Xeno426

Same problem here.

And Boeing 747.

I'm afraid I don't understand what you are asking for. The mods are in the first post, which include the models required for them to work.

dds is a texture file format, not a model format.

Well, the R-37 never entered service, so I somewhat doubt that would get included.

Yak-141 is experimental and most systems weren't integrated before the development shut down, so it's unlikely there's very good data around. The Yak-38 is an extremely limited aircraft, and if we're doing VTOL the Harrier GR.3, GR.7, AV-8B or AV-8B+ would be far more interesting with a better flight envelope. If there was solid data for the Yak-141, including the integration of all the planned weapons, I think that would be pretty sweet.

Linking to AusAirPower actually damages your argument...

Good luck finding any info you could actually use to make a game from. I'd prefer to set my sights on something that has a possibility of coming to fruition.

Except that the M2 isn't cold war, it's post-cold war. The Su-24M, however, fits that criteria.

I really hope you can find a texture maker and scripter to get these units into the game.

Except it doesn't work for static objects, so you can use the template system to create a FOB or FARP.

I didn't know it worked across missions. Is that how people have such nicely-placed FOBs? Also, love your avatar. :D

You choose an aircraft that has even a chance of good data being obtained for.

The reason you can't see it is because the game itself where the model is loaded is part of a different executable, so it can't be done in the current system (it's also why the encyclopedia has images rather than the actual ingame model). EDGE is supposed to unify the interface, so hopefully we'll be able to see the model and more, like being able to place it within the 3D world.

Agreed, and I was so looking forward to the Su-27SM. And then they went and said it would just be the Su-27S... At this point, I'd be happy with just something like a Su-24M. The problem is that even if the Kh-31 was added to the loadout there'd be no way to use it as a human player. It's not hard to add it to the Su33.lua file.

Kh-66 was designed for use with the MiG-21 and the RP-21 radar. It can't be used on an aircraft without radar, which would limit its use to basically the MiG-21 and MiG-23. Because otherwise anyone could put anything on anything. I want the AIM-120 on the Su-33. Wait, you mean I need evidence that it could? Why? Well, here's evidence we should be able to attach men to the A-10. Also we should be able to put the R-60 on the wingtips of the Mi-24. ...except that these are rather fake and there is no actual capability to use them. Sometimes the internet lies to you... Well no, that's because the USSR has never nuked anybody. They have seen actual combat use and deployment and actually have the systems in the game integrated. Just because people on the internet associate them doesn't mean they use them. The Igla and R-73 have been associated with the Ka-50, but it's never used them nor has it ever had them integrated. The Su-33 lacks any kind of PGM capability, and while it would be trivial to attach the Kh-31 to a Su-33 there would be no way for the pilot to designate targets and launch the missile because there's no integration. When it comes to Russian equipment, English sources are wrong in a lot of instances.

Like 1080p gaming has become the norm? 'Cause reading through this thread has introduced me to a lot of people running at 720p or lower... Methinks it's going to take quite a bit more time for 4K to become the norm than you're thinking.

Except that in order to have a full suite of "modern" (as opposed to "fake future) equipment you're going to need a lot of mods and then you'll have to find a dedicated group to play with because you're never going to get drop-in players. ArmA3 just doesn't have the native content necessary for that kind of gameplay, unlike ArmA2.

I wouldn't mind the Pave Penny getting modeled in the A-10A so you could do things like have an A-10C or human JTAC point out a target for you and allow you to employ LGBs.

Um, http://pcsupport.about.com/od/termsr/g/rootfolder.htm In other words, "DCS World" is the game root folder, unless you chose to change the installation location name. More importantly, you shouldn't be installing any folder called "aircraft" from JSGME because that would mean you've screwed up the installation of the mod.

Well, try this one. It's what I use and it works fine for me. http://www.mediafire.com/download/pf23ja2clp9pef9/DCS_JTAC_Mod.7z

If using long-range SAMs, I would suggest placing them behind some kind of natural barrier like a large hill. That way people could still fly their CAS missions if they want, but they would have to do so at low altitude where the enemy SAM systems are blind. That way it becomes a tradeoff: if you fly low enough to avoid the long-range SAMs you expose yourself to the short-range threats around the city.

I downloaded the versions you have in the first post, second and third download links. You may want to update them, then.

I notice that both your ship and "Some tents and towers" mods make use of an entry.lua inside the \Mods\tech\ folder. Unfortunately, this causes compatibility issues, as they can't run with each other and tend to cancel out other added units in the tech folder. Since your IX514 Helicopter Landing Trainer (HLT) seems to work fine, could you modify your other two mods so that they work as well without invoking the entry.lua file?

I made a simple modification of my own to it to add in those aircraft. It's pretty basic, and I piggybacked the new aircraft in the scripts for the existing ones since I intended the number of players to remain the same (1-6), just with more aircraft choices. I also did a bit of tweaking; there was no need for the F-16s to carry HARMs since no targets have radar and neither was there a need for so many Mavericks (I'm not even sure the F-16 ever carried the triple rack), so I cut down on them and replaced the HARMs with cluster bombs. I also found the F-16s were flying way too low to be realistic; they're not built like the A-10, so they should be flying at least as high as the A-10s if not higher. One main problem I've encountered is that the Su-25Ts aren't really needed to take care of the enemy AD, since it's all rather short range and not radar guided. The A-10s can do the job easily with their Mavericks, and probably better than the Su-25s as well thanks to better targeting equipment. Hell, the Ka-50s can do the job pretty well since the Vikhr easily outranges anything the enemy has. I would suggest placing some actually threatening SAM systems (particularly radar-guided ones) in the area or at least in the enemy rear so that the job of SEAD is more useful; this might mean you'll have to move the airbase to somewhere further away from the action. Operation Erase & Replace V2.5.miz