F-16 cockpit

Are there any 3D modelers out there that could possibly attempt to create an F-16 cockpit for LOMAC FC? It would have to be in a Loman package that when installed, overwrites the F-15 cockpit so that it could be used with the Virtual Thunderbirds mod. If anyone wants to attempt this i would be ever so grateful. Thanks.

I don't think that would be possible. You could change the cockpit texures, but not the model.

My somewhat uninformed opinion.

What I have heard before is that you have to put the 3D pit into LOMACs format wich also requires some coding as well. I would love it but Im afraid its chances of implementation are very remote. I wouldnt try to push this on ED since they are going to do the F-16 on a new SIM. Furthermore the current game doesnt support some of features present in the F-16's MFD's unless you make block 15 layout wich is very basic.

What I have heard before is that you have to put the 3D pit into LOMACs format wich also requires some coding as well. I would love it but Im afraid its chances of implementation are very remote. I wouldnt try to push this on ED since they are going to do the F-16 on a new SIM. Furthermore the current game doesnt support some of features present in the F-16's MFD's unless you make block 15 layout wich is very basic.

It's not necessarily that it requires additional code (although I'm sure it does), so much as ED are the only people with the plugin that allows conversion of a "normal" 3D model to .lom or .cmd standard.

We can make the model . . . . . but in order to be converted into something Lomac can read, you need ED's 3D modelling tools, if only for a simple file conversion.

So all in all, it's not really possible.

IIRC, Locsta faked it in a video by adding an F4 cockpit to a moving background recorded with Lomac . . . . but doing it yourself for a working 3D cockpit is highly unlikely.

For F16 buy Falcon AF....

...with enemy aircraft that turn invisible when hit, paper plane physiscs, AIM-9M's that behave like python 4's? I dont think so. ;)

...with enemy aircraft that turn invisible when hit, paper plane physiscs, AIM-9M's that behave like python 4's? I dont think so. ;)

A working radar, missiles that hit often, did I say radar ?

I don't fly falcon anymore myself, I have gotten hooked on the graphics of Lomac and the formation flying abilities .. but in my opinion, those two things are the only two things that Lomac even comes close to falcon on. What I love about falcon is that when a missile is active on you, you ARE defensive, you have to leave that missiles parameters and you have to do it pretty much flawlessly or else ! Takes a whole lot more skill to fight in falcon.

I realize this thread had nothing to do with that ... so sorry in advance for derailing things.

I was not referring to "Missiles that hit". I mean in F4 I see AIM-9's turn as if they were 4rth Gen missiles. They have about 4 times more kintetic range than in LOMAC too. Theres litle to no room for missile text book evasion at all. They are simply too good (a bit on the opposite flaws as in LOMAC). Spaming all missiles to your oponent before you are shot yourself (because you will die for sure) is BORING not to mention unrealistic. It takes manuevering out of the equation completely. This is why I always felt F4 is more a tactical bomber SIM than anything else. The falcon is an agile bird and this feature is thrown out of the window on that SIM.

And Im sure if somehow an F-16 finds its way into LOMAC, as farfetched this hypothetical event may be, it would be very different from that of falcons and this story of "for F-16 fly F4" realy sounds silly to me, because then I could say "for F-18 fly Janes" or "for F-15 fly microprose strike eagle". And then when we run out of simulated aircraft they should stop making SIM's?

Its realy not relevant at all as the implementation of any of these aircraft havent been adressed the same way and never into hyper-realism as the Su-25's and the KA-50 are in this game. And Im not even mentioning the graphics (IMHO not THAT important).

I say this because F4's FM may have been based on aerodynamic tests and LOMACs may be based on flight chart test flights scripted into the FM but both give a different feel of flight.

I would gladely welcome a block 15 F-16 in LOMAC. As far as the flight simulation goes it would blow F4 right out of the water even with standard flight model.

I was not referring to "Missiles that hit". I mean in F4 I see AIM-9's turn as if they were 4rth Gen missiles. They have about 4 times more kintetic range than in LOMAC too. Theres litle to no room for missile text book evasion at all. They are simply too good (a bit on the opposite flaws as in LOMAC). Spaming all missiles to your oponent before you are shot yourself (because you will die for sure) is BORING not to mention unrealistic. It takes manuevering out of the equation completely. This is why I always felt F4 is more a tactical bomber SIM than anything else. The falcon is an agile bird and this feature is thrown out of the window on that SIM.

 

And Im sure if somehow an F-16 finds its way into LOMAC, as farfetched this hypothetical event may be, it would be very different from that of falcons and this story of "for F-16 fly F4" realy sounds silly to me, because then I could say "for F-18 fly Janes" or "for F-15 fly microprose strike eagle". And then when we run out of simulated aircraft they should stop making SIM's?

Its realy not relevant at all as the implementation of any of these aircraft havent been adressed the same way and never into hyper-realism as the Su-25's and the KA-50 are in this game. And Im not even mentioning the graphics (IMHO not THAT important).

 

I say this because F4's FM may have been based on aerodynamic tests and LOMACs may be based on flight chart test flights scripted into the FM but both give a different feel of flight.

 

I would gladely welcome a block 15 F-16 in LOMAC. As far as the flight simulation goes it would blow F4 right out of the water even with standard flight model.

Ya, I do like lomacs flight models .. real or not, it does give you the feeling of flying better than most other sims. As far as the missiles, I don't really know ... maybe they are over done in falcon .. maybe not ... what I do like about it though .. is BVR is a chess match, you have to jockey for an advantage to get the first shot off. Usually the first guy to go on the defensive loses .. which I like. It's a good brain game. As far as heaters, if you practice BFM and ACM enough .. you can create aspect and angle problems for the bandit and his heaters. If you slip into his weapons parameters though ... it's all over ! My personal opinion is that this is a better way to do things. I do realize my opinion may not be the popular opinion though .. just mine. I like the idea of the chess match thing, you fight, turn maneuver to stay out of your bandits parameters, and put him in yours .. the first guy to have success at that is pretty much garanteed the win.

It drives me nuts in Lomac that firing nearly any missile at a bandit online or offline rarely causes him to be defensive .. a few jinks, some chaff and flare, strobe the jammer and still prosecute the fight ... I hate that !

Just re-reading .. sorry again .. I've gone off on my own little tangent that doesn't have much to do with the topic ! Pilot, I don't disagree with anything you've said.

But there are some cases in which F4 is much better than LOMAC. I mean avionics and its various modes. Sorry to say that but F-15 and even A-10 avionics in LockOn are almost so poor like in arcade games...

Also full dynamic campaign, traffic in air and whole feeling are admirable.

ED! If You're working at flyable F-16, take example from F4 avionics.

what I do like about it though .. is BVR is a chess match, you have to jockey for an advantage to get the first shot off. Usually the first guy to go on the defensive loses .. which I like. It's a good brain game. As far as heaters, if you practice BFM and ACM enough .. you can create aspect and angle problems for the bandit and his heaters. If you slip into his weapons parameters though ... it's all over ! My personal opinion is that this is a better way to do things. I do realize my opinion may not be the popular opinion though .. just mine. I like the idea of the chess match thing, you fight, turn maneuver to stay out of your bandits parameters, and put him in yours .. the first guy to have success at that is pretty much garanteed the win.

 

It drives me nuts in Lomac that firing nearly any missile at a bandit online or offline rarely causes him to be defensive .. a few jinks, some chaff and flare, strobe the jammer and still prosecute the fight ... I hate that !

I know exactly what you mean, its like chess in the air, the first one to shoot while keeping himself out of the enemies firing parameters is the key in F4.

My personal view is however who has the biggest stick wins and I dont think it works IRL like that. Launching a missile is just the beggining, you have to, not only get within range but to be positioned to minimize the chances the enemy doesnt dodge and survive to get a return shot. I flown F4 again yesterday and did serveral fights. The predominant factor there is F-Poling, however once launched the missile will rarely miss. Todays Technology still doesnt provide this kind of efecteviness. IRL missiles miss much more often. I was getting 40 mile long sure kills with the AMRAAM. Its just not right. My plane works as a missileer concept wich existed in the past but proved to be wrong.

LOMAC has a bit the opposite problem, where under certain circunstances you can take advantage of the games flaws to keep flying straight into the enemy and dodge his missiles to spam your own at point blank range.

Then I noticed something, in F4 everybody races for the highest altitude to be the first to launch and get the kill at max range (again it just doesnt feel right). In LOMAC everybody flies low, and when you see an enemy you probably go fly low with him.

I Always flown the same way in every game with some adjustents to that particular games nuances.

I fly LOMAC the same way I flew F4 when doing the BVR engagements. Here I still fly high to maximize range but I have to get closer to the NEZ to get the kill. Here I dont have to panic if the enemy is careless by shooting at max range. Manuevering has actualy importance in this game wereas in the F4 the theory of vietnam era "BVR missile combat makes dogfighting obsolete" seems to be true after all. :S

The problem with net code exploits in LOMAC is subject to change with each pilot flying style and is prone to change overnight with a patch (in this case a further addon and several more patches). LOMAC has changed FM and missile perfomance more than F4 did in the last 8 years. I have a feeling there will be alot of people who will feel a pain in the back after their exploits no longer work.

This is why I believe an eventual F-16 in LOMAC's engine and the future F-16/Mig-29 SIm will rock. You will take dogfighting and multirole into a new realm IMHO never realy experienced yet thanks to advanced FM and missile modeling F4 also doesnt and will never posess.

Every game made with the F-16 so far had critical flaws that prevented the use of its real concept purposes.

You totally right.

But Falcon 4.0 is simulation of modern air combat - sim of the Grand Chessboard. Even the radio comms in game give more options. Just listen to AWACS in what way it paints the picture. You have the impression like there have been two great walls and a transitional zone over the frontline besides them. Over these "walls" you will always see Combat Air Patrols settled all along the line. If you're good You can imagine the situation, find the clear lane to escape or where to break through the defense. In some moments feeling comes that it starts a fire beneath the helmet when the brain can't calculate all informations coming from different sources (in and out the aircraft). "Ya know what I'm sayin'"?

To have similar impression in LockOn I must add many static objects at the origin airfield and traffic all along the way to target 'cause default missions are empty of life. Another thing! It seems that LockOn has a problem with big numbers of planes in the air. There is short limit. Even US Carrier can't take on deck so many aircrafts as it should. Some times mission builder reminds me this known from F/A-18 Korea...

It's a pitty that T-Bone and company have stopped Black Sea Ops project. That I believe would solve the problem.

Thats what he meant in the first place I believe.

Yeah! I remember that clip but I'm wondering how did he make HUD. There is no signs of montage but it should be. Maybe the lower quality of video hide it?

You totally right.

But Falcon 4.0 is simulation of modern air combat - sim of the Grand Chessboard. Even the radio comms in game give more options. Just listen to AWACS in what way it paints the picture. You have the impression like there have been two great walls and a transitional zone over the frontline besides them. Over these "walls" you will always see Combat Air Patrols settled all along the line. If you're good You can imagine the situation, find the clear lane to escape or where to break through the defense. In some moments feeling comes that it starts a fire beneath the helmet when the brain can't calculate all informations coming from different sources (in and out the aircraft). "Ya know what I'm sayin'"?

To have similar impression in LockOn I must add many static objects at the origin airfield and traffic all along the way to target 'cause default missions are empty of life. Another thing! It seems that LockOn has a problem with big numbers of planes in the air. There is short limit. Even US Carrier can't take on deck so many aircrafts as it should. Some times mission builder reminds me this known from F/A-18 Korea...

 

It's a pitty that T-Bone and company have stopped Black Sea Ops project. That I believe would solve the problem.

BSO was only ever a static campaign - a very big and ambitious one, but still a static campaign.

It's not stopped forever - chances are we'll see at least part of it some day.

F4's real strength to me has always been the way the theatre is simulated - the aircraft itself is modelled in great detail, of course, but the feeling of immersion for me has less to do with that and more to do with the radio calls from other packages, the tower calling to whine at you, your waypoints actually mattering . . . . . . and stuff like that.

Simply adding an F-16 to Lomac won't address the fact that Lomac doesn't do all that fun stuff, and I seriously hope that ED can increase the immersion in the theatre with their future projects.

BSO stopped ?!!! You're breaking my heart people - for christ sake why :S

I'm glad they haven't gave up totally, but they should have taken into account that missions will get broken eventually by patches. That's why i still got installed v1.02.

I hope your movie's gonna be at least 90 minutes long - they always seem to be too short ;)

BSO was only ever a static campaign - a very big and ambitious one, but still a static campaign.

 

It's not stopped forever - chances are we'll see at least part of it some day.

 

 

F4's real strength to me has always been the way the theatre is simulated - the aircraft itself is modelled in great detail, of course, but the feeling of immersion for me has less to do with that and more to do with the radio calls from other packages, the tower calling to whine at you, your waypoints actually mattering . . . . . . and stuff like that.

 

Simply adding an F-16 to Lomac won't address the fact that Lomac doesn't do all that fun stuff, and I seriously hope that ED can increase the immersion in the theatre with their future projects.

Yes! I know that BSO is - sorry - will be a static campaign but this will be full of life I think. I saw movies made by Glowing Amraam (kudos!) and I heard (but I'm not sure) he's messing in this project too.

P.S.

Men! Let's shout everybody: "We want Black Shark now!!!!" :pilotfly:

Not only my patient ends! Come On ED!!! ;-))

Good thinking and great job Ruggbutt. Keep it up!