Opinions needed - decision time for Bf109G-10 updates

Captain Kurt

Captain Kurt

Administrator
Staff member
Guys, I need your input to choose a model for the Messerschmitt Bf109G-10. There are 2 versions, the original CFS2 PR model and the FS2004 conversion model. There are slight adjustments in the bitmaps and one size fits all doesn't work quite right. So one model needs to be picked to use.

Please respond with your choice and I will go with the majority.

There are pros and cons to each.

Pro: The CFS2 model can have appropriate rudder trim tabs added via the alpha channel
Pro: The CFS2 model is multi-LOD
Con: The CFS2 model has a gap in the tail wheel strut.

attachment.php


Pro: The FS2004 conversion has no tail wheel gap
Pro: The FS2004 conversion has the aerial wire added
Con: The FS2004 conversion rudder was shortened and does not leave enough material to add trim tabs
Con: The FS2004 conversion is not multi-LOD

attachment.php


Please let me know your preference.
 
Reply...

Kurt,

For both continuity's sake and the ability to use it in missions, I would implore you to please use the multi-lod CFS2 model.

By the way, I was going to PM you about something....I am having a problem with the VC in the Bf-109g-6AS model...several VC gauges are "popped out" from the panel?
 
I agree with Rami. Frame rates can still bog down most rigs. Hate the gap, but multi-lod is the game changer.
 
Rami

Didn't see that one coming re the panel. For some unknown reason on all of the AS engined models, PR mapped the vc bitmap to the small image of the instrument panel used for the external view of the models cockpit instead of the blank instrument panel bitmap used for all of the other models. The image of the instruments interfere with the VC gauges.

I've resorted to using stock Bf109e gauges for the VC and oversized them to hide most of the interference. Best I can do, so try out this panel.cfg file and if you think it works, I'll update the panels. View attachment 58719

Voyager

Regarding a fix for the tail wheel leg gap, there are two things that could be done without a complete model rebuild. One would be as suggested, a .dp attachment. That would have to be a vertical tube attached as a weapon. The other would be to SCASM edit the MDL file. Unfortunately, I don't have the skills to produce either. So unless someone with those skills would like to volunteer to tackle it ... Hint, hint.:devilish:
 
Hi Captain,

I will take the Hint. If you can send me or direct me to both models. I will take a look and see if I can fix it.

Regards,

B24Guy
 
Reply...

Kurt,

To be clear, the panel is only a problem on the AS model. This doesn't affect anything else. :encouragement:
 
Reply...

Captain Kurt said:
Rami

Didn't see that one coming re the panel. For some unknown reason on all of the AS engined models, PR mapped the vc bitmap to the small image of the instrument panel used for the external view of the models cockpit instead of the blank instrument panel bitmap used for all of the other models. The image of the instruments interfere with the VC gauges.

I've resorted to using stock Bf109e gauges for the VC and oversized them to hide most of the interference. Best I can do, so try out this panel.cfg file and if you think it works, I'll update the panels. View attachment 58719
Click to expand...

Kurt,

Your fix works fine. Full speed ahead, Captain! :wavey:
 
Rami said:
Kurt,

To be clear, the panel is only a problem on the AS model. This doesn't affect anything else. :encouragement:
Click to expand...

Hi Andrew, That's only because I haven't posted the G-10s and G-14/AS models yet. I was suspicious and checked them. They have the same issue. :banghead:

Did the new panel.cfg resolve the issue?

LOL your answer beat this post to the gate

G-6, G-10, G-14 panel posting is now amended.
 
Hi Captain,

I DL and looked at the models.

Bad news is that the Multi-res bf109 was built with FSDS 1 (I think) anyway MDLC will not convert it correctly.

The other model was built with FSDS 2 or gmax.

Regards,

B24Guy
 
Not sure but I think Cody is only voting for the CFS2 model to be used. Yes it's a workaround but if it can't be opened up it might still be acceptable compared to leaving it as is.
 
Reply...

Kurt,

I hope it's not too late, but I stumbled across something that will save you a lot of work. I checked Paul's models out of curiosity, and there are two multi-lod models of the G-10, one with the tail wheel problem and one without.

(Oddly, the G-10 "Rita" download uses a g14 model)

The model with the tail wheel problem is named: g10ltv3.mdl and is dated 26 March, 2002. That particular model is found in these downloads:

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/local_links.php?action=jump&catid=54&id=4439

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/local_links.php?action=jump&catid=54&id=4442

However, this download uses the model g10stm.mdl, dated 8 February, 2002 and does not have this issue.

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/local_links.php?action=jump&catid=54&id=4441
 
Ummm thanks guys but that's not it. PR actually made three different G-10 models - which is appropriate as each was for a different G-10 version.

The G-10 series was pretty much a mess with a lot of variations due to the dispersed manufacturing locations, but the main differences were the rudders, the large or small main gear wheels which dictated whether there was a small or a large bump on top of the wing, whether the engine used necessitated small chin bumps on the nose (sometimes called a G-10/AS although there was no official designation for this), and finally the long or short tail wheel gear leg.

The most common tail wheel leg was the long gear. Some sources claim the long tail gear leg was to improve ground handling and others state it was to provide more ground clearance for carrying bombs.

I am doing skins for each of Paul's 3 versions:

1. Short tail wheel leg, no chin bumps, and small wing bump (an early G-10 production run) - the 'Rita' model
2. Short tail wheel leg, small chin bumps, and large wing bump
3. Long tail wheel leg, small chin bumps, and large wing bump - Most common G-10 and the model under discussion
 
Sorry to be late. I will vote for the CFS2 multi-LOD model as well. And since you already did it for the G-6 late production model, I am sure the addition of the aerial wire will be an easy task for you. :encouragement:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top