Print

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

[wern moldy]

I'm running Bat 4.0 with Dgen for BAT & WxTech's effect pack. I visited an old campaign that I'd played several years ago: The Seafires of Force V. Failed at my first carrier take off which was surprising given all these years of experience....and failed a further 19 times in a row after that. It's like you can't get enough speed. Did not have this problem the last time I played the campaign. As soon as you leave the deck the a/c rolls to one side or the other & plop....straight into the drink. I tried various trim and flap settings but nothing worked. Finally I did a take off on auto pilot....same result! I did it 2 more times to confirm it wasn't just a random glitch. The damn thing won't even lift off on auto pilot....and to prove I'm not useless, I performed a carrier take off in an F4F, with no problem......................what in the f*ck is wrong?!
I grow tired of these issues with BAT. It's almost like every time I play there's some new glitch, another tail wheel won't lock, another a/c instrument doesn't work, another Dgen campaign doesn't function properly.....'I think I'll skip Dgen for a while, ooooh! Here's an ol' favourite....The Seafires of Force V....I haven't done a carrier campaign in a long time'..........................................!

[WxTech]

Which carrier? And did you try setting a decent breeze and having the tub steer into it at a speed of at least 20kt?

[WxTech]

Right after posting previously from my phone, I went over to my computer and tried a take-off mission I made years ago for the Martlet on a Pacific map, in which which I substituted the Seafire III L. Wind was set to calm, CVE84 (Shamrock Bay) steaming at 35 km/h (18 kt). I rolled forward a bit so as to clear the 3 wingies to my side, set chocks, unfolded the wings, set one notch of flaps, revved up the motor to full power, released the chocks, and got safely away on the first try. I was not much above stall speed, but that was a fairly short take-off roll with an effective head-wind of 35 km/h.

[wern moldy]

Right after posting previously from my phone, I went over to my computer and tried a take-off mission I made years ago for the Martlet on a Pacific map, in which which I substituted the Seafire III L. Wind was set to calm, CVE84 (Shamrock Bay) steaming at 35 km/h (18 kt). I rolled forward a bit so as to clear the 3 wingies to my side, set chocks, unfolded the wings, set one notch of flaps, revved up the motor to full power, released the chocks, and got safely away on the first try. I was not much above stall speed, but that was a fairly short take-off roll with an effective head-wind of 35 km/h.

I already said I tried to take off with auto pilot (twice) and the thing still landed in the drink.......what do ya want from me?! What the hell difference would the carrier make?! I don't steer the damn ship so how could I make sure it's facing the wind even if I wanted to?!....and I've played it before.....when the latest thing was VPModpac................

[cbradbury]

Well, Glenn does have a point. First thing to check is whether the Seafire can take off from a carrier, then work from there - after all, it could be some incompatibility with an old campaign causing the issue.

Quick test that you can try - set up a carrier - by default it will be doing 26 knots (I know - I was the one who set all the ship speeds in BAT). Don't worry about wind speed or direction - leave them both at zero in the mission - 26 knots should get any prop plane off the deck. Then try a seafire launch with and without catapult and see what happens.

Yours,

Clive

[SAS~Storebror]

Help requests work so much better when you refrain from swearing and accept good advice.
Add to that, no one keeps anyone from fixing issues they identify in BAT or any other mod or package.
Just coming along and badmouthing something that others put years of work into is... mildly offensive, to me at least.


Mike

[Ta183Huckebein]

Do you have a link for that campaign? I'd be interested in seeing if I could recreate the problem

[wern moldy]

Help requests work so much better when you refrain from swearing and accept good advice.
Add to that, no one keeps anyone from fixing issues they identify in BAT or any other mod or package.
Just coming along and badmouthing something that others put years of work into is... mildly offensive, to me at least.


Mike

I find it amusing when people who 'talk the talk' on forums like this... like they're real life combat pilots, macho men who use the jargon, attempt to dazzle all with their aviation knowledge, then become soy boys over a bit of harsh language.....that's funny! Oh, and contradict themselves in the process; you've displayed the same attitude and used the same language....over BOS I believe, the proof is on this forum.....so if this place has a 'do as I say, not as I do' attitude, then that's all I need to know....I'm outa here; my world won't end.......

I haven't a clue about using FMB; and don't care to know, I can't build campaigns or make mods.... my contribution was making regular donations in the short time I've been here, coz to me it seemed unethical to take something for nothing. But after a time, I no longer felt like paying money to have people fuck up my game......funny that! To draw an analogy, I don't enjoy spending more time tinkering with my car in the garage than actually driving it....or paying tinkerers to solve one problem only to create another...and you're offended when someone mentions this and gets annoyed over it?!

If there was a disclaimer stating that the forum was best suited to people who enjoy fooling 'round with computer code more than actually playing the game, I would never have joined in the first place; to me such activity is akin to watching paint dry. In my chosen profession, I'm an expert and such mistakes don't happen. If someone is gonna mess with things they're not fully versed in, they ought to learn to take their lumps as well, no matter how well intentioned they are or how long they've been doing it, or just stop tinkering......have a good look on this site, it's 'chock a block' with thousands of pages of people HAVING PROBLEMS.....gee, I wonder why?!

I'll delete my account as soon as I figure out how to do it...or you can do it, or ban me or what ever, I don't give a shit. I'll play the stock game if I have to.....at least everything works.

[SAS~Storebror]

Wow.
You do have issues.
But we're not going to solve them cause we aren't any psychiatrists.

You paid money, and now you're disappointed that this didn't buy you a hundred modders who will do just what you want?
Poor sap.
Want me to reimburse you?

You'd better keep a safe distance from this site. The liberal and open-minded style celebrated here won't do a slow-witted any good.
You're not seeking help anyway. All you want to do is stir shit.


Mike

[wern moldy]

It would appear that the one with ‘issues’ here is you. That’s why your entire response is packed to the brim with bullshit, casting aspersions that are not even close to the truth, IE…     *suggesting I want my money back….where did I even suggest that?!
*suggesting my gripe is because the game doesn’t conform to ‘my expectations’…..
What should I say?! ‘Oh I love that 2/3rds of the Dgen campaigns I start, won’t run all the way through anymore’!!
Then there’s tail wheels that don’t lock, canopies that won’t open, cockpit instruments that don’t work anymore, to name a few………now add a Seafire that even the autopilot can’t lift off the deck……….
Everything I wrote is the truth…. And that’s what has you in a huff…including the way you contradict your own actions elsewhere on this forum by criticizing me for doing the same thing!! You never denied it….how could you?... It’s the truth.
Furthermore, I did not single anyone out nor did I slander any individual. I let my feelings be known about some aspects of the way this program has been going…..and for that, now I’m the bad guy!
I stated when I first joined, that I’m not a forum dude; they tend to be full of dickheads…and you proved it with a reply that is bereft of any facts, bereft of truth, merely a reply for the sake of it….I DEFINITELY don’t belong here………..and thanks for not calling me a liar!

[SAS~Storebror]

I see.
We're all idiots, ruining the game, introducing one bug after another, breaking things endlessly, and not producing anything useful.
Our forum is full of dickheads, I'm the biggest one.
You are the only expert here.
And you don't care to learn anything about the game. You know it all anyway.
Stock is best, mod sites like SAS are a pile of bullshit.

Does anyone else hear that distant flush sound coming closer?
What was your question again?


Mike

[cbradbury]

Well, I do not propose to get involved with rants, so how about a more measured approach?

Let's start with the Seafire. It takes off perfectly well from a carrier both via autopilot and manual. In this case I actually used one of the worst carriers to launch from - HMS Furious - simply because I already had that CV in a test mission. It has no catapults, and a weird multi-level flight deck, yet AP and manual takeoff were fine. So the Seafire works - the problem, as I suspected, lies somewhere else.

By no tailwheel lock, do you mean that aircraft that once had a working lock no longer do so? If so, please be specific so that I can test them. If not, with somewhere around 1,000 aircraft (I think) in BAT, there are certainly quite a few with no tailwheel lock modelled. Same with opening canopies and instruments. It is what it is - some aircraft are not always finished to absolute completion, but are released in 'good enough' condition to fly in the sim. That seems fair enough to me - what do you think? Also, would you consider no tailwheel lock and a non-opening canopy to be an absolute deal breaker? Personally, I would rather have the aircraft in the sim than not. After all, with such a vast choice you can always opt not to fly an aircraft you don't like - there are plenty more to choose from.

Finally, many of the added aircraft have errors corrected and improvements made over time, sometimes by the original author, sometimes by others. Take a look at the recent work on seaplane cockpits by Asura, to take one example. This is an ongoing, dynamic project, with gradual improvements over time, undertaken by amateurs at no charge - it is never going to be a finished article 'out of the box'. 

Yours,

Clive