Community A-4E

[ESAc_matador]

What a pitty... I love Wild weasel missions. Even with rockets and CBUs!

[gospadin]

What a pitty... I love Wild weasel missions. Even with rockets and CBUs!

 

Rockets and CBUs won't be a problem, per our December update. :pilotfly:

[Hook47]

I've really wanted to find a way to make a Modded SEAD missile that could be used on other aircraft, as it's needed so much. If only one could find a way to fool the sim into thinking a player launched missile was in fact AI launched after the release, so it would go seeker hot.

[archimaede]

If only one could find a way to fool the sim into thinking a player launched missile was in fact AI launched after the release, so it would go seeker hot.

 

That's not the problem. The problem is that you must have a lock on before launch. The AI can do that because the AI can be set to use "fake" avionics that permits locking on radars.

 

The player could also fire an anti radiation missile provided he has a lock on the target. If we added a way to find an lock a radar target (a la SU 25T) then we could fire the missile, but obviously that's just wrong in the case of the A-4. And we probably couldn't make that lock on hidden / automatic from the player's point of view either, that's why it's not happening.

[Tirak]

Isn't there a force Launch Authority button on the SU-25T that lets you fire without a lock?

[archimaede]

Isn't there a force Launch Authority button on the SU-25T that lets you fire without a lock?

Yes and (I'm not sure, correct me if I'm wrong), anti radiation missiles explode automatically after a few seconds when forced launched.

 

And that's how they behave on the A-4E. We can fire them as a player, but they'll detonate mid flight, even if you're looking straight at a dozen SAMs when firing.

[ESAc_matador]

Isn't there a force Launch Authority button on the SU-25T that lets you fire without a lock?

 

What I meant, is that the system automatically lock the closer radar which is closer to your heading. Instead of representig the lock in the HUD, it automatically calculates which is the radar in parameters. Once you fire, it goes to such SAM... So basically you are indeed locking on the target, but you do nothing.

[gospadin]

Isn't there a force Launch Authority button on the SU-25T that lets you fire without a lock?

 

I don't believe you can override launch authority on anti-radar missiles, but I could be wrong. There wouldn't be much point in firing them without a lock anyway.

 

Edit: as Kryb pointed out, the immediately detonate when they don't have a target

 

Either way, we're not using any Su-25T avionics. We've done our own from scratch in Lua, and thus we don't have access to any of the internal C/C++ capabilities unlocked with the SDK.

 

--gos

[SkateZilla]

As far as i know there's no intention on making this project an official 3rd Party Module. It's a passion project and a bit of an audition piece, but I would assume they don't have the funds set aside for a new company, sought legal counsel for licensing the project, how or advanced flight model coder to do so. It would be nice if ED made the SDK a little more flexible to encourage projects like these, but those of us interested are just spitballing ideas to see how much can be fudged with what is available.

 

 

 

I was suggesting more, have a complete Proof of Concept and Possibly Sign required Docs to Get SDK access to complete aspects not doable w/o SDK, and not a actual Legal Agreement to produce a licensed product.

[gospadin]

I was suggesting more, have a complete Proof of Concept and Possibly Sign required Docs to Get SDK access to complete aspects not doable w/o SDK, and not a actual Legal Agreement to produce a licensed product.

 

I am not sure any of us see the point in having SDK access without having the proper plans, structures and agreements in place to make a for-pay module. We'd be signing NDAs but without the possibility to realize revenue. As we've been digging in for a year, we've discovered that the standard system and flight models are capable of some very accurate behaviors. We've certainly come further than we expected to on day 1.

 

If someone complains about a missing feature in a free mod, well, they can pound sand. =P

 

That's the best part of this whole effort, frankly... our only real commitments are to ourselves.

 

--gos

 

Edit: I was speaking for myself above. Other members of the team may or may not feel identically.

Edited January 11, 2017 by gospadin

[BR55Sevas]

If someone complains about a missing feature in a free mod, well, they can pound sand. =P

 

Golden words!

[SilentEagle]

I was suggesting more, have a complete Proof of Concept and Possibly Sign required Docs to Get SDK access to complete aspects not doable w/o SDK, and not a actual Legal Agreement to produce a licensed product.

 

Lots of modders would be much happier with a system like that (still not ideal), but at least the talent of casual modders who don't want to make this their career could be unleashed. Don't see it happening though.

[spud3030]

Golden words!

 

+1!!!

spud

[probad]

If someone complains about a missing feature in a free mod, well, they can pound sand. =P

you tell em

Edited January 13, 2017 by probad

[gospadin]

In fairness, there really hasn't been much of that at all.

 

We're really hard on ourselves, and we hope that translates well into something everyone enjoys flying.

[DieHard]

(re: Message #1)

 

Got approval by John McCain? LOL!

 

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1BOHD_enUS487US526&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=A-4E+McCain

 

I used to be a Navy guy, though not an airdale (Navy-speak jargon).

 

USS Forrestal

=========

https://www.google.com/search?q=uss+forrestal&biw=1229&bih=589&espv=2&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiRoKanwr_RAhVj_4MKHYwNBywQ_AUIBygC

 

 

I was to Gitmo in 1978. I saw a crackerjack pilot fly one of these out of the air-station there. Had a mini-airshow for about an hour.

 

Cooooool jet!!

 

 

 

As usual, I am a bit late to this party.

 

You build it, I will buy it.

Edited January 13, 2017 by DieHard

[Tirak]

Hey Gos, I'm wondering, just out of pure curiosity. If the A-4E project ever were to go ahead as a full module, how much retreading would be required to upgrade the SFM to an EFM? Would all the rigging need to be redone or is that handled independently? Would it require completely redoing all the systems?

 

I'm just asking 'cause I know that the MiG-19 project got picked up by RAZBAM and I was wondering about the potential shortcuts possible if full third party devs ended up taking over for some of the SFM mods we've got these days. Sort of if it would make more sense to snap them up early to minimize having to redo work, or if most of the work already done would simply transfer over?

[gospadin]

Hey Gos, I'm wondering, just out of pure curiosity. If the A-4E project ever were to go ahead as a full module, how much retreading would be required to upgrade the SFM to an EFM? Would all the rigging need to be redone or is that handled independently? Would it require completely redoing all the systems?

 

I'm just asking 'cause I know that the MiG-19 project got picked up by RAZBAM and I was wondering about the potential shortcuts possible if full third party devs ended up taking over for some of the SFM mods we've got these days. Sort of if it would make more sense to snap them up early to minimize having to redo work, or if most of the work already done would simply transfer over?

 

*IF* ....

 

Existing system behaviors would likely port easily. They're in Lua now, but converting to C++ isn't that hard, and we could even just use existing Lua if we wanted to. With SDK documentation we'd definitely tweak some of our weapon parameters more, but we don't know what all of the entries mean.

 

Model and animation porting is basically not required, as what we have now, while unfinished, doesn't care about the systems underneath it. It can complete at its own pace.

 

The hard part is new complex systems like the flight model and the engine. Those would be from scratch, since the standard flight model is just a half-dozen lookup tables. Somewhere between person-months and person-years of effort to get everything implemented, depending on experience.

 

Ultimately everything is connected. The more accurately you model every system, the less tweaking is required to get both realistic primary behavior *and* realistic failure modes. If everything is a hack, then every new feature can trigger bottom-to-top fixes. That's why things like the F-16's flight control system having been leaked are so key for accurate behavior modeling, as they can "damage" any part of that system and their control system behaves exactly like the real one would.

 

--gos

Edited January 13, 2017 by gospadin

[gyrovague]

Without SDK, you cannot lock the target even with the IR missile.

 

Watch this space... :music_whistling: ;)

[Silver_Dragon]

I'm just asking 'cause I know that the MiG-19 project got picked up by RAZBAM and I was wondering about the potential shortcuts possible if full third party devs ended up taking over for some of the SFM mods we've got these days. Sort of if it would make more sense to snap them up early to minimize having to redo work, or if most of the work already done would simply transfer over?

 

Remember a old A-4E project (by JazAero) intent to convert to official module by some 3rd parties (VEAO and another), and dropped as a module due to prohibitive rights contract with McDonnel Douglas.

[gospadin]

Remember a old A-4E project (by JazAero) intent to convert to official module by some 3rd parties (VEAO and another), and dropped as a module due to prohibitive rights contract with McDonnel Douglas.

 

Other than a brief 1-sentence statement from VEAO, we (Community A-4E team) have no idea what the actual sticking points were. Obviously if we tried to get a license we would have our own issues to deal with that may or may not be the same ones.

 

JazAero's model was nice (especially the engine detail), but since we already had our own work in-progress, none of us contacted him to consider reviving it.

 

When we first started the A-4 project, we had heard VEAO had stopped work, but didn't really dig very far into why, or how far the old project had come. At this point JazAero's pictures are still on Facebook I believe (linked from his thread) but the images on this forum appear to no longer work.

 

All of that, though, would probably be better served by discussion in a different thread.

 

--gos

[gospadin]

As usual, I am a bit late to this party.

 

You build it, I will buy it.

 

Best part is, you won't have to pay for it. =P

[uboats]

Watch this space... :music_whistling: ;)

 

you've figured it out? :)

[gospadin]

you've figured it out? :)

 

:music_whistling: :music_whistling: :music_whistling: :music_whistling: :music_whistling:

[Nero.ger]

i think he learned from letherneck how 'hyping' works :-p

to be honest i am more interest in how you guys coded the stuff than in actualy flying the airplane :)