GregCrack 0 Posted March 26, 2007 Hi all, I'm waiting for the Stealth Fighter F-22 and wonder this plane is'nt released yet ! Is anybody working on this Fighter ? GregCrack Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BUFF 8 Posted March 26, 2007 I'm waiting for the Stealth Fighter F-22 and wonder this plane is'nt released yet !Is anybody working on this Fighter ? Yes, it's being worked on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cgold 0 Posted March 26, 2007 I know I am pro-F-14, but I think that the F-22 is a good substitute. Any idea on a release date? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
raidenandsolid 0 Posted March 26, 2007 Last time I heard the issues with Thrust Vectoring and Stealth, those 2 not being able to work or not working properly in game, has caused this plane and others that rely on this to be pushed back quite a bit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SayethWhaaaa 245 Posted March 26, 2007 Well, there's a few problems with building a model of a plane like the F-22 and the F-35 and having them work properly in the SF series. Things like thrust vectoring, stealth etc. The SFP series wasn't designed with these things in mind, it's just taking a while to be able to integrate them into the game. At least that's my understanding. A model can me made relatively quickly, but a flight model is pretty tricky, not to mention having the aircraft perform realistically. It takes a while. But be patient, because the lads involved always produce quality Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JediMaster 451 Posted March 26, 2007 Right, it's easy to make a plane that looks like an F-22 or F-35, it's making one that flies and fights like them that's hard. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sgt.KAR98 0 Posted March 26, 2007 That´s why the F-117 and the B-2 are stuck too? Errm... I guess I will be killed for saying this,but... And if you don´t add the stealth and vector things? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Dave 2,322 Posted March 26, 2007 That´s why the F-117 and the B-2 are stuck too? Errm... I guess I will be killed for saying this,but... And if you don´t add the stealth and vector things? Then they might not get released. Who knows. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BOOM 0 Posted April 6, 2007 well, considering that the F-117 is a stealth aircraft it too falls into that list. It also has a lower IR signature and i dont think the game can handle that. As for the B-1, it too is considered to be slightly stealthy but the model and pit are EXTREMELY complex. Its a huge varible geometry wing b-52 with several bomb bays. Calculating all this makes the FM a little hard too. Just a guess. The other problem is that these are primarily night aircraft and the AI does not lose effectiveness based on time of day. The F-117 is an electronically invisable b-52 (similar flight characteristics too) with 2 bombs. If a mig sees you and chooses to gun you down than your toast Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fubar512 1,350 Posted April 7, 2007 well, considering that the F-117 is a stealth aircraft it too falls into that list. It also has a lower IR signature and i dont think the game can handle that. Really? "HeatSignature=" is coded into the sim, though presently only implemented for ground objects, as is the radar cross section statement. Aircraft have an 'RCSModifier" variable available, but the functionality of that was broken by SP4. TK has stated that he will eventually rectify that, and also implement the heat signature into the aircraftobject.dll Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sgt.KAR98 0 Posted April 7, 2007 Weird thatthe F-22 isn´t available. There´s a F-23 to download at this site,but I didn´t looked if it has the thrust vector...(probably not) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fubar512 1,350 Posted April 7, 2007 Weird thatthe F-22 isn´t available.There´s a F-23 to download at this site,but I didn´t looked if it has the thrust vector...(probably not) The YF-23A did not have thrust vectoring in real life, so why would it in a sim? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sgt.KAR98 0 Posted April 7, 2007 The YF-23A did not have thrust vectoring in real life, so why would it in a sim? I thought it had,since it was the F-22 "rival"... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Gocad 26 Posted April 8, 2007 I thought it had,since it was the F-22 "rival"... The final production of the YF-23 would most likely had thrust vectoring, because if the YF-23 had won it would have recieved the same engine type as the F-22 has now. Besides, the YF-23 was just a prototype, like the YF-22. And there are a number of differences between the YF-22 and its production version, the F-22. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fubar512 1,350 Posted April 8, 2007 The final production of the YF-23 would most likely had thrust vectoring, because if the YF-23 had won it would have recieved the same engine type as the F-22 has now. Besides, the YF-23 was just a prototype, like the YF-22. And there are a number of differences between the YF-22 and its production version, the F-22. The YF-23 was not designed for thrust vectoring. It was actually as maneuverable as the F-22 above 400 knots, and was stealthier in both the microwave and infrared wavelengths, as it did not have to house the thrust vectoring nozzles. It also boasted a higher top speed. As to what would have eventually happened to the design, had it been chosen for production, who can say? I do know that the Northrop team initially looked into TVC, and decided against it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kazamashin 0 Posted April 9, 2007 Yeah..and TVC is kinda overrated too. The production F-23A would have been slightly longer with an extra(or longer) weapons bay, a more modern cockpit and automated doors for the gun at least thats what i heard anyway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Dave 2,322 Posted April 9, 2007 Yeah..and TVC is kinda overrated too. The production F-23A would have been slightly longer with an extra(or longer) weapons bay, a more modern cockpit and automated doors for the gun at least thats what i heard anyway. TVC is not overrated in the least bit. Its a proven technology that has bigger applications then just dog fighting. I mean you are talking SAM or A2A avoidance to the extreme degree. And that is just examples. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shin_kazama 1 Posted April 9, 2007 Right, it's easy to make a plane that looks like an F-22 or F-35, it's making one that flies and fights like them that's hard. very true dude. one can make a realistic model skin for them but its twice as hard making the FM for it right? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JediMaster 451 Posted April 9, 2007 TVC was not part of the ATF specification. The F-22 didn't HAVE to have it, LockMart put it in anyway to make it better. NorthGrum went for extra-stealthy and didn't. Keep in mind that from what I've read BOTH planes satisfied the "plane" part of the ATF competition. The F-22 wasn't a "better" plane than the F-23 to any significant degree. Instead, LM won on the other parts of the competition. In short, the USAF believed LM was more likely to deliver the F-22 as advertised, with the least troubles, and cost growth and so on. They had less confidence in NG's ability to execute the F-23 program to the same degree. Actually, I think it safe to say that had NG been the one making the F-22 and LM the F-23 that in that case the F-23 would have won! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
serverandenforcer 33 Posted April 9, 2007 TVC was not part of the ATF specification. The F-22 didn't HAVE to have it, LockMart put it in anyway to make it better. NorthGrum went for extra-stealthy and didn't. Keep in mind that from what I've read BOTH planes satisfied the "plane" part of the ATF competition. The F-22 wasn't a "better" plane than the F-23 to any significant degree. Instead, LM won on the other parts of the competition. In short, the USAF believed LM was more likely to deliver the F-22 as advertised, with the least troubles, and cost growth and so on. They had less confidence in NG's ability to execute the F-23 program to the same degree. Actually, I think it safe to say that had NG been the one making the F-22 and LM the F-23 that in that case the F-23 would have won! Ha!, then I guess it was pointless for NG to even get involved with the competition in the first place. That kind of sucks for them, 'cause that means they'll be losing investors since the government doesn't have faith in the quality of the products that they make. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fubar512 1,350 Posted April 10, 2007 An F-22 in Strike Fighters? Never Happen.... I really hate the AI..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bucklehead101 29 Posted April 10, 2007 Is that really a photoshop? I seem to recall seeing some more "propaganda" shots over at simhq like a year ago. Still looks good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JediMaster 451 Posted April 10, 2007 Well, realize that other than the B-2 (which was a bomber program rife with funding issues) NG hadn't run a fighter program in years. The 2 halves had last done the F-14D and F-20, both of which were updates to 70s designs. True NG was the major sub on the Hornet, but it wasn't the lead. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fubar512 1,350 Posted April 10, 2007 Is that really a photoshop? I seem to recall seeing some more "propaganda" shots over at simhq like a year ago. Still looks good. No Buck, it's Wpnssgt's model. Unfortunately, real life issues have put the model on the backburner, for now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sgt.KAR98 0 Posted April 10, 2007 A bit spammy,but I discovered that AI uses MGs too... Thought they only use AA missiles... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
