Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing most liked content on 09/10/2021 in Posts

  1. 9 points
    I wonder how many times a year will the same fantasy keep being re-stated. Time to move on people. The game is what it is -- it will never be better or changed or updated or improved, internal code-wise. Lets just keep building the best mod add-ons we possibly can, with in the confines of the code. I think this thread is just about done.
  2. 8 points
  3. 8 points
  4. 6 points
    " Fox two!... Splash one Mirage F1!... Where the f*#k is the CAP?!!!"
  5. 5 points
    About the nearest I will get to a Greek holiday this year ..
  6. 5 points
  7. 5 points
  8. 5 points
  9. 4 points
    just a shot, from late 1965 or early 1966
  10. 3 points
    Almost forgot. Are you sure you've been a good boy ?
  11. 2 points
    If the red Prussians would have won:
  12. 2 points
    Two more shots with YAK-130 Aeromacchi event.
  13. 2 points
  14. 2 points
  15. 2 points
    Dam - Dam - Dam - DamDamDam - DamDamDam
  16. 2 points
    2015... Early test flights of the Boeing F-15F Super Eagle from Eglin AFB !
  17. 1 point
    View File Lockheed RF-104G Starfighter The RF-104G was a tactical reconnaissance model based on the F-104G, usually with three KS-67A cameras mounted in the forward fuselage in place of the internal cannon. Many of the 189 built were subsequently reconfigured to the F-104G standard. What's in: - 6 new planes to fly - 14 HD skins - historical decalsets - Hangars & Patches Credits: - Gkabs 3D parts (KS-67A cameras) - BobRock F-104G temps - Soulfreak German/Greek base skins - Paulopanz skins, decals, screens, data.inis edits Install: - you need SF-2 Europe for CF-104 used - all in main mod folder (Isn't easy?) Enjoy. @ paulopanz Submitter paulopanz Submitted 09/10/2021 Category F-104  
  18. 1 point
    hold the f^@& up .... are you giving up on hope?
  19. 1 point
  20. 1 point
  21. 1 point
    I guess, the CF-104 is used here, because by default it doesn't have the cannon, as did the RF-104G. So no need to cover the gunport of the F-104G.
  22. 1 point
  23. 1 point
    We do not know If TK will ever share the code, maybe the smart thing to do is to start looking just in case.
  24. 1 point
  25. 1 point
    My point is not in saying it's not possible, it's just not plausible. The amount of work and effort required is definitely out of reach for most great programmers. You need to be a hacker, someone very special; nothing like that can be achieved in minutes nor days nor weeks. I wish it were so easy, but it isn't. And since there's a source code available (because TK has it, he plans to update the game for Win10/11), I see no point in wasting months of life on reverse engineering a code which exists. We should rather worry about finishing any of our work in progress mods and tools. The rest are just dreams.
  26. 1 point
    Yes, but to make a patch which fixes broken features, you need a source code. So basically what TK says is: if you're a genius hacker and you wish to create a very small patch after months or years of life spent on reverse engineering it, feel free to do so. It's more a middle finger than anything. Also, the executable alone does not have any use, so I wonder why he's against redistributing a patched executable. Without the tons of .dll libraries which are the true core of the game, the executable is good for nothing. Actually, if we want to improve and patch the game, we would have to work on those dll libraries, not on the executable. The .exe is just a starter for all them. So TK's words make even less sense. He knows how he programmed the game, features are not hard-coded in the executable, but in those libraries! All we can possibly do with the .exe and .dll files are just minor hex-edits, but without any idea of what each assembly code does in the executable, it's like going inside a new house completely blinded. And even if we succeed in doing such edits, any changes would remain hard-coded and could compromise the stability and integrity of the game. Long story short, TK's words in that email have shown already to have no practical use in the long term. Here we are every year beating the same dead horse.
  27. 1 point
    About 80% completed, I need to add some more details, then the UVW and making the texture. Big thanks to @Nightshade/PR for helping with searching for more information for the tank.
  28. 1 point
  29. 1 point
  30. 1 point
    Vulcan in the Valleys.. Showing it's teeth.. Heading for home..
  31. 1 point
  32. 1 point
    Douglas A-4E Skyhawk - No.860 Squadron, Royal Netherlands Naval Air Service, 1971
  33. 1 point
    Giving the new Vulcan a workout high over the English countryside..
  34. 1 point
    I have absolutely no idea! I set up the mission to be a simple intercept of the Airbus (actually the 'real' mission was to intercept a Tu-95 on a recon run off the North Sea coast but I set up a couple of F-15Cs out of Lakenheath to take care of that). The story was that the airliner's navigation equipment had gone down and we would form up on it and lead it down through the clouds and onto the runway. I was as surprised as anyone when I got in visual range, and the flyby to check over the airliner was real. I re-wrote the story in my head on the fly as I tracked the Airbus down and over London until it landed. Funny thing is I've flown the mission a few more times since then because I thought I had set something wrong, maybe with the airliner dropping below stall speed, and it has been absolutely fine... Maybe TK programmed in a secret setting - RandomCatastrophicMishap=TRUE
  35. 1 point
    Avro Vulcan B.2 (MRR) - No.27 Squadron, RAF Strike Command, 1991
  36. 1 point
    BAM Cóndor (base de los Pucara), Pradera del Ganso y al norte Darwin
  37. 1 point
    SEPECAT Jaguar FRS.4 - 899 Naval Air Squadron, Royal Navy, 1980
  38. 1 point
  39. 1 point


×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..