BMS Other Fighters Mafia (BMSOFM) Journal
-
Good Day, All,
The “news of the day” is that last night I submitted our repaired/improved 1799 to the Dev’s , as well as new cockpit diagrams. Plus, work on the Manual continues.
Another thing we hope to work on is where the some of the instrument needled don’t model properly. In 4.34, you had to turn on the console lights to get their needles to model. In 4.35, it’s reversed, you can’t see them with the console lights on, and that’s tough on the night missions -
Good Day, All,
The “news of the day” is that last night I submitted our repaired/improved 1799 to the Dev’s , as well as new cockpit diagrams. Plus, work on the Manual continues.
Another thing we hope to work on is where the some of the instrument needled don’t model properly. In 4.34, you had to turn on the console lights to get their needles to model. In 4.35, it’s reversed, you can’t see them with the console lights on, and that’s tough on the night missionsthanks for your work
-
whenever I do it has the masking problem as you describe. The permanent fix would probably be as Lolo describes, but frankly Fox is the brains of the Mafia when it comes to LOD. If yours happens to be one, make it “2”
In fact , this really depends of the “shape” of the model , and where the hardpoint are located in the said model(HP/Slot coordinates in LE) . Depending the plane you are flying , stting the TGP to 1 can work . Other plane, “2” will do the trick . On others again , correcting the TGP fov in AcData could even be sufficient .
But for some others , there is no cure but to edit the coordinates in the LOD model . And yes , it’s a permanent and last resort fix (and this method has the great advantage to keep a realistic loadout . A bit more work to do , though …)
-
Good Day, All,
I’ve been busy the last week or so, but work on the Manual continues. Feel free to call it Joe’s version of “in 3-4 weeks…”
Meanwhile, I calling out to invite someone with skills with LOD and such to join the Mafia. I don’t want to put everything on Fox, he has other things on his plate. I have the time to do things like fixing the Hornet’s gauge modeling. I’ll do the work. I just need someone to show me how to do it.
Meanwhile, I’m starting to educate myself on the 3DDB Builer in Tools. Right now my 3DDB doesn’t even load, and my LE just gives me a purple screen. Fox told me 3DDB where we fix the gauges(post 103). If we can’t make it perfect, day or night, I at least want to take it back to 4.34 settings. IMHO, having to run the console lights during the day is better then having to turn them off at night.:rolleyes: Plus, hopefully fix the Growler TGP issue. -
I calling out to invite someone with skills with LOD and such to join the Mafia
What kind of skill is needed ? To do what kind of work ?
-
What kind of skill is needed ? To do what kind of work ?
Hi, Lolo,
That was quick, and thanks for the reply. The kind of skills that would really help are something that’s probably second nature to someone like you (hint, hint ).Working with things like LOD and 3DDB. The “inner workings” of BMS that don’t require code access.
You’ve been reading about the issues with the gauges and TGP masking, stuff like that is the immediate goal.
Beyond that, who knows? The “BMS FighterS Mafia’s” long term goal is not just “fix current Bug problems”, but to see just where we can take it. And , I’m hoping, to maximize BMS enjoyment of not only the Hornet but the other “non-Viper” jets as well.As previously stated, we’re focused on the Hornet right now. as we can help the most people that way. BUT, what works on the Bug will help the Hog Drivers, etc.,etc. That’s the whole purpose of this thread. It’s like the old saying. “Give someone a fish and they eat for a day. Teach some to fish and they eat for a lifetime”.
As for your “what kind of work” question, I don’t really know, as right now I don’t know how this stuff works! I can promise you , if you want to team up, that I would not just dump this on you. It would be fun for me to learn this, anyway.
Our work fixing the Bug’s hotspots is a microcosm of what I’d love to see. I kind of muddled though and managed to fix them, then Fox came along, having already done it it faster and better. I’d love to make a team and see just what we CAN do, and share that knowledge with our BMS Mates.
Anyway, if you’d like to PM, I’d be happy to discuss this with you.
Joe -
you’d like to PM, I’d be happy to discuss this with you.
PM sent, compadre
-
My friends, I am very happy to announce The Mafia is now a trio. Welcome, Lolo!
-
My friends, I am very happy to announce The Mafia is now a trio. Welcome, Lolo!
-
Hi, Seb, and All,
Here’s a quick check in, as I’m about to go BMS flying…
Work on the Manual is proceeding, and I would still welcome input on what you would like to see in it.
The other project being worked on is the secondary gauges modeling. -
Hi drtbkj ,
I began to check the F-18 LODs , but I must admit I’m quite confused with all this variants . The Hornet is a plane I’m really discovering !
A thing that would help me much would be :
1/ A little explanation : What are the differences between EA -18 , CF-18 , F-18 etc …? I already googled them and so far , for me the difference seems to me that some are export variants of the F-18 . But, I would need to be explained which variant is derivated from which F-18 (A, C ? D etc… ) . It’s important to me because it could point me to the right LOD to(to try to ! ) fix .
2/ I would need to be absolutely sure of which variants or sub-variant are concerned by the TGP issue ?
Honoured to have been hired by the Fighter Mafia ! I hope I could be of some help . We’ll see . Wish me good luck !
-
Hi,
EA-18G - is the electronic warfare version derivated from F-18F(dual seat)
CF-18 - canadian version of A and B
F-18C - single seat, new version of F-18A
F-18D - dual seat, new version of F-18B
F-18E - superhornet, new version of F-18C
F-18F - superhornet, new version of F-18DI know that F-18C has the TGP issue in BMS 4.35. Don´t know about others.
-
Hi,
EA-18G - is the electronic warfare version derivated from F-18F(dual seat)
CF-18 - canadian version of A and B
F-18C - single seat, new version of F-18A
F-18D - dual seat, new version of F-18B
F-18E - superhornet, new version of F-18C
F-18F - superhornet, new version of F-18DI know that F-18C has the TGP issue BMS 4.35. Don´t know about others.
Lolo_salsal,
In Mission Commander, the CF-18 is actually called the CF-188. CF-188 is the actual official designation by the Canadian Air Force. I believe BMS’ core files also call it the CF-188. Thus if you are doing work/changes to the CF-188 core files, you won’t find any denotation to the term CF-18. The CF-18 is just a nickname that has developed over the years. Kind of how the CF-116 is the actual CAF designation for the F-5A/B.
-
I see , thanks ! This kind of things is quite confusing !
-
I’m currently experiencing a new kind of error(for me !) in LE : " Maximum stack counter encountered " , as I was trying to edit the Bug LOD in 1799 . It prevents me to save the modification , so there’s no modification at all possible . Does anyone knows about what it means ?
-
Hi drtbkj ,
I began to check the F-18 LODs , but I must admit I’m quite confused with all this variants . The Hornet is a plane I’m really discovering !
A thing that would help me much would be :
1/ A little explanation : What are the differences between EA -18 , CF-18 , F-18 etc …? I already googled them and so far , for me the difference seems to me that some are export variants of the F-18 . But, I would need to be explained which variant is derivated from which F-18 (A, C ? D etc… ) . It’s important to me because it could point me to the right LOD to(to try to ! ) fix .
2/ I would need to be absolutely sure of which variants or sub-variant are concerned by the TGP issue ?
Honoured to have been hired by the Fighter Mafia ! I hope I could be of some help . We’ll see . Wish me good luck !
Hi, Compadre,
Firstly, thanks to Masudanimal and Chuckles for the info.
Lolo, although we’re starting out focusing on the F-18C, for reasons previously stated, we did receive a request here to look into the EA-18G. I don’t know if the OP solved his problem, as we have not heard from him lately.
Chuckles, I’ve not seen or heard about a TGP problem in the 4.35 F-18C, specifically, beyond the known issue of masking if you set Config to internal. What have you heard? The C has some, seemingly realist, masking of the TGP on Station 5 if a drop tank is on Station 3
BTW, In RL you can help this by putting the drops in Stations 5 and 7. However, in 4.34 when you did this you would often get a TRP FUEL warning (Viper carryover). I haven’t tested this in 4.35 -
Hi Lolo
The EF-18 is the Spanish version of the F-18A, very modernized. The cockpit is that of the F-18A, but with the MDF in color. As TGP, mount the Lithening in station 5
Or in the standard position of the ATFLIR
The CF188 is the Canadian version of the F-18A, also very modernized, with the cockpit of the F-18A, but with the MDF in color. As TGP mount the Sniper, in the ATFLIR position, and I imagine that also in the central position they will be able to carry it, although I have not seen any pictures of it. Let’s see if a Canadian can confirm it for us
The RAAF F-18 is also a highly modernized F-18A, at the level of the USN’s F-18C. Like the Spanish plane, it mounts the Lithening from TGP, in the same positions, in the central and in the ATFLIR position
In all versions, in addition to the current TGP, they can mount the old ATFLIR
-
Hi Lolo
The EF-18 is the Spanish version of the F-18A, very modernized. The cockpit is that of the F-18A, but with the MDF in color. As TGP, mount the Lithening in station 5
Or in the standard position of the ATFLIR
The CF188 is the Canadian version of the F-18A, also very modernized, with the cockpit of the F-18A, but with the MDF in color. As TGP mount the Sniper, in the ATFLIR position, and I imagine that also in the central position they will be able to carry it, although I have not seen any pictures of it. Let’s see if a Canadian can confirm it for us
The RAAF F-18 is also a highly modernized F-18A, at the level of the USN’s F-18C. Like the Spanish plane, it mounts the Lithening from TGP, in the same positions, in the central and in the ATFLIR position
In all versions, in addition to the current TGP, they can mount the old ATFLIR
Hi, Fresco,
We had gotten an earlier request- "Hi bugs,We are facing troubles with TGP in EF-18 (not sure if happens in other versions).
Please, could you have a look?
https://bmsbugs.blu3wolf.com/view.php?id=31
We don’t remember how to solve this."
At first I thought EF-18 was a typo for a Growler, so I’m glad you wrote. I’m not having any problems on the C, with ATFLIR on Station 4. I’ll try to tweak things with Editor and get it on Station 5 , Maybe I can repro
Update: Tanks to the Editor, I rigged a Litening on Station 5 and did not get any masking.
Hopefully, the Op will write back wit what problems he’s having.
Meanwhile, Lolo, if I might make a suggestion…what do you think about going into config, set the TGP to internal ("switch #1#) ,and check out what masking you get. Maybe if we can figure that out, we can help the OP? -
I believe that the position of the TGP in the F-18 RAAF is correct. Everything works fine there.
However, this afternoon I try to check it exactly and tell you.Thanks for the job.
Fresco
-
Hi all!
I’m not having any problems on the C, with ATFLIR on Station 4
That’s what I was checking yesterday evening . Same result , it seemed to show only “normal” masking . I was about to ask if it was really an issue ? Now , I’m sure it’s not !
TGP in the F-18 RAAF is correct
Was trying this too ; same conclusion and behavior as for the C(edit : it’s a C too !!! -edit-Fresco explained it’s a A , but BMS considers it’s a C in the .dat**** , that’s confusing) . But as I lack of experience on the Hornet , I was wondering if it was normal or not .
set the TGP to internal ("switch #1#) ,and check out what masking you get.
Was on my to do list , before I fell asleep …
-edit- but one question: this plane isn’t supposed to be fitted with an internal pod, not ?
-edit2- I did some testing , and for me stting TGP on 1 shows the good old “internal masking issue” . Only one thing , maybe I have found smg to do to avoid any kind of masking with external pod , but I need to dig . It can work , but if it does, there will be a little drawback . I’ll report later .
Where can I find the EF-18 mentionned above ?