As always, I am struggling to find the time to work on my FSX project, which as you know include continuous upgrade to my existing aicrafts as well as working on new ones (S-3B Viking being the current project).
Lately I've spent most of my time working to upgrade the F-35, but I also made continuos improvements to the F-14, as of today unreleased.
Here is the list of changes I am working on and their status - if you have suggestions, bug reports or requests, please leave a comment to this post.
Mistake in tail hook geometry (hollow hook instead of solid one) - Status: Closed. Fixed in latest, unreleased model build.
Misalignment of taileron pivot point and the fuselage textures - Status: Closed. Fixed in the latest, unreleased model.
Misplacement of textures in the fuselage, nearby crew access ladder - Status: Closed. Fixed in the latest, unreleased model.
Addition of new texture sets - Status: Closed. Added VF-2 159630 and VF-213 164348 courtesy of Jiri Soukup. Addition of other liveries under evaluation.
Addition of working Multi-Status Indicator to VC - Status: Open. MSI is working for A-A missiles, needs code for other ordnance.
Addition of variable, weight-dependent loadouts - Status: Open. Added Sidewinders, Sparrows and Phoenixes; GBU-31, GBU-12 and Lantirn planned but not implemented yet.
Limited Integration of Tacpack features - Status OPEN. Due to the lack of time and resources, only a small fraction of the Tacpack functionalities will be supported. Details of supported features as follows.
GUNS - Working, but no gun-director features are planned at the moment. Addition of other features under evaluation.
AIM-9 - Provisions for visual launch only, working and tested.
AIM-7 - No support planned. User will be able to jettison or fire the weapon, but target will not be acquired. Integrated, but almost useless.
AIM-54 - No support planned. User will be able to jettison or fire the weapon, but target will not be acquired. Not integrated yet.
GBU-31 - No support planned. User will be able to jettison or release the weapon, but target will not be acquired. Not integrated yet.
GBU-12 - No support planned. User will be able to jettison or fire the weapon, but target will not be acquired. Not integrated yet.
IN-FLIGHT REFUEL - Implemented but not tested.
ECM JAMMER - Implemented but not tested
NIGHT VISION GOGGLES -Implemented, working fine
CHAFFS/FLARES - Not implemented yet
I was hoping to see AIM-54 - thank you! The cat is finally getting some claws.
ReplyDeleteWhat happened to felix though? Should I release it separately or did you just forgot to mention it? Cheers, J.
o.O Awesome! nice THE BEST Freeware Plane for FSX:Acc thx fisrt time in blog! sry my eng :/
ReplyDeletehail from Brazil!!! nice Work *_*
Would like to see the roll rate fixed on this bird as well , it tends to roll fast at slow speeds as well:)
ReplyDeleteSo, will this new update that you are working on have Tacpack integration??
ReplyDelete@Jiri...forgot to mention!
ReplyDelete@Anonymous - will check the roll rate against flight manual
@Varun
It will depend on the status of the Tacpack
@All
I could not find, in the flight manual, any reference to what the MSI should show when a non-A-A weapons is loaded... This is probably in the weapon system manual... should anyone have info to share, please let me know.
Will the F-14 be able to use the ILS of the tacpack carriers? As for now, it cant.
ReplyDeleteAnd, nothing to do with the tacpack, but now when you are attached to the catapult the launch bar is not acually attached. Will you be able to fix that? Because it gives the F-14 a whole other look.
And I have to say that your aircraft is truly AMAZING, no freeware can be compaired. Cant believe you're doing such an awesome job for free! Thank you
@Anonymous
ReplyDeleteMy F-14D (and the T-45C and the F-35C, too, I believe) have "standard" (i.e.non-tacpack SDK compliant) avionics code. I know they have issues in Tacpack multiplayer environment, but as of today it is impossible for me to test it.
Also, I am not making any changes that will potentially be detrimental to "regular" FSX version... so, at the moment Tacpack-ILS will not be supported.
As for the launch bar... the problem is not the launch bar but the the "kneel"-ing feature which is not simulated at the moment.
I have thought of a way to do that, but it would require major changed to the visual model architecture...
Would it be possible to have the external fuel tanks weight dependent as well or even just have a model with them removed>
ReplyDeleteWhy not simply make the AIM-54 and AIM-7 exactly like the Sidewinder? That way they could still be used?
ReplyDeleteWhy not simply make the AIM-54 and AIM-7 exactly like the Sidewinder? That way they could still be used?
ReplyDeleteWhy not simply make the AIM-54's and AIM-7's functionally duplicates of the AIM-9?
ReplyDeleteAs for the fuel tanks, it could be done, but this would expose a texturing mistake in the lower part of the engine nacelle....which is very difficult to solve. So at the moment, fuel tanks will stay.
ReplyDeleteAs for the AIM-54's and AIM-7's the problem is that the Tacpack is a quite advanced and realistic system. Much more than what most people believe. Specifically, those missiles must be slaved to a radar track before launch, which would require a proper radar code and interface... while AIM-9 can be launched in visual mode and relies solely on the IR sensor - which does not require any radar interface at all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1lBw0oqyiI - This should help for F-35 suggestions.
ReplyDelete@Varun
ReplyDeleteThanks a lot, but I am posted on LM updates.
Beside, this is the F-14 thread.
True but I had to get the message through though
ReplyDeleteOh Dino, here is an awesome link of an F-35 video of the C variant.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTzFA3zgbxc
Nice vid , but as the man pointed out previously this is the f-14d thread
ReplyDeleteFor the missile problem, couldn't you just copy the AIM-7 from VRS and use it as you're own, and modify it for the AIM-54?
ReplyDeleteIt is more complicate than that.
ReplyDeleteVRS Tacpack SDK is an extremely flexible environment and quite realistic... but is also "generic" in its implementation, and (to a certain extent) aicraft agnostic.
Aicraft specific radar, launch, HUD and displays interface must be written from scratch by the developer - copy/paste is not a doable option.
I beg your pardon. Shooting in fsx is nothing like masturbation gloves with coarse sandpaper. How do you want the shoot it better to invest in a lock-on or any other simulator designed for this purpose. Even Falcon 4.0
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous,
ReplyDeletemost likely you have not tried the VRS Superbug and Tacpack - which, in terms of realism, provide IMHO a believable and quite realistic combat environment.
The main problem of the Tacpack, IMHO, is that if you use it in single player you have no real "opponents" (at least in the air)...but in multiplayer it is a realistic and complex aerial combat simulator.
Actually it is the best recreational Superbug simulation ever and one of the most complete rendition of a military plane in the market. And yes, I do have tried F4.
Then I am a "peaceful" FSX developer. But Tacpack SDK allows developers like me to add working weapons functionality to our projects quite easily.
come sempre sei un genio, ma perchè invece di cominciare altri proggetti come l's3, non finisci quelli che stai per finire, solo una curiosità eh, grazie per quello che stai facendo, anche se l'mb339 era fortemente desiderato, peccato, un gran peccato
ReplyDeleteCiao Daniele...
ReplyDeleteIn realtà, quando li rilascio, i progetti mi sembrano sempre "finiti"...nel senso che so che sono manchevoli di alcune cose, ma mi sembrano completi anche senza.
Poi, beh, il tarlo di quel che ho dovuto lasciare fuori si manifesta...e alla fine non resisto e mi rimetto ad aggiungere roba.
Nello specifico, il Tacpack è stato una bella (e benvenuta) tegola ai miei progetti...
Per il 339...semplicemente non ero convinto di come avevo impostato il progetto. Da buon italiano è un aereo che amo molto...e non mi sembrava che fosse partito col piede giusto.
Cmq, adesso che ho più confidenza col Tacpack, le cose dovrebbero riprendere più speditamente.
la gentilezza che si nota nelle tue risposte dimostra oltre che una gran intelligenza(e si nota nei tuoi progetti),anche una gran persona fuori dall'ambito prettamente videoludico.
ReplyDeletecomplimenti.
riguardo fsx, che è quello che ci interessa, a mio parere personale, il tacpack è la ultima cosa che mi interessa.
Sappiamo tutti che fsx, nativamente non supporta tale funzione, dunque per quanti workaround si faccia, sempre sarà qualcosa di "rotto".E sappiamo molto bene che ci sono altri titoli, che svolgono tale funzione.Dcs in primis.
D'altronde sviluppare aerei militari, ci porterà sempre alla conclusione che avendo a che fare con tali apparecchi, il solo navigare sarà alquanto riduttivo.Se voglio solo navigare, lo farò con il cessna sei d'accordo?
Quello che volevo dire comunque, dopo tanta zuppa, che i tuoi progetti sono una favola, ma preferirei sempre più perfezionamenti ai modelli di volo, più aggiornamenti a livello grafico, che un paio di missili da lanciare nel nulla, sapendo benissimo che tutto questo costa molto sforzo economico e personale.
Una mia opinione personale come già detto, so che molti altri non condivideranno la mia idea, e va bene così.
ti auguro un buon proseguimento in spiaggia, te lo sei più che meritato:)
saluti