streakeagle

Ironic that the master thief didn't want anyone stealing property that he had stolen. He didn't want anyone posting screenshots that he didn't approve of. He accused Third Wire/TK of trying to intentionally sabotage his project with the changes TK made to SF2. The goal of accurately recreating the history of Vietnam was great. His execution of that goal is not a legacy I would want to honor in any way. I respect his service to the country as a fighter pilot who risked his life in combat. But that doesn't pardon his behavior in this community.

Great information. This entire thread was quite the learning experience.

"Sonic boom buster" is an aerospike. Still curious why it is only seen on this one variant. Maybe they were trying out a new idea. Or compared to earlier designs, the AIM-4F needed a drag reduction to reach performance goals?

I would agree that looks plausible. In the other examples, the shape of the cone is very flat or blunt requiring a fairly long spike. Maybe the AIM-4 was sufficiently aerodynamic that it only needed a relatively short one to get the desired drag reduction? My question would be why only this version of the AIM-4? It seems the aerospike concept was first utilized in the 1970s, a bit before the AIM-4F's time. I would bet that even though it may not have been intended to be an aerospike, that it certainly acted like one.

AIM-4F has two claimed improvements: better SARH guidance and better ECCM. The nose probe is probably an antenna involved with one of those two improvements. But I can't find any documents online that go into any real detail on the AIM-4 series of missiles.

What year does the base (fictional map) SF2 install stop? Did a quick install. Base SF2 stops at F-4D_75 and F-4E_75, both of which are the latest year variants included.

Great work!

This is a list of all the F-4 manual pdfs I have. I had bought several early on, but most of what is listed here came from Avialogs and possibly from some other free sources on the internet.

There are two places to look for good F-4 manuals. The first doesn't require any kind of registration: Downloads The seconds used to be a payware site, but went to free if you register for access: Avialogs: Aviation Library - Avialogs: Welcome to the aviation library, online since 2010. Avialogs has tons of manuals on everything, quite a few on F-4s. About once a month, I pick an aircraft type and download all the pdfs for it. This site has dramatically increased my flight manual library... for free!

They no longer force Facebook accounts. The VR market is still relatively small. The dominant market share is the Meta Quest app store. So, if you want to make money selling VR games, time spent on supporting anything other than Quest is time and money lost.

I thought SF2 (perhaps only in early patch levels?) was backwards compatible with old mods that had shadow models. My memory extends mostly to old mods being used in SF2. The Razbam F2H-2 sticks out in my memory. The SF2 shadow technique mixed poorly with the old mod, so disabling the shadow fixed the problem. The F-111 pack I have on file was an updated SF2 version with the following lines: [Shadow] CastShadow=TRUE ShadowCastDist=10000 MaxVisibleDistance=400 As such, CastShadow can be set to false if the F-111's shadow is causing the performance hit. Interestingly enough, the ini is only using a single LOD reported as 1,713 kB: [LOD001] Filename=F-111Ad.lod Distance=8000 But has a 2nd smaller lod file included in the folder reported as 799 kB: F-111A.LOD I wonder why there are two LODs, but only one is utilized in-game?

There are two ways to generate shadows: The original method incorporated a separate shadow 3d model. The new method generates shadows from the regular lod. If this is an old mod, it may still be using the separate shadow lod. If so, there is a chance editing the F-111 ini file to use the new shadow method may solve the problem. If not, perhaps completely disabling the shadow for the F-111 in the F-111 ini file will solve the problem at the cost of no shadow at all.

It is only available from the Meta Quest store for the Quest 2 and Quest 3 series headsets. It was made using the "Unity" game engine, so they could port it to other platforms, but I doubt they will do that. It is similar to the free-to-play Strike Fighters android game (which is also available as a PC game), but it is VR only and flown from the cockpit. I don't see any way to see external views. A typical mission involves startup, takeoff, fly through a portal to get to the mission area, fly through some waypoints, accomplish the mission, fly through a portal to get to the turn onto final approach, and finally land. The clickable cockpits, startup, takeoff, and landing procedures give the game a simulator feel. But targets have generous hit boxes and 0.50 cal. MGs can kill most targets with ease. But the differences between attacking with rockets, bombs, and guns are fairly well modeled. The bombsight is basically CCIP and the bombs usually detonate well after you have flown past the target, so bombing is much easier than it should be. Dogfights are not that much different than F-86 vs MiG-15 in DCS World: the AI can extend at will in a climb or hit the brakes to make you overshoot. Because I have already learned how to deal with this type of AI in DCS, I do fairly well. I finally earned enough money with the T-33 and F-80 to get the F-86. Now I want to save up enough for either the F9F-2 or the FJ-3.

This is a decent flight sim for a VR headset game. The graphics are similar to 1999/Falcon 4.0 but with anti-aliasing making it prettier. Make no mistake, it is a game. But the cockpits look decent and the flight models are not totally arcade.

SF2 only needs a couple of upgrades to be more competitive: native VR support and cockpit 3d model/texture upgrades for VR. SF2's lower gpu/cpu requirements run wildly fast in VR when you can get it to work using VorpX. The cost of upgrading the cockpits of so many aircraft variants to decent VR standards for a 360 degree view would be quite high. After spending all the time and money, how many people would buy it? The fact is that what is left of the jet combat sim market is dominated by DCS World. DCS has made great strides in covering jet fighters previously only flyable in the SF series. SF2 still has an overwhelming large set of aircraft, terrains, and historical campaigns which can be played on much less expensive hardware than DCS, but not enough people bought it when it was originally released and it will never get any useful number of sales in the future. I gave up on SF2 when TK did. In a very short time frame, DCS added the MiG-21bis, UH-1H, F-86F, MiG-15bis, and F-5E which sold me on migrating to DCS. The addition of the AJS-37 Viggen, AV-8B, F-14A/B, MiG-19P, Mirage F1, and advent of VR sealed the deal. DCS is still growing/improving. SF2 is still stuck with a late 90s terrain engine, no multiplayer, and no VR.