Print

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

[western0221]

I add to Pablo's special steam effect a bit more function.
And Catapult power is made to decrease in old year the mission set , before 1946 PowerJets is ignored.

Sorry, now it's only for Dark Blue World 1.6.
To other MOD environments, after day I will release, one after another.

Catapult/Arresring wire MOD and Diving_Hawk's Essex CV tweak (Temporary version4)
https://www.mediafire.com/?uv6uzxu99ncwl8u
This depends on Diving_Hawk's Essex CV SCB-125

Catapult/Arresring wire MOD (Temporary version4 without Essex SCB-125)
https://www.mediafire.com/?2lux5f7n62e9k9s

You have to install +1 this "Variable Temperature MOD" to make steam effect more loudly by mission's season or weather.
https://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php/topic,20264.0.html
On summer fine day, steam clouds are soon disapper.
On winter day or rainy day, steam clouds are more smoky.


Catapult power increasing at each year
MOD default parameters are changed by mission's year:
At     -1945 CatapultPower=10 , CatapultPowerJets:ignored and use CatapultPower
At 1946-1950 CatapultPower=13 , CatapultPowerJets=19
At 1951-1954 CatapultPower=16 , CatapultPowerJets=22
At 1955-1971 CatapultPower=19 , CatapultPowerJets=25
At 1971-     CatapultPower=19 , CatapultPowerJets=30

You can chenge CatapultPower and CatapultPowerJets parameters in conf.ini [Mods] section.
Parameters you write are used at missions 1955-1971.
Before 1955, Powers are automatically decreased each -3,
and CatapultPowerJets is ignored before 1946.

[FANATIC MODDER]

I understand that benitomuso focus is to catapults but possibly there is time to mention something that bothered me a long time: Please try the B-25 Raiders and you 'll understand. Each plane wing overlaps the others. So when we have such big planes like the B-25, the carrier mod blindly puts them again side by side. Is any way that this can be fixed?

[benitomuso]

Fanatic Modder,

       what you suggest is quite hard to achieve. A dynamic MOD able to consider if the planes have folding wings or not, the maximum wingspan, setting the position avoiding any collision, etc., is hard to program, but possible.

  But suppose you finally get this:

  There is a way to fit them there, but you would not be able to take off from the USN carriers being like this, so in the middle of the deck. There is no distance for the first planes. And they didn't use catapults at all. And what if for the same mission you just set a B-29 instead of a B-25? How would the MOD manage to fit those big planes in the deck?

  There are too many weird and abnormal (quite impossible in real life) situations. So how the code should react to that?

  Regards,
                        Pablo

[western0221]

I think the same as FANATIC MODDER says, in long time.
When the carrier is a narrow one (like IJN light carrier) and airplanes have no folding wings or wide span instead of folded,
In using CTO-MOD filling, the number of airplanes filled on a deck is decreased to a half by Daidalos default filling.
In example, airplanes are small one like IJN A5M (old small airplane), IJN Hosho CV(MOD) can fill 5 airplanes by CTO-MOD, but default 9 airplanes.

We HAVE the java code "Each plane wing overlaps the others" filling one, at default Daidalos code.

I think that...
1. CTO-MOD's filling process "TESTs" in memory each 2 ways and counts filled airplanes.
2. Compairing which way can many airplanes filled, more airplanes filled way choice and "DO".

I don't have an idea "How to count filled airplanes".
Now flown airplanes are auromarically "Air Start".

I add one more problem.
Each airplanes wing span when folded is hard coded in CTO-MOD.
When we have more carrier based airplanes with folded wings at new MODs, we have to retouch CTO code to implement folded span size of  the new airplane.
If can, folded width is written in airplanes own class inside - moved from CTO class - like Storber said about Carrier has which Catapult parameters moved from inside Catapult MOD to Ship class.

[benitomuso]

Wingspan is an FM parameter, you eventually can retrieve it from there authomatically without having to hardcode that. I haven't payed attention on how the CTO MOD was written. But there are other problems about the configuration of a plane (where its win is located, where is the elevator, etc.) that could lead to wrong distribution.

But again: suppose that the mission has two flights in the deck of a big carrier, but the user selects the B-17 as the plane (something impossible in reality but the game allows that). What would the MOD do on that situation? It would not be able to fit 8 B-17s. So would it collapse? Will not show them?

This is what I mean about that in some way there should be a reasonability principle on what would be placed in a carrier to take off and if so it's quite basic to code it. But if you want to consider all the possibilities, there are many, and for sure some will fail. So, doing the big effort to try to cover everything worths the pain if the code must have a lot of verifications? From my point of view a couple of exceptions doesn't justify that. But it is only a point of view.

Regards,
                  Pablo

[western0221]

Wingspan is an FM parameter, you eventually can retrieve it from there authomatically without having to hardcode that. I haven't payed attention on how the CTO MOD was written.

I've read CTO MOD java source code to understand how that MOD works filling airplanes.
In FM parameters, full wingspan is recorded, and CTO MOD uses it.
But folded wingspan doesn't exist in FM parameters.
No way to know how meters folded wingspan is.

Then, CTO MOD has hard-coded folded wingspan meters at each known airplanes.
In com.maddox.il2.ai.AirportCarrier class of HSHX5

Code: [Select]

    private int setAircraftDimensions(Aircraft aircraft)
    {
        byte byte0 = -1;
        if((aircraft instanceof F4F) && !(aircraft instanceof F4F3))
            byte0 = 5;
        else
        if((aircraft instanceof F6F) || (aircraft instanceof F4U))
            byte0 = 6;
        else
        if(aircraft instanceof TBF)
            byte0 = 7;
        else
        if((aircraft instanceof B5N) || (aircraft instanceof B6N))
            byte0 = 8;
        else
        if(aircraft instanceof D3A)
            byte0 = 12;
        else
        if((aircraft instanceof A6M2_21) || (aircraft instanceof A6M2_21Late) || (aircraft instanceof A6M3_22) || (aircraft instanceof A6M3a_22ko))
            byte0 = 11;
        else
        if((aircraft instanceof SEAFIRE3) || (aircraft instanceof SEAFIRE3F))
            byte0 = 5;
        else
        if(aircraft instanceof F9F)
            byte0 = 6;
        else
        if(aircraft instanceof SeaFury)
            byte0 = 6;
        else
        if(aircraft instanceof Swordfish)
            byte0 = 6;
        return byte0;
    }
This "byte0" is the meters wingspan folded such airplanes.
And when setAircraftDimensions returns -1, com.maddox.il2.ai.air.CellAirPlane class uses FM wingspan.

At DBW1.6 's AirportCarrier class - it's I havn't read - perhaps adding FJ-3 Fury's folded wingspan in this function.

[benitomuso]

Ok Western.

   How does the Hotkey to fold wings operate? Cannot you receive from there a clear confirmation if the plane has folding wings? If so, easily you can consider that if a plane has folding wings, a simple equation like float WingSpanFolded = WingSpan * 0.6 would hardly produce an improper value.

  This is what I mean about simplifying code. Because you cannot modelize everything in detail if you want to be comprehensive. The most you specify the most you narrow the scope of the model (I speak about reality modelization) you use. It is always a tradeoff: the spirit of the right implementation is to achieve a good balance.

  Regards,
                         Pablo

[western0221]

Now I read Daidalos 4.10.1m AirportCarrier class and CellAirPlane class.
I decide these folded wingspan hard-coded was made by Fireball at CTO-MOD.
Daidalos 4.10.1m classes doesn't has any those hard-coded.

If so, easily you can consider that if a plane has folding wings, a simple equation like float WingSpanFolded = WingSpan * 0.6 would hardly produce an improper value.

No! No! Airplanes are not so easy one.
In WWII, particular than today.
Carrier based Fighter airplanes or DiveBomber airplanes were in begunning.
Countries' own needs on Carrier operation and countries' technical capabilities made thier airplanes with much variation.
See and compare A6M2 and F4F, their folding style.
See and compare D3A and TBM, their folding style.
Or Seafire in RN.
We can't decide their WingspanFolded = Wingspan * 0.6.

And I think... Fireball tried to modelize these airplanes' personalities in Carrier cell filling.
I respect Fireball's hard work.
I think, when I retouch his CTO-MOD code, don't decrease his modelize detail.
And plus one, allowing IL-2 1946 players funny & freely play.
At Daidalos 4.10.1m and Fireball CTO-MOD 5.3.3 (or HSFX5's 5.4 version) , players can fly on Land-based airplanes from Carrier deck.
Like Doolittle Raid, Taking-off from Carrier by B-25!!
But I read soon DBW1.6 AI MOD's AirportCarrier class ... we can't play Doolittle Raid.
B-25 will break at spawning on Carrier.

[Hangman]

This is going to be annoying my timespeed is normal when I use autopilot but when I don't use autopilot timespeeds are 1/2 slower this happens with all planes any help appreciated

[fokker95]

Now I read Daidalos 4.10.1m AirportCarrier class and CellAirPlane class.
I decide these folded wingspan hard-coded was made by Fireball at CTO-MOD.
Daidalos 4.10.1m classes doesn't has any those hard-coded.

If so, easily you can consider that if a plane has folding wings, a simple equation like float WingSpanFolded = WingSpan * 0.6 would hardly produce an improper value.

No! No! Airplanes are not so easy one.
In WWII, particular than today.
Carrier based Fighter airplanes or DiveBomber airplanes were in begunning.
Countries' own needs on Carrier operation and countries' technical capabilities made thier airplanes with much variation.
See and compare A6M2 and F4F, their folding style.
See and compare D3A and TBM, their folding style.
Or Seafire in RN.
We can't decide their WingspanFolded = Wingspan * 0.6.

And I think... Fireball tried to modelize these airplanes' personalities in Carrier cell filling.
I respect Fireball's hard work.
I think, when I retouch his CTO-MOD code, don't decrease his modelize detail.
And plus one, allowing IL-2 1946 players funny & freely play.
At Daidalos 4.10.1m and Fireball CTO-MOD 5.3.3 (or HSFX5's 5.4 version) , players can fly on Land-based airplanes from Carrier deck.
Like Doolittle Raid, Taking-off from Carrier by B-25!!
But I read soon DBW1.6 AI MOD's AirportCarrier class ... we can't play Doolittle Raid.
B-25 will break at spawning on Carrier.

What about putting the values for folded wings in the aircraft object file and pulling the data into the cell placement based upon its size ? That would reduce the code required and avoid putting in all the aircraft in listings (as seems ot have been done for a few already)

[western0221]

What about putting the values for folded wings in the aircraft object file and pulling the data into the cell placement based upon its size ? That would reduce the code required and avoid putting in all the aircraft in listings (as seems ot have been done for a few already)

fokker says is right.
And in the future, I try the code improve like fokker says.
But continues this story is "Off Topic" here.
That is "Carrier Take-Off MOD by Fireball" area, and CTO's class files are separated from Pablo tweaking for Catapult and Arresting wire.
I will make a new topic about Carrier Take-Off MOD in WIP or other space.

I write about some comparing 3 types airplane filling arrangement on deck in my blog in English. When you are intereted in it, please read.
http://il2itaki.blog135.fc2.com/blog-entry-877.html

[FANATIC MODDER]

Thank you for your answers. I was suprised when I realized that I opened up such an interesting discussion and as it seems, with results!
To answer to benitomuso I understand his point of view but I was thinking about something much simpler: When we have a plane that it's wingspan (folded wings or not doesn't matter) exceeds a certain limit, then the take off procedure would eliminate the side by side taxing and create a single qeue. But as we see, western0221 made already something more sophisticated. Great....