them checked they show up but will still freeze/crash the program. Just wondering it this is a known issue or if my install is messed up.

Texac, I noticed some errors in the template and figured I'd let you know if you ever release a V2 of it. Nice work by the way. I'm looking forward to the have glass one. If you need screenshots let me know and I'll post them. Errors: Dark gray texture wasn't painted all the way on the right horizontal stabilizer top surface in the wing R psd causing a triangular hole. Ladder marks in albedo and roughmet don't align in main 1 psd. They also are too far aft and not centered with respect to each other judging by photos online. Faint white square around the circular and oval stencils on the nose. Appears to be carried over from EDs default template. Also the interior of those stencils is shaded faint white. Very hard to see. Use a white background on the stencil layer or it shows up easier when viewing the roughmet. Incorrect image centering in main 2 psd causing the whole texture to shift aft a few pixels. Easy to see when looking at the black line where the nose cone connects to the fuselage. Transparency difference in dark gray layers between wingsL/wings R and main 1 psds causing color mismatch. Edit: 2-26 Also normal map on the right side of the tail for the panel where the pointy probe thing is does not line up with the texture. And the texture and normal maps for the left and right side of the tail don't line up. The right side looks shifted upward by 5 pixels.

I don't know if this have been reported yet but there are no threads about it going back to at least June. While working on a livery I noticed 6 errors in the model that appear to be slight misalignment in the polygon vertices. Confirmed it is not due to the normal map or roughmet. Pictures attached from modelviewer darkviper livery with low light (late evening/early morning with nose pointed roughly into the sun so the light hits the model at a low angle.