borchi_2b

i am working on it, thelights and most animations are done. only the animations for the damagemodel are left. then the skinning and some last testing. i will release the mod as a complete mod so that i do not have to touch it again, so sorry, but you still have to wait.

i could see the mfd in the reflection :-) oregon coast, thats a nice area there, but no chicks at the beaches to burts by :-P still cool pics do you have some air2air pics too? sorry this is off topic

well well, old crow is on the right track. when you are in 3dsmax and have opend your model you have to assign a material to your canopy glas. after that you go into the lomutilities. there you see a box thats says pick material. you choose the material of the canopyglas. then you say get data, after that you go into the box obove and choose the material canopy glas. this replaces the settiings of the former material to the setups of the lockon material. after that you say get data again. this should be it. after that you can unwrap the area and set up everything you like, but be aware, you have to use the standart materials. no vray no nothing. to change the color of the glas you have to unwrap that area , make a bmp or if you like a tga file and apply to the diffuse map and the opacity map. i have a white tga or bmp i use for the eagle and have set the opacity to 5. i can only say, if it is done right it looks awesome, although i would like to have the material a bit more transparent, but that is something i cannot do anything about :-) i hope this helps alittlebit. if not just pm me and i might be able to help out more specific

nice pictures viper_guy, are they done in norway?

well i guess he wants the glas of the canopy to shin in the game ?

well, lets say it the way ED said it to the former simmod team. 100k polies is a ammount that should not be crossed. lod models are important too, maybe most important. i do not want to talk about the eagle and the polyies but i am over 50k :-)

i don´t think so ;-) or is that him, who knows. let see what he says :-P

vekkinho, did you see the videotape? this plane never flew again after that hapend. ok, gg, you found one of the 2 viedos. but there was one on youtube or some other video hoster without the voice and with a way better videoquality in which you could see the g meter in the hud clearly. maybe they removed it, but i have been searching for it for 2 days now and it is not in my linking list. never the less, normaly the planes are designed for a max g performance. ok, lets talk about bussiness here. do to the fact that military and civil planes are built to fly manned, they have to withstand certain tests. a boeing 777 for example has a max break load, we talk about a max g untill the wings fall apart, of 11g´s. it is limmited to a max flight performance of abaout 3 g´s, which is a 1/4 of the max possible g´s before the plane breaks. when we talk about military planes ok, then we have about the same ratio, but most western fighters were designer with a max load that is 5 times greater then the max g performance. so lets take the f15c, ok. the eagle is limited to 9.5 g´s in flight. 5 times that ammount would sum up to what ? 47.5 g´s max. this is about the g force that is needed to break the wings of the airframe. so it is possible to pull an eagle to 40g´s. not for long at all, maybe just a tiny fraction of a second but most people would thing "ohh this plane cannot pull such g´s cause it breakes apart way earlier", which is complete bullshit. that it will not stay in service after such loads that a fact that we do not have to discuss cause it is obvious. one last thing to the g load. in eruope we have a very nice piece of fighter. all should know about that plane by now allready. the eurofighter is limited to a g load of +12, do to the fact that even most of the pilots cannot withstand higher g´s for long althugh they were a nice invention done by the germans :-), which is called libelle, one of the best anti g suits ever built so far. the EADS production and testteams figured that the eurofighter could withstand about 17g´s for a long term without having serious damage done to the airframe. so lets not talk about that down to 0 cause it is not what i actually wanted to piont our with the fact of the eagle. what i wanted to point out is, that a mach 1.7 is not impossible at low levels at all, although the airframe would probably suffer from the heat that builds up, but we have not been in a f111, none of us so far i guess. i just think that it is a possible flightenvelope of the f111, not more and not less. just imagine, only replace the engines of the tornado with the eruofighter engines which have about twice as much power then the tornado engines have and you could easily go mach1.4 with a panavia tornado at low level. this is not much less then m1.7 and i am sure, with engines that are srtong enough and the thrust to weight ration in a huge advantage set for the planes envelopes, the m1.7 is a realisic number

hey ggtharo, please do not correct people when they know more about a plane then you abviously do. sometimes it is even for you better to not write anything. this what i talk about was recorded on the hud cam, no harder evidence can prove me wrong, not even the biggest dick in the world. the pilot himself did not even realised that he pulled so many g´s. he actually passed nearly out, but the fear of death kept him awake. i am still surching for the tape though

nicer reading here, and alot of speculations. when i read the first post i really thought, what an idiot, but well, there are circumstnaces that might give the f111 the possibility to travel m 1.7 at low level. first to the design of this bird. it is, from deigners point of views and physical calculations able to got about mach 1.7 what would concearn me most are the shockwaves and airpressure produced at such alt. one thing that can be said about the f111. at low level it was at the alt it was designed for and it had the most stable flightpath of all planes designed to fight low level. 2nd in line is the tornado, which has an awesome design for low level abut not quiet that good like the f111. one thing is sure, the engines of the f111 were very very strong, by far stronger then the once of the tornado, which can fly mach 1.2 at low alt, without any trouble. an tornado pilot of the german air force once said, when the eurofighter was close to compleation, that they could, after repositioning a small box in the rear of the tornado, use the new eurofighter engines, cause they were designed to fit into the tornado. the conclusion of the german air force testcenter was, that the tornado could exceed mach 1.4 at low level with these engines. now back to the f111. i do not believe that it could go mach3 at low level but a speed of 1.7 is a number that is not impossible. guys, just think about the fact, that most of us only know facts from book, that are controlled form the militaries in this world. nobody ever thought that an f15c could withstand a max g of about 40 either, but it was taped and recorded by an f15 driver when he got into a no SA situation and pulled down instead of pulling up. his flight was recorded by the hudcam and the cam failed to record at about 32 or 38 g´s. cannot remember, have to see if i find the video again. no matter what, i believe that untill it is not porven to be impossible, it stays possible for me that the f111 could go m1.7 at low level. it has the deisgn and also the enignes to got faster then any other bird at that alt ever before

well, you have to have max8 and import your 3ds file. but be aware. all wrapping and animations have to be done again. thats why i only modelled in max9 and converted the model to max 8 after i got done with it in basic. now i make the unwrap and the animations for the eagle in max8.

hehe, not realistic, hmm, well well, if we talk about su27s of the year 1994 it is unrealistic, but the once flying in the year 2009 are capable of it. but well who cares, we are not up to date with lomac anyways :-)

i would suggest to make new textures, cause the lomac textures are not so great. it is ok, if you are lasy to go that way, but for me. go for own textures

also from other fighters, that what link16 is all about

i have not woked with them so far either, but it was just one question that came to my mind, if it is possible to animate in the lod models. if it is possible, then the lights could be animated too. so maybe it could be possible to have a greater visibility of the nav lights. @vekkinho, yes it is possible to animate the lights like storbes. thanks to a little suggestion from tomcatz, a single light of the eagle is animated like it is in real life ;-)

hi everybody, right now i am working on the lighting of the eagle. it is about done, but one thing came to my mind. is it possible to include the lights into the LOD model as animation how we are used to in the normal model stage? i thought that if it can be modeled in the LOD mdel, that we could make it possible to have lights visiable at a range of 10-15nm, which is realistic. so i hope someone has an answer to it. thanks in advance borchi_2b

hey yoda, a burnthrough on a jammer depends allways on the radar you use. with an old f4 phantom radar or a fairly weak mig29a radar i will not get a burnthrough before an estimated range of 20km. eagles might get a brunthrough at a range of 30km - 35km, do to the fact that this radar is so powerfull and send hard nailing beams to the fighter and gets back enough noise to be filtered. so you estimation you posted about hoj in kilometer ranges are way of reality. the ecm topic is really a thing that bothers me for a couple years in this sim. and the way to strong chaffs and flares. most of the times flares in a huge ammount still work with full ab in lomac, but flares are useless when you light up the rear of your bird. the heatsource is way to big. maybe not hotter then the flare which burns at about 1200°celsius but the size matters there and the time the flare is active.

gg tharos, a car is a real bad example. a car is a tiny piece of eshit compared to a fighter, in size and heatsource. remember, the enigne still has about 750°celsius, although it is not in burner. this differs from engine to engine, but you coule use it as referance. a car has a heatsource like a hot, huge fart in the african sun, compared with a turbo jet engine. topol-m, there are to many things way of reality in this so called sim, so please wait for a patch that might fix sertain things. just to mention it. this sim was never ment to be realistic at all

or aim well ahead and oerwrite your weaponssystem to shoot the r73 at a range of 12, thats what i would recomment. i also shoot it a ccouple times at 17, which is really really far, but if the enemy is stupied enough, he eats my missile :-)

that makes a diffrence :-)

well i read through it, and there is way more that should be mentioned. the burntime of the r27et is longer indeed and the balistics are to be fixed. the tws function of the russian fighter needs to be fixed, in real it is a usable tool, and mulitable targets can be tracked. the iff of the eagle needs to be fixed. when you look a freindly you get a huge cross in your hud, that indicates not to shoot, although you could. ecm strobes are normaly only visiable for the enemy automatic HOJ missile shots are not real, the pilot still has to choose if he fires a missile or not. there will not ba a missileshot automated by the computer as far i can recall the eagles systems. and that does not matter if the plane was in range before he used a jammer. the eagle can go with full milpower and a full combat load higher then it can in lomac, thats true. it needs more power, cause the engines in lomac are equal to the once of the first tranch of f15a, which is for sure no f15c :-) the g effects of the pilots needs to be cut down a bit, cause this way, what happens when you set it to realistic is by far not realistic at all. a pilot in the nato has to withstand 7g´s for about 30 sek or 45 , i am not sure. took the test long time ago. but sure is, that all the pilots who fly fighters, can withstand 9 g´s for about 30sec, which is realistic and about the average when you look at statistics one mature thing that needs to be fixed if possible is the visability of the nav lights. when you switch them on, you see them for many kilometers. has anybody ever watched the planes pass overhead at night when they are at cruise alt ? the visability range of all fighters need to be fixed. there is a bug that is used by most pilots in the community. you will never ever be able to see a flanker or a f15c at a range of 30km, which is the biggest bug i have ever seen in a flightsim so far. a mig29 or f16 head on are picked up visual at about 3 - 4 km. an eagle or flanker at about 6 - 7 km. but not 30km like in lomac in the russian fighters, the hsi is not working correct when you switch to the bvr mode, this must be a bug, cause the hsi is not linked to the weapons computer which controlls the combat modes in real life. the chaffs were allready mentioned by you yoda

i firgures the problem, when i rendered the template as tga file, i did not put it to 32bit, which incorporates a alpha channel, so this way i could not set an options

thanks vhekkiho, i allways wanted somebody to show some prove for what we knew for many years. but allways this is bloged by the community. damn even the su27 can track mulitiples and attack them. but why do we discuss this in this forum. most of the people here ban hard ass facts, like we ban cheaters. the mig29S (9-13) is capable to track 4 targets at the same time, like the su27, and with thier new radars, damn, they are even capable of more then that. the new radar tech is capable to track in theorie 1000 targets, cause it incorporates multi radarbeams sent form many many radar emmiters, in independent directions and as far the theorie, each beam is independent and could be tracking a target at the same time. same way works the radar of the eurofighter and all the new 5 th generation fighters and also the 4th generations. but that level is bloged by the community here and the still bitch about the r27et, and other things which are way outdated by these days. i can only say on thing. most of the people here should be happy that only the non sophisticated ARH SARH and IR missiles are inplemented in worng ways into this sim. today pilots have to face even worth threats then we have to face in lomac, and still people bitch about shit like 27et. imagine somebody would fire a passive radar homing misslie at you. this is even worth then a ir long range, cause you here nothing and the missile tracks you for 130km just by locking you radarsignals. these missiles were built to kill awacs, but they work fine for fighters as well. the bad thing is, that these missles can also activate thier own tracking radar when they are close enough and the radarsignals they are tracking disappear, so there is no real way to get away from that bitch. so please ED, for the patch that you want to releas for FC this year. make the missile more real and give the mig29c and the su27 the capabilities they have in real. lock and track multi targets. the eagle has so far what it needs, but some stuff needs to be done there too.

hmm, how about ED, could we make a suggestions list of all the bugs they have to change , proven by facts in the sim ?

i really get a freakuot at some time, that allways something has to trouble me with 3ds max. damn that prog. i checked it now with both, my max 8 and my max9, at both progs the same problem, i went through the maps, and i allready checked yesterday what it could be that causes that trouble. damn i might have to join a good 3ds max forum to get help. i hope they have a solution. as far i do not get that sourted out, why it is that way, i cannot make the lights at all. so this will delay the bird for a few days again. damn that. i really would like to get things sorted and done. too many cool ideas which i will realise with this bird. damn damn damn