Indiafoxecho TA-4

[Aircanuck]

Very nice Dino, to soon to ask about any further projects ?

FYI , my Avast Internet Security hit the panic button when this file was down loaded with the attached warning " may contain a rare virus " must quarantine for further investigation which proved to be a false alarm ... whoa !!

Has anybody else experienced a similar issue with this file ? .... curious !


Regards

[Dino Cattaneo]

@Aircanuck

First, about the virus warning - NEVER dismiss the possibility of a virus. I use AVG, and all my installers are checked with it... also, typically distributors have antivirus detection in their systems...but no antivirus is perfect. I have learned it in the hard way losing all my old source codes (and this is why the T-45, the S-3 and the F-14 have not been updated in years).
Having said that. AVG always flags my installers as "to be checked" (since they are unknown .exe) but always reports them to be free of viruses.

Having said that… here is what is down in the pipeline at the moment:

- Upgrade of the TA-4 to include the OA-4M model (almost done on P3D... not sure if it will be ported to FSX) -> Next few weeks hopefully

- A-4 single seater (Super Fox for sure...most likely E and F models too…. currently being developer for P3D, may be ported to FSX depending on the sales of FSX TA-4) -> Late 2019

- Aermacchi M-346 (at the moment P3D only...then we'll see) -> Spring 2020

- T-X (plan is to leverage some commonality with the M-346) -> TBD

- High-detail F-14D (probably straight into FS2020) -> TBD

[jeansy]

A few more, im away from home again and the laptop is somewhat limited in painting abilities

[JensOle]

Thank you so much Dino! I hope the oa-4 also makes it over, it would be much appreciated 👍

[Josh Patterson]

FYI, I'm a guaranteed TA-4 sale in FSX. I'm happy with Virtavia's A-4, but if yours should make it to FSX I'll most likely upgrade that too! (I'm really just happy getting a two seat Skyhawk!) Love your work Dino!

[xpelekis]

Weapons training at NAS Fallon Range B-16, with TA-4J. A-4 AIs are native FSX (MAIW).
An overall succesfull training sortie of all participants... During landing at video's end, wheels didn't
come down due to damage of a .50 caliber shell, from a T-62 target (weaponized by FSCAI)...



Great stuff in FS !...

[Victory103]

Great vid, exactly what I am trying to do with FSCAI, and I do have the MAIW converted A-4s.

[Seahawk72s]

Looking for screen shots of rear seat\panel and Israeli paint.

Thanks...

[Dino Cattaneo]

@Seahawk72

The FSX version does not feature the backseat cockpit. Image below from P3D.



Here is a screenshot (P3D) of the Israeli livery - the plane is depicted prior to the tailpipe modifications that was applied to all Isreali Skyhawks...

[Seahawk72s]

[QUOTE=Dino Cattaneo;1199761]@Seahawk72

The FSX version does not feature the backseat cockpit. Image below from P3D.


Thank you...
I'm sure its some technical reason I'm not appreciating but why no backseat for FSX..?

[Odie]

Thank you so much Dino! I hope the oa-4 also makes it over, it would be much appreciated 

Ditto on the OA-4 as well!

[Dino Cattaneo]

@Seahawk72Problem is that FSX has limitations on the complexity of the 3D models - which are absent from P3D. There are ways to circumvent this limitations while compiling, but in the end the resulting model is very difficult for FSX to handle... so I cut the backseat out of the FSX build.

[narah]

@Seahawk72Problem is that FSX has limitations on the complexity of the 3D models - which are absent from P3D. There are ways to circumvent this limitations while compiling, but in the end the resulting model is very difficult for FSX to handle... so I cut the backseat out of the FSX build.

i am sorry, but there are more complex models available which do have dual cockpit options. I have heard too many times about "FSX limitations"

[jeansy]

i am sorry, but there are more complex models available which do have dual cockpit options. I have heard too many times about "FSX limitations"

Youre not sorry

It was designed and built for P3D v4.4 and greater, for the downgraded model to have dual cockpit options would require a complete rebuild of coding. just be grateful that it was even modified for FSX use considering hes a one man show with time and family constraints, where many larger sized devs these days dont even want consider the doubled workload for producing a 64bit and a 32bit release.

[fsafranek]

Youre not sorry

It was designed and built for P3D v4.4 and greater, for the downgraded model to have dual cockpit options would require a complete rebuild of coding. just be grateful that it was even modified for FSX use considering hes a one man show with time and family constraints, where many larger sized devs these days dont even want consider the doubled workload for producing a 64bit and a 32bit release.

What he said.

[narah]

What he said.

it was noticed what "he said", thank you

[Dino Cattaneo]

@narahYou are perfectly entitled to be sorry :-) and completely entitled not to believe to me (I would assume it is a good practice, in this day and age, to doubt of anything) but please allow me to elaborate this a little. True: there are FSX models with both front and backseat cockpits... for example my freeware T-45C and F-14D, which were designed directly for FSX.Believe it or not, FSX compiler has a limitation on the complexity of the visual models on a per-Direct X drawcall basis - so, unless you design the model keeping in mind the constraints of FSX, the model compiler will either refuse to compile the model (and exit with an error) or compile garbage in some cases (with parts of the model invisible or untexturer).If we want to go into technical details, as far as I know there are two ways to circumvent this:- The "Write to File" method (which I never successfully used)- The "multiple materials" method (in which you split the parts of the model that exceed the per-drawingcall limitation into multiple "similar" materials... as result the compiler will assign them to different drawcalls and will work nicely)....this is why you can still use my latest F-35 model on FSX... and partually in the FSX model of the TA-4.So, technically speaking, you could use some of these tricks to bring the full VC to FSX... but then again, the TA-4 cockpit was designed with little concern on polygon count and texture video memory allocation - as these are not problems in P3D v4 (being it a fully 64 application - I am sure you know the story of the 3.3Gb limit of any 32-bit application). As a more general statement, P3D compiler has none of the FSX limitations, and the memory available in the simulation is much larger.Problem is, even if you get the full model to compile (and again...yes, you could with some additional effort), most users may experience performance issues and out-of-memory errors.I hope this clarifies the situation - and again, you are perfectly entitled to be upset when we developers speak of FSX-limitations... but they do exist (and I do not like them either) ;-)

[Dino Cattaneo]

BTW my apologies for the formatting of the post above, and for the one of all of my recent posts... but for some reason this is what I get from the forum post editor (on either Chrome and Edge).

[Dino Cattaneo]

...and a small note on the "coding". If you code in XML, most of the code works fine in both FSX and P3D. The main difference is that, if you use .dll's to do things like fuel system simulation (as I did) you need to use two different version of the .dll (a 64 bit one for P3Dv4 and above, and a 32 bit one for the rest). The only part of the code which is really "P3D only" is the radar, which uses the P3D radar service (much more realistic than other methods available in FSX). The main reason my the model has to be rebuilt and reworked is the .mdl compiling and memory usage, as explained in the previous posts. Anyway, I am happy to discuss the matter furtherly if needed.... criticism is ALWAYS welcome (and if I am implicitly accused of being lazy...I'll do my best to prove I am not). :-)

[menef]

Some in-game screens, (FSX) , I can't stop to fly it :-)

[narah]

...and a small note on the "coding". If you code in XML, most of the code works fine in both FSX and P3D. The main difference is that, if you use .dll's to do things like fuel system simulation (as I did) you need to use two different version of the .dll (a 64 bit one for P3Dv4 and above, and a 32 bit one for the rest). The only part of the code which is really "P3D only" is the radar, which uses the P3D radar service (much more realistic than other methods available in FSX). The main reason my the model has to be rebuilt and reworked is the .mdl compiling and memory usage, as explained in the previous posts. Anyway, I am happy to discuss the matter furtherly if needed.... criticism is ALWAYS welcome (and if I am implicitly accused of being lazy...I'll do my best to prove I am not). :-)

Hi Dino, thank you for your detailed and much appreciated reply. The contributing factors for my comment were, that I like tandem seaters with both positions functional, like the pay ware PC-9/A, T-38, and T-28B and the wish to have a good Skyhawk in FSX (never had one since FS2K). But more the phrase “FSX limitation” which is not addressed to you personally. Most of the so-called limitations, like the proper simulation of Helicopters or a turboprop engine are well solved by some developers. I have considered the A4 as non-complex aircraft in RL, so I was surprised about a possible limitation in FSX. I appreciate your work like the Eurofighter, have no doubt about your skills and I can imagine your efforts. Thank you also for the explanation of the different application. Kind regards, Thomas.

[Josh Patterson]

@Seahawk72Problem is that FSX has limitations on the complexity of the 3D models - which are absent from P3D. There are ways to circumvent this limitations while compiling, but in the end the resulting model is very difficult for FSX to handle... so I cut the backseat out of the FSX build.

I'm okay with that! I don't fly from the back seat anyway (Except in Captain Sim's TF-104 and that's only because I'm forced to! No panel in front! SO waiting on SSW's TF-104!))

[WarHorse47]

I'm okay with that! I don't fly from the back seat anyway (Except in Captain Sim's TF-104 and that's only because I'm forced to! No panel in front! SO waiting on SSW's TF-104!))

Not an issue with me either. The TA-4 is great. Love it.

Only issue I've encountered is the cockpit lighting. For some baffling reason I cannot get the red spot cabin lights to turn on. The scripting looks fine in the [lights] section and the effects file is where it should be. All the other lights work fine. The only red glow I get in the cockpit is from the probe lighting.

[Dino Cattaneo]

For information, version 1.11.1 was released yesterday night at SimMarket - along with a number of small bug fixes, it introduces the OA-4M model too...

[menef]

For information, version 1.11.1 was released yesterday night at SimMarket - along with a number of small bug fixes, it introduces the OA-4M model too...

Icing on the cake !!! Thanks a lot