Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dreamk]

In the hier.him replace the entry for AroneR_CAP by the following - it will make disappear the static aileron that appears behind the mobile one.

[AroneR_CAP]
Mesh AroneR_CAP
Parent WingROut_D0
Hidden
Separable
Attaching 0 -1.000000 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 3.652542 1.418565 -0.155459
CollisionObject xaroner
CollisionObject .xxlockar1
CollisionObject .xxlockar2

[Draken]

Thanks , but this does not work 
I deleted the content of AroneR_CAP , then wrote your line in it .
Trying to fly the Potez , there was no more cockpit in game and the screen was frozen...

[Birdman]

Dreamk didn't mean the AroneR_CAP.msh file but the [AroneR_CAP] section in hier.him file.

I think that the best fix is to remove [VatorL_CAP], [VatorR_CAP], [Rudder1_CAP], [AroneL_CAP] and [AroneR_CAP] sections completely from hier.him. Those CAP meshes are complete damaged control surfaces, so they shouldn't really be there at all because they only make static versions visible when the part detaches.

EDIT: Looks like all other CAP meshes are also just copies of D3 parts, so they should be modeled properly (or removed until proper meshes are modeled) because in this WIP situation they just leave parts visible when another copy of them detaches. However, unlike the control surface CAPs the other CAPs are needed to fill the holes left by detached parts, but the D3 copies just can't do that.

[Dreamk]

When looking at photos of the period of the SCW and of the 1940 campaign, of real shot-down planes, one can see clearly that in most cases alerons, rudders and elevators DID remain in place, but were often pierced with multiple bullet holes - therefore there si a need for CAP meshes for these parts, identical to the D3 meshes - what is needed here are a better damage tga files.
Loss of mobile surfaces does not occur when they are shot at by non-explosive bullets (the current ammo by then) but when they are submitted to blast from explosion of heavy DCA shells - this happened later in ww2 with the Flak88 for instance- what happens with small calibre explosive shells (20mm and over) is in between - with most 20mm shells systems used in ww2, these surfaces will remain in place, at least in part.

[Draken]

Thanks !
I noticed also that it is easy to fly acrobatics with this plane ! 
It can also dive until 600 km/h before loosing ailerons .
Are you sure that the FM is realistic ?

[Stefan SG]

It seems that the plane has an unrealistic survivability. Bf-109D shot at close range all the bullets (40% hits) aiming at engines and pilots. Almost nothing. Only a killed upper gunner and slight smoke.

[Dreamk]

For your info, the survability parameters of the FM are identical with Il2 core He111H-2....we must keep consistency till someone will take over the gigantical task of rewriting all the FM in this game (volunteers, please raise your hand.......)
For a plane with a steel tube structure, and a top speed of 310kmh, a stress limit speed of 600kmh is reasonably expectable.
BTW the reports from SCW fighting show that this aircraft could come back home even after sufferring extensive damage - on the 19 Potez 540/542 serving in Spain, 14 were thus "shot down"...and rebuilt to refly operationally (some more than once!)
Like most aircraft of the period it's not the ammount of hits that was critical but the emplacement of these hits, as the bullets used were of small caliber, without high impact velocity, without high rate of fire (the Shkas was a solitary case in this period) and, except very few exceptions, non explosive.

[Birdman]

When looking at photos of the period of the SCW and of the 1940 campaign, of real shot-down planes, one can see clearly that in most cases alerons, rudders and elevators DID remain in place, but were often pierced with multiple bullet holes - therefore there si a need for CAP meshes for these parts, identical to the D3 meshes - what is needed here are a better damage tga files.
Loss of mobile surfaces does not occur when they are shot at by non-explosive bullets (the current ammo by then) but when they are submitted to blast from explosion of heavy DCA shells - this happened later in ww2 with the Flak88 for instance- what happens with small calibre explosive shells (20mm and over) is in between - with most 20mm shells systems used in ww2, these surfaces will remain in place, at least in part.

Aren't the D1, D2 and D3 meshes there for situations with hits to the control surface that is still remaining in place? At least I wouldn't like to see the D3 control surface flying off and then another copy (CAP) still remaining there magically. If you don't want to see control surfaces detaching due to small caliber bullet hits, then why not make them tougher or edit the damage code so that only hits to the attachment points can detach them.

You can also test removing the large hitboxes (like xaronel) for D3 control surfaces and leaving only the attachment point hitboxes there. That might give exactly the effect you want so that small caliber hits can only damage the control surfaces but not shoot them off unless hitting the attachment points. However, I expect that larger caliber hits like AAA and HE cannon rounds can still shoot off the control surfaces by making more damage that jumps over the D3 stage. Then you can still lose control surfaces by diving too fast, so it should all be realistic without CAPs.

[Dreamk]

Sorry to say that Birdman, but you're wrong. The game is built to some extend as an arcade game - "shoot and kill" and it's quite unrealistic to see parts of plane fly out under bullets - even cannon fire - or planes exloding such as we see quite often.  It's not a question of making parts tougher or not - it's simply nor occuring in real life - these are simple principles of ballistics. And if we try to modelize weapons accurately, we need also try to modelize damage accurately. And the most realistic is to have CAPS modelized through alpha layers of damage tga  on the whole mesh. But its' my own opinion of what is after all only a game and everyone is fully entitled to think differently and have a different approach towards this game.

[propnut27]

With regard to the problem I have getting this fine aircraft to land on autopilot: I tried reducing the airspeed at each waypoint to more reasonable limits, but that did not solve the problem. Now, I know from nothing about programming anything, but I did notice, while fiddling around with various things to get it to behave, that, on entering the landing pattern, there is no acknowledgement from the control tower that me and my flight even exist. the other pilots in my flight request landing instructions, but get no response. On the planes the flaps do not actuate, the gear remains up, and the plane breaks off for another circuit. I know it must be me, but I can't figure out what I'm doing wrong.

[Mick]

... did you try to reduce the altitude too ...?

Try with 500 m for ex ...

[Dreamk]

Landing bug confirmed. Origin identified in the Polares section of the fmd. Here's teh corrected FM (first post updated)
https://www.mediafire.com/?a3gdgfkbamqlrl4

PS - the same problem exists for teh Br20 as they share common data in this polares section of the fmd - I uploaded a new FM for the Br20 see link https://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php/topic,34784.msg379313.html#msg379313
(direct download link https://www.mediafire.com/?lm1mux92dx3zzeg)