Print

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

[mikejr]

Evening all,

I'm not a modder, I'm no programmer and I'm certainly nothing like any of the pros on here but if there was one thing I had the ability to do it would be trying to fix the question of temperamental radio navigation in 4.10.1.  I also don't mean to be a nuisance posting this issue more than any others!

I have a ModAct 3.06 game on 4.10.1 with a fair few mods, I have the latest buttons - 9.7 at the time of writing. A while ago I removed 4 or 5 mods because I found they disabled (I will come back to this) the radio navigation features in IL-2 almost entirely (I will come back to this too).

Before I go on, yes I have all the difficulty settings set up to use radio nav', it's nothing to do with in-flight music and radio stations, and I've exhausted almost every supposed solution out there to no avail.

First, have a look at all the mods I currently have installed:


Now, I know some may have mentioned this before, but the stock Bf-110G-2 navigation training missions work fine even without radio navigation being available elsewhere. This is because no matter what beacons always work in the 110G-2. For instance in the Coral Sea map the carrier beacons are all selectable and audible in the Bf-110.

The reason I bring this up is because I have just installed Claymore's utterlly brilliant Fw-190/Ta-152 pack (https://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php/topic,20351.0.html). It is litterally one of the best mods out there at present... with one (I think fairly important) downside: It removes, almost disables, the ability of all other a/c (minus the 110) in game to use beacons, even if they did before. They work fine in the 190's and 110 with this mod installed, but nothing else. Ok, I could just use those aircraft when I want to use beacons, but what with all the expansion and additions to the IL2 sim why would I want to reduce playability? I know it is this mod because I tested my game by removing some other mods and the beacons still played up with the Claymore 190's enabled.   

I have done some research and some a/c seem to 'sort of' have it avaliable but simply unselectable. To ensure it wasn't other arbitrary known problems causing it I tested the stock install into which I have my ModAct installed and all was ok there. I then created a new pilot profile and assigned keys to the beacon selection. The problem still exists.  Assuming the map has beacons on it, some a/c display the HUD message 'Beacon: none' at the start of the flight (see here:
)
which initially suggests that beacons are available for that a/c (this message always appears on the 190 and 110 - always is important, incidentally even if there aren't beacons on the map 'Beacon: none' still shows in the 190 at the start of a flight) and then you should be able to select the available beacons using the assigned hot-keys, but you cannot. Such aircraft are the B-25J. Most aircraft which had previous total beacon compatibility do not even have that initial HUD message on a map where beacons should be usable. 

Being no expert, I can't say with any expertise, but it could perhaps be a common set of conflicting class files, entries in hier.him files, or something much simpler... that is why I'm searching for some help on this.  I think it is key to learn that beacons are always available in the Bf-110G-2 and (at least with the 190's) in the mod aircraft which otherwise causes the loss of beacons everywhere else. Take away the a/c which causes the loss of beacons (except with itself) and the problem is solved. I hope that helps some... There is nothing to go on in the log, or any error files, by the way.

I'm aware my efforts for finding help with this are futile, due to the nature of modding and the game engine anyway, but I wouldn't be surprised, going on the immense talents that exist among this forum alone, if there was a potential permanent reliable fix for this. The reason I care so much is because I use the beacons in IL-2 regularly and enjoy the training missions which utilise them. I am also in the process of building a few missions which use one or two of them and they are now redundant. I also really want Clay's 190 mod to work! 

It is genuinely frustrating after over 6 months of building up a brilliant and comprehensive mod pack to have what is to me an equally important part of the game suddenly unexplainably avaliable. Of course I could remove the 190 mod but the problem would still exist for others... 

I know the demand for this is likely to be low, since most use the modpacks of DBW and UP, but I hope there is some interest out there for this.

I will stop rambling now!

The pros out there please understand my pain! 

If you need anything else explaining/clarifying just let me know. I am willing to test anyone's potential solution at the risk of my beloved install!

One day the day will come when I'll be totally content with it and will fly it more than I spend time on the internet for it and mod it! 

Michael.

[vanir]

A lot of your mods conflict with 4.10 navigation. Some of them say in their threads "works with 4.10" but unless the mod makers specifically with any and all cockpit/canopy mods (including new slots), have repacked their classfiles to be 4.101 compatable, they aren't and whilst the mod may work for some, it will only in a limited capacity and won't include navigation features, and may cause further conflicts with other aircraft.

I found for example I had to just plain disable/delete every single mod that involved cockpit class files (including canopy mods) that weren't specifically designed to work in 4.10 even if the thread suggests compatability. I found by trial and error this is not so.
eg. the Hurricane canopy mod, spit 12/14 mod and all other pre-4.10 new slots supposedly working like the Me410/210 flyable, Fw189, older Tony Jcats (there's a new 4.10 compatable version you don't have on there, that looks the older 4.09 one), etc.

Your conflicts are there. When I screened all the non-specifically 4.10 cockpit classfile mods and put only specifically compatable ones, in total it amounts to less than half the number of mods you've got installed. They just haven't got around to repacking all the older mods that mess with classfiles and may conflict yet, and there are more that haven't been repacked but cursory tested and declared working, but may conflict than there are specifically 4.10 designed mods here. There's your conflict imho. I don't think it's the 4.101 Fw190/Ta152 pack though I can't d/l it 'till I top up web credit (almost out 'til payday) but Clay knows what he's doing with 4.10 from what I see and just look at your mods man. Half them aren't specific 4.10 designed mods.

[HundertzehnGustav]

i dont have a clue how to help yopur very , very specific situation, but if that is your mods folder, why not go the DBW route?
Planes - in  there
Maps - in there
Cockpits - maybe in there. but can be added later if you really wish.
Effects... sure.

I dont have a shadow of a doubt that what vanir says is valid... you have a mods folder that has so many creators as sources, stuff is bound to be lass than compatible, or, compatible at first sight (no crash) but the inner workings are not working well or at all.

re: thread title: with this specific, personal, unique setup i do not think that it is about "anyone" wanting that stuff cracked.
It is about You wanting it done.
Right ?

[sputnikshock]

In order to have working beacons, in the cockpit classfiles of an aircraft, instruments need to be configured to use beacons if realistic navigation is turned on. But all this does is governing the correct movement of instrument needles.
However, I cannot see how these entries, or absence of these entries, could lead to radio beacons becoming non-functional in general.
IIRC for that to happen, a mod would have to replace the AircraftState.class, which is part of the fm set of classes.
I am aware this doesn't solve your problem though...

[mikejr]

Thanks for the enlightening replies guys,

A lot of your mods conflict with 4.10 navigation. Some of them say in their threads "works with 4.10" but unless the mod makers specifically with any and all cockpit/canopy mods (including new slots), have repacked their classfiles to be 4.101 compatable, they aren't and whilst the mod may work for some, it will only in a limited capacity and won't include navigation features, and may cause further conflicts with other aircraft.

That's fair enough, but one of the conditions of keeping mods in my game is whether or not they mess around with radio navigation - hence my dilemma over the long awaiting 190 pack... And before this none of my mods affected radio nav, and the one's that do I've disabled as you can see ("-").

eg. the Hurricane canopy mod, spit 12/14 mod and all other pre-4.10 new slots supposedly working like the Me410/210 flyable, Fw189, older Tony Jcats (there's a new 4.10 compatable version you don't have on there, that looks the older 4.09 one), etc.

I understand that but these do not cause the problems I describe with my system, although it's good to know they're not technically 4.10 compatible.

Your conflicts are there. When I screened all the non-specifically 4.10 cockpit classfile mods and put only specifically compatable ones, in total it amounts to less than half the number of mods you've got installed. They just haven't got around to repacking all the older mods that mess with classfiles and may conflict yet, and there are more that haven't been repacked but cursory tested and declared working, but may conflict than there are specifically 4.10 designed mods here. There's your conflict imho. I don't think it's the 4.101 Fw190/Ta152 pack though I can't d/l it 'till I top up web credit (almost out 'til payday) but Clay knows what he's doing with 4.10 from what I see and just look at your mods man. Half them aren't specific 4.10 designed mods.

I am highly greatful to Claymore and he is clearly a modding guru to turn out such a brilliant mod (if I only wanted to fly the 190's the whole time it would be fine), so I am in no way putting the blame on him. Do you think it could be, thanks to mods not actually being compatible with 4.10, another mod conflicting with the 190 mod which somehow messes around with beacons in game? What if I disabled every mod I had and just left the 190's in as an experiment? 

i dont have a clue how to help yopur very , very specific situation, but if that is your mods folder, why not go the DBW route?
Planes - in  there
Maps - in there
Cockpits - maybe in there. but can be added later if you really wish.
Effects... sure.

I dont have a shadow of a doubt that what vanir says is valid... you have a mods folder that has so many creators as sources, stuff is bound to be lass than compatible, or, compatible at first sight (no crash) but the inner workings are not working well or at all.

re: thread title: with this specific, personal, unique setup i do not think that it is about "anyone" wanting that stuff cracked.
It is about You wanting it done.
Right ?

First, I don't want to give the impression I'm being selfish, I just thought there might be plenty others out there who also want radio navigation but don't have it, and might also want it fixed.  But, among the many many many things I think about in the shower DBW was one of them this morning. What I like about the modact though firstly is it's customisability and secondly you can decide how much disk space you want taking up. The downsides are bugs such as this as well as spending more time modding than actually playing!  ??? With DBW is there still space for customisability and such? By that I even mean simple things like changing mission background screens and replacing the stock missions with ones which are mod aircraft compatible... as in, is the file/folder system structure the same? Also, my current IL2 1946 folder (with SAS enabled) is 16.8GB. How big would UP/DBW be do you think? Could I install it on top or would it be best to start from the stock game? This is a serious consideration now... as I'm fed up with modding and sorting out problems the whole time rather than playing, that and I have two essays which I soon need to start writing... 

In order to have working beacons, in the cockpit classfiles of an aircraft, instruments need to be configured to use beacons if realistic navigation is turned on. But all this does is governing the correct movement of instrument needles.
However, I cannot see how these entries, or absence of these entries, could lead to radio beacons becoming non-functional in general.
IIRC for that to happen, a mod would have to replace the AircraftState.class, which is part of the fm set of classes.
I am aware this doesn't solve your problem though...

That all makes sense sputnik, I am more confused than you about how one mod can conflict with a game-universal feature... 

Do you think it is a likely possibility that Claymore's mod/mods which cause the problems might replace aspects of the said AircraftState.class?

Thanks for the pointers guys 

Michael.

[SAS~Anto]

I hate to be that guy, but if you want to guarantee everything works with 4.101m, get DBW1.7. Many of those early 4.10 mods have been updated for DBW and the authors no longer support the old versions. It is a big download, but it makes this MUCH easier.

Speaking from my experience, I have little motivation to revisit any packs I've done in the past (with exception to some of the 109s, but for different reasons).

[mikejr]

Hmm, that's on the cards as a serious possibility now Anto... although I've just read that Claymore's 190's also cause the same problems in DBW!  ???

Dilemmas dilemmas! 

Michael.

[HundertzehnGustav]

but claymore's stuff has a chance to be adapted...
thats the difference

[mikejr]

Ok,

It seems it is always class file related. I now have full beacon functionality restored (yet to do a full test) to my game. Please see here - https://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php/topic,20351.348.html - for what I did. 

Michael.

[badderger]

Hi Mikejr,
   The first thing I noticed was the seemingly utter amount of mods, effects, cockpits, etc...seems almost appalling to me...at least it would be with my little mid-range computer.Even with a mega-computer it seems almost certain that something isn't gonna mix in that soup...But I use DBW and UP3 so alot of your stuff is already installed...so, I'm no expert either, I could be wrong. But here is how I would approach this problem.

First, I might consider the use of jsgmemods to break down my mods for different air.ini/misc mod combinations.This would make isolation of problematic combinations easier. Example---I would start out at the beginning with a mod-less "stock" air.ini install which could be added and subtracted with countless other .ini variants/combinations to isolate issues. This would involve taking your air.ini right out of the game and loading and unloading with other air.ini/mod variants. This way you're only installing your mods when you use them. Reason is ---I see a possibility that there could be a memory related issue with over-modding. So, one .ini pack would look like this--- il2/modact3/jsgmemods/files/com/maddox/il2/objects/air.ini>>times?---your choices
                                                  /mods/
                                                 /planes
                                                /effects
                                               /etc...

Another option I would consider is on an external hard drive to have several il2 installs with or without various mods, including the Claymore mod and applied just for installs as I need them. I have six il2 installs and they all run well off my external hard drive.

I don't know if any of these ideas will apply to you because my situations/installs are different from yours. But I hope something here will help you on the road to fixing your problem.

Good luck/best wishes.

[mikejr]

Thanks badderger,

Thanks for that, it sounds a good idea, except I've now found a solution to my (specific) problem. See the above link

Cheers for the tips

Michael.

[KiwiBiggles]

Hi Michael,

I'm currently building a custom modact3.06 install (although much smaller than yours) and like you, I want to preserve all the new 4.10 functions as much as possible.

This thread has been really useful.  Actually, it's pretty impressive you found that classfile conflict in your setup - if I was a betting man I reckon I'd have wagered on the other guy! 

Thanks for this thread, and all the best!
Kiwi