Flight Model Manager
-
I believe the tool is only available in house for the moment. AFAIK, if you have a copy, you likely should not.
-
@Shadow & FoxBMS: Would you be kind enough to tell us how did you get it (no link please) ?
EDIT: Nevermind … I know.
-
@Dee-Jay: I don’t remember where i downloaded, maybe foinikas.org……really don’t remember it’s long time.
@Nuno Santos: This tool can edit .dat files easily in GUI (e.g. f16bk40.dat…etc.) and many more things.
If its home kitchen tools, i didn’t know about it…anyway if its not intended to be public, don’t worry, i will not put to download anywhere. Just want to get latest ver. for 4.33.4
If there is some good soul who can send .zip file to email [email protected]
How to contact Falcas? I would pay for this tool some bucks! -
I believe the tool is only available in house for the moment. AFAIK, if you have a copy, you likely should not.
As it should be !
I seen how it was used to add performance to the engines of the SU-27 AFM I put together for the ill fated 611-eagle model used in one of Falcon online FoF theaters at the time.
-
As it should be !
I seen how it was used to add performance to the engines of the SU-27 AFM I put together for the ill fated 611-eagle model used in Falcon online Balkans FoF at the time. I hold Nizmo or AS responsible for that mutilation.
You are talking trash.
Nizmo never had anything to do with FO (banned in fact). And i did not make BfB, just RF 4.0 with FM data left untouched.
That being said… “performances changes” (before or mid-flight - as was possible in prior versions) was always something i was strongly against. -
Well AS someone did. It might not have been in BfB. And it may not have been you. My apologies.
But eagle Su-27 Model and my AFM was included in one FoF theater Release at a time when Nizmo was “welcomed by FO” his words not mine. And he was contributing to FO at the time,
So who was responsible for at least previewing/testing/justifying data edits with no consultation with authors of those inclusions. ?
This may not be the place to have this discussion.
-
-
Is this taboo? I added a GUI editor for the DAT (Standard and AFM) files in my tool…
-
Nothing prevents anyone to make such tool, so no taboo.
We are talking about an internal development tool which got public, on Nizmo website (EBS)… Doesn’t really surprise me.
-
…boola-boola.
-
Well AS someone did. It might not have been in BfB. And it may not have been you. My apologies.
But eagle Su-27 Model and my AFM was included in one FoF theater Release at a time when Nizmo was “welcomed by FO” his words not mine. And he was contributing to FO at the time,
So who was responsible for at least previewing/testing/justifying data edits with no consultation with authors of those inclusions. ?
This may not be the place to have this discussion.
The FO BfB (there are other BfBs out there) was made by Danguard.
I can t remember, nor do i think - the Su-27 was a fly-able in his build, thus no reason to tweak it.Best ask Danguard…
-
-
@Switch:
Trying to make a point?
Yes.
-
@A.S:
The FO BfB (there are other BfBs out there) was made by Danguard.
I can t remember, nor do i think - the Su-27 was a fly-able in his build, thus no reason to tweak it.Best ask Danguard…
You don’t remember, if you say Nizmo wasn’t a FO member and the 27 wasn’t in one of the FoF releases with eagles “acquired” model with a AFM I had been working on for a few years, it wasn’t perfect but better then what we had previously.
Some one used BMS’s FM manger to add a unrealistic performance increase to the engine outputs in that release. Which I had painstakingly worked and tested. And it was at a time after Nizmo was asked to leave the 801st and had joined FO. And yes He was eventually kicked form there too. The whole “stolen” model fiasco was eventual exposed and the 27 was withdrawn from use.
Water under the bridge, however it was a very disappointing time for me.
-
You don’t remember, “if” you say Nizmo wasn’t a FO member and the 27 wasn’t in one of the FoF releases with eagles “acquired” model with a AFM I had been working on for a few years, it wasn’t perfect but better then what we had previously.
An “if”, yet no, “then nor why”??
C9
-
@Cloud:
An “if”, yet no, “then nor why”??
C9
You posting under the influence again. Or still ? ( a home brew item ) :munch:
-