archimaede

Not level but I'll answer. Modelling is done using blueprints when available, and eyeballing when not, preferably using other known references as a base. The aircraft shape is not the hard part, there's a lot of data available with lots of info on it. The smaller details are harder to get because of the lack of references, but we make do.

The "push stick forward" is for runway landing, to keep the aircraft from going back up because of its lift. Here's an example : https://youtu.be/df1J1WrXXtA?t=4m44s Indeed for carrier landing that's not really an issue since your whole speed is killed in a second.

Thanks. We're still hard at work on the A-4E, however April has been uneventful for us and our work was mostly aimed towards code and animation, stuff that we can't really show you guys with pictures. We might make a mid month update to compensate for that or you'll just have to wait for the next monthly update. :smilewink:

And it's a carrier based aircraft. Carrier landing are the roughest thing you can do to a landing gear, and as any carrier based aircraft, the A-4 didn't fall into pieces when hitting the deck, because it was its job to be a tough little aircraft. Also standard procedure it to push the stick as far as possible on touchdown to put the maximum weight on the nose gear. So yeah, the A-4's gear is not fragile.

Yes we know, it's just the phrasing Level used that was weird. The message is still the same though : we won't do anything else than an upgraded A-4E, at least for now.

The Blue Angels flew an A-4F variant called the Super Fox. It had a lot more visuals differences with the A-4E than just the bent probe and the lack of hump. Same for A/B/C used in the Falklands. What I'm saying is that removing the hump won't do a lot to fake other variants. If we want to do something nice, it would require a lot more work than just that. Not counting on the cockpit which would still be the same. So we'll see about including other variants.

Yes, it's normal, the alignement is ~3 min on the 25T. The problem is that with a non aligned INS, half the modes of the HUD are still correct when none should be.

When flying the SU 25T before the INS alignement is done, the HUD is still half correct. In all the navigation modes, it displays the correct heading : http://i.imgur.com/UcpTjn8.jpg In all the combat modes, the heading is (rightfully) wrong, and on the same heading than the backup compass: http://i.imgur.com/yGMUhRf.jpg Everything should be incorrect no ?

Alright, I'm back with another issue. I'm creating a gun like this : function m60c(tbl) tbl.category = CAT_GUN_MOUNT tbl.name = "m60c" tbl.supply = { shells = {"7_62x51"}, --shells = {"M61_20_HE"}, --shells = {"M2_50_aero_AP","M20_50_aero_APIT"}, --mixes = {{1,2,2,1,2,2}}, -- count = 500, } if tbl.mixes then tbl.supply.mixes = tbl.mixes tbl.mixes = nil end tbl.gun = { max_burst_length = 500, rates = {600}, recoil_coeff = 0.01, barrels_count = 1, } if tbl.rates then tbl.gun.rates = tbl.rates tbl.rates = nil end tbl.ejector_pos = tbl.ejector_pos or {0, 0, 0} tbl.ejector_pos_connector = tbl.ejector_pos_connector or "Gun_point" tbl.ejector_dir = {-6, -2, 0} tbl.supply_position = tbl.supply_position or {0.121, -0.48, 0} tbl.aft_gun_mount = false tbl.effective_fire_distance = 1500 tbl.drop_cartridge = 205 tbl.muzzle_pos = tbl.muzzle_pos or {0,0,0} -- all position from connector tbl.muzzle_pos_connector = tbl.muzzle_pos_connector or "Gun_point" -- all position from connector tbl.azimuth_initial = tbl.azimuth_initial or 0 tbl.elevation_initial = tbl.elevation_initial or 0 if tbl.effects == nil then tbl.effects = {{ name = "FireEffect" , arg = tbl.effect_arg_number or 436 }, { name = "HeatEffectExt" , shot_heat = 7.823, barrel_k = 0.462 * 2.7, body_k = 0.462 * 14.3 }, { name = "SmokeEffect"}} end return declare_weapon(tbl) end It all works just fine, except for the recoil_coeff. Any time I fire, the recoil is so huge that it causes my aircraft to stall in a few rounds! I tried changing the value to something big, to something small, to something in between, it's always way too much recoil for the caliber. Do you guys have any ideas on how to fix that ?

If you're talking about the name of the missile that you want appearing on the HUD, then it's in your userName attribute. As far as I know, it's linked to the SU-27, meaning it's in the SU-27 code.

It is on SU-27 and such, but not on F-15C.

Did you use an AIM-120/AIM-7/AIM-9 base for that new weapon ? Does the missile appear in external view ? Can you shoot it ?

You'll need a lot more than that to add a new aircraft. You should check the Wunderluft example, it has everything you need for that. As for adding weapons, it's not supposed to do anything to missile_data. Everything should be internal to your new aircraft. Also, last time I checked, adding custom weapons to the F-15C while still using an F-15C cockpit made DCS crash, so there's that...

Not sure if it's what you're asking for, but here's an example for airbrakes : In the command_defs.lua add your commands : PlaneAirBrake = 73, PlaneAirBrakeOn = 147, PlaneAirBrakeOff = 148, In systemname.lua add : local Airbrake = 73 -- This is the number of the command from command_defs local AirbrakeOn = 147 local AirbrakeOff = 148 dev:listen_command(Airbrake) dev:listen_command(AirbrakeOn) dev:listen_command(AirbrakeOff) Then further down, for the actual code : function SetCommand(command,value) if (command == Airbrake) then ....... elseif(command == AirbrakeOn) then ..... end end

Flying online on the L-39C with solo flight ticked, F2 shows only the pilot and no one in the backseat, but only for the aircraft you fly. Others L-39 will have 2 pilots. Other players will see their aircraft having 1 pilot while the others have 2. Also after an emergency jettison of the rocket pods, other players confirmed they could still see them under my wings while my F2 view showed them jettisoned.

I had an opaque square appear on the gunsight : (It happened in multiplayer if it's any help..) Here you can see the SU-27 hidden behind : Another screen :

Just west of the runway :

As you can see here, the mic button stays in place while the throttle moves.

I don't think the Rafale would make it, considering it would be hard to make it even as an AI (not enough data) and considering it would completly annihilate anything else in the game and thus make the 2000C irrelevant and useless. The priority would be to add a french tanker for AAR.

Sorry mate, I haven't tried to make any gun pod yet so I can't help you on that one... :(

That's not what's in the package but what should be expected to be in it. So far Razbam have not been 100% clear about wether they'll add the exocet / armat or not. Anyway, very nice post Az'!

Hey, I just wanted to say thanks for all, it's been a tremendous help ! A little thing to correct in the guide though : In your guide, it's written : TYPE = “bounding_box”; However, the correct syntax is : TYPE = "bounding_box"; The almost unnoticable different is the "" instead of “” (maybe due to the italics ?). Without the correction the export is impossible.

Different drag. The 2KC computer can not handle different drag for AS payload. Everything must be the same. So you can't carry both MK82 and GBU 12 at the same time, period.

By the way, the image with 4 GBU 12 and 2 MK 82 is wrong. In real life, you can't put 2 different AS armaments on the 2000C variant they're doing.

Couldn't Aviodev release the CC version bit by bit ? What I mean is instead of polishing every weapon and releasing it all at once, couldn't they polish the gun and release the CC with only the gun, then in another update add the bombs, then in yet an other update add the missiles ? That way we don't have to wait months for the CC variant, and have something to play with while waiting the the next weapon systems :)