streakeagle

By the way, SFP1/WoX was way more fun flying with/against real people. The AI fails to expose the subtle and not-so-subtle differences between all of the aircraft. An ace like doghouse and his friends can punish just about anyone no matter what the aircraft matchup by using energy/angles fighting to the limits. But they will also back off and coach you into being a better pilot, as they would rather have an ineffective novice that needs lots of training than have no one to fly with at all. The game really works best with the free-for-all infinite spawning single player deathmatch, as players can come and go as they please and respawn at will in any aircraft allowed by the server's date/time setting. But they also play team/co-op. But once you start a co-op mission, no one else can join and once you die you are dead until the mission is over, so its not too fun unless the pilots are good enough to survive the whole mission or finish it quickly to avoid the dead people getting bored/quitting. As long as you only care about air-to-air (that would be me), single player can even support teams with groups of player forming up for flight vs flight combat. But given the limited number of people flying SFP1/WoX online, you will be lucky just to get in some good 1 v 1, much less 2 v 2. While the lag caused by the directplay interface and internet latency makes it hard, simple formation flying can be fun and lead to some cool screenshots. Good luck on eventually getting multiplayer working online over the internet.

There are a handful still dedicated to flying SFP1/WoX online when they can find others to play. Look for "doghouse" on hyperlobby... he is there quite frequently flying any online combat flight sim his PC and phone modem can still support (likely IL-2 since that is almost exclusively what the majority fly in Hyperlobby). He is a multiplayer addict and loves to fly this series with anyone he can find. Any others out there pretty much fly with him, so if you find him, you have found the "handful". He can also provide some great setup guidance via Hyperlobby chat to get your install and PC working in Hyperlobby and/or Hamachi, though he is going to favor Hamachi since it works so well. Also, I forgot to mention firewalls and antivirus. From WinXP SP2 and on, PC firewalls caused even more havoc with SFP1/WoX setups. If you are going to leave them enabled, you are going to have to get the firewall permissions set up correctly as well. If you use a popular/common firewall like Microsoft Windows' built in software, someone can help you set that up correctly. Personally, I just turned all that stuff off when flying online.

SFP1 based games use the Microsoft DirectPlay API. DirectPlay was never designed with internet routing in mind. It works best when all computers are physically connected to the same LAN. Problems caused by the internet and routers can be difficult to isolate and solve. Hyperlobby is also subject to being blocked or degraded by routers. If you or other people playing SFP1 online are behind routers, you have to follow the complicated configuration directions for each person hiding behind a router. Furthermore, your internet provider may interfere in ways similar to home routers, which you cannot control. The best/easiest solution has been for everyone to have a Hamachi account, and for everyone to join the same Hamachi "room". This setup "tricks" all the associated PCs into behaving as if they were connected directly together on a LAN rather than hiding behind routers. However, Hamachi doesn't allow you to find new players. Hamachi only tries to solve the networking issues caused by routers. In my years of hosting SFP1 online servers, I found Hyperlobby to be the perfect way to communicate/find players, but too problematic for actually hosting/playing online. So, I used a combination of Hyperlobby and Hamachi. I opened my server on Hyperlobby while having an active Hamchi network. All of the regulars would meet via Hyperlobby, but connect via Hamachi. Newbies would come to Hyperlobby and see an active server. If they could join via Hyperlobby without any problems, great! If there were problems, but a veteran was able to notice the presence of the newbie, they would be helped as much as possible.

How/why was it a failure? I always thought it was an efficient design only held back by politics (i.e. US pressure to buy US planes or the fact that they rely heavily on US components).

There's such a thing as an F-22?

Keep in mind that they almost always have something that you don't know about So, given this thing has been public for quite some time, what else do they have that isn't public?

I have fully re-engineered the F-4 stick into its best form yet. No more hacked up joysticks and rotary pots. The PC interface is now a BU0836X USB board with industrial grade linear pots that precisely match the range of motion provided by the stick. I had to do some grinding to create a slot in the aluminum tube for the pitch pot, but it has worked out extremely well. Some springs were installed to provide centering for both the pitch and yaw axis. The pitch springs are fairly tight, so it takes some force to pull back 100%. The overall feel of the stick is amazing: like a Warthog stick with an extension shaft and no detents around the center range. The bit resolution is 0-4095 versus the Warthog's 0-65535, but I would know the difference while flying as I can make very subtle roll/pitch adjustments--this is much better than the resolution provided by the SIdewinder or X-45. But the really big news is that I have used sketchup to design a cockpit installation. I am going to make a wood replica the aluminum box that covers the stick along with a cloth "boot" similar to a stick shift boot. I am going to use wood to make the ejection seat "bucket" and back rails to go with the real survival pack, cushions, and parachute pack that I just bought. The survival pack/lower seat cushion is out of F-4C 63-7704, a MiG killer! I will also make the left console and install the Warthog throttle in it (though I may make my own F-4 throttle handles at some point and connect them to the BU0836X at some point). I am excited. I am very close to having my own replica F-4 cockpit :) F-4C 63-7704 is now a gate guard with a fictional number painted on the tail: My upper "lumbar" back cushion came out of 72-1482:

Latest Pics inbound: It may be awhile before I can make time to get the real switches mounted and covered with plastic plates, but it will be great once it is done!

It has been public news for some time. It is one reason that the USAF had no care about whether the NASA space shuttle was being retired... they had already developed one for their own purposes. They would like an upscaled version, X-37C, that could carry larger payloads including people.

Well, the only advancements from before are using your photos as an overlay for the previous black/white lo-res manual print-out and adding our old 46" LCD TV to my computer desk... no more dragging the PC out to the family room, its mine now! I will provide pics as soon as I get a chance.

I will gladly take any drawings you have! At some point, I want to ditch the Warthog throttle and put in a home-built reasonable imitation of the real one.

That pic is perfect! I am envious of everything you have. If and when DCS has a fully clickable F-4E/F Phantom, I will be wishing I had everything you have. But, over time, I hope to largely replicate what you have with wood and real switches minus the gauges. Of course, years from now, maybe I will be in a position to get equivalent PC driven gauges or maybe even get around to getting what you have. While my wooden box does the job, I truly regret not buying the authentic enclosure that was sold on eBay by the same person that sold me the stick mechanism. You even have the snap on "boot" that covers the base of the stick. At some point, I would like to have functional rudder pedals that move in and out with the hand crank on the center console. But I don't have the metal working / machining skills to do it right and can't afford to pay someone else either. Rudder pedals and throttles almost never pop up on eBay, and when they do the price goes too high for me. So if I ever want to do this, I have to come up with something I can fabricate in my garage with basic tools and materials from Home Depot / Lowes. I saw the ejection seat trainer cockpit on eBay once, and my wife even authorized me to get it. But I had no place to put it and didn't want to waste money on something I wouldn't be able to use or even store at home. The one I saw was ultimately bought by the USAF for training QF-4 pilots in Florida. Kind of ironic that the USAF had to buy and F-4 trainer at eBay prices that they had probably just gotten rid of for pennies on the pound through DRMS. Keep posting pics of your progress!

MiG-25s and MiG-31s look way cool and distinctly Russian no matter how well they do/don't perform in combat

I am very sorry to hear you are having such trouble. I hope that it is just a minor problem or at least can be solved with a minimum of pain and suffering. What is the recovery time if they operate? In particular, how long before you can sit up and play flight sims At the very minimum, even if you are constrained to lying down in a bed, you could always watch all the Godzilla movies. I won't wish you luck because you don't need it... you already have and can continue to overcome adversity better than most people in the world. But know that your friends here wish you the best health and happiness.

Isn't AC-100 the CO aircraft with the bright colors? The closest I can find for 1995 is March 1995 AC-204 at Leeuwarden AB ops: Also from the same time/place, AC-205: AC-101 in 2006: So, I am thinking, just apply yellow higlights on the tails of the 1995 204/205 pics to get AC-101 in 1995.

Thanks for the post. My son loved it!

In a word, "no". It is supposed to be possible to create an orbit waypoint in the mission editor (not sure if that even works), but you can't tell wingmen to orbit.

I don't know if someone has posted this link before, but it sure is slick The F-35 should have been everything the F-16 evolved into, but with stealth: Small, agile, relatively cheap, very capable at both air-to-air and air-to-ground. But stealth inflates everything: size, weight, cost, and in this case deflates performance to F-4 Phantom levels. http://www.ausairpower.net/Analysis-JSF-Thud-2004.html

Fingers crossed.

Those shots do look pretty good... but it would be nice if there were more "Sundowners" doing that quality of work for every model ever released for SF2 Of course, being primarily an F-4 Phanatic, I am lucky to have had Sundowner and Ravenclaw keeping me topped off with goodies in recent years. But I have lots of SF2 flying time in all the century series birds, both stock and mods, as well as MiGs. It would be nice to have every aircraft I fly, if not every aircraft available, to the same standards as the best mods.

I got plenty of rest, didn't leave the house too much, and my son mostly left me alone. So, I spent most of Saturday and quite a bit of Sunday flying DCS. For now, our big 7-year-old 46" Mitsubishi 1080p LCD TV has become my monitor, which really makes me feel like I am in the cockpit when the zoom is set just right. I mainly flew the DCS P-51D on Saturday. I focused on flying P-51Dx4 vs. Fw190D9x4. I got familiar with how the AI handles multi-bogey engagements and tried to get my gunnery skills up to the laser-death-ray skills of the AI. If my wingmen respond well, it is a race to see if I can get any kills. They stole some kills from me quite often. My best mission, I killed two Fw190D9s with really fast focused bursts, during which time the AI easily splashed the other two. On a typical bad mission, I would try to clear an Fw190 off my wing's tail, but the Fw190 would nail him fast, in the mean time another Fw190 would be lining up on me while I chased the first one. The tail warning radar can be very useful if it isn't being tripped by the ground or wingmen. If you hear that bell ringing, you know you need to do something about it. I also use the rear view mirrors extensively. They let me track a bandit that passes head on and I almost always see a little speck diving on me. With TrackIR, I can get disoriented while maneuvering violently and sometimes I can't find the bandit even when I know he is on top of me and about to shoot. But most of the time, I can keep track of my target and maybe even keep up to date on where the other planes are. I think it would be much better with a 360 degree dome or maybe an occulus rift head mounted display. I spent some time practicing startup/taxiing/takeoff with the P-51D. The startup is much simpler than the A-10C or even the UH-1H, but I can still have some trouble with getting it primed right and turning over. Taxiing in a tail dragger is a trip. I only ground-looped once, totally destroying the plane trying to turn too fast with too much speed. Generally, I have no problems though since it behaves a lot like the P-51D from Aces High, complete with the locking tail wheel. Simply flying this beast is a pleasure, getting to fight in it is an added bonus. The flying aspect could be exponentially more fun if I could fly anywhere in the world per MS FSX and have high-def mods for my favorite locations. I also enjoy the 6DOF cockpit in the F-15C. It looks great on my LCD TV. Guns only combat is a little too easy, but fun nonetheless after getting spanked so many times in the P-51D. I don't believe the F-15C should easily beat Su-27Sx2 in close-in gun combat. If the AI flew those aircraft as well or better than me, I should never really win since one should always get me if I try to get behind the other one. Despite the AI limitations, sliding in with the gunsight tracking correctly is just as fun as using the K14 on the Mustang. The dispersion seems to be too much for the 20mm M61. Also, the damage effect of the 20mm seems too little. Even taking the dispersion into account, I can see how many hits I am getting. In reality, one or two hits could be fatal and five or six almost always are against fighter sized targets. In DCS, 20mm seems to have the effectiveness of 0.50 cal and 0.50 cal seems to be about the effectiveness of 0.30 cal. Of course, I have gotten used to SF2's highly lethal damage modeling. But, I would argue that in the case of MiG-21s, it seems to match reality. I don't know what's realistic or not when it comes to helos, but I love flying the UH-1H. I have the Mi-8 and like it, too. But the UH-1H is right up there with the F-4 as my all-time favorite aircraft. To have it modeled to this level of detail/realism is simply amazing. I have gotten pretty good at flying it and transitioning to a hover, etc. I am not so hot at engaging well defended targets. But I am having so much fun just taking off/flying/landing that I am not too worried about my combat skills. I need to do the missions. The only one I tried was picking up people from the tall mountian peak... but I can't seem to land without crashing. So, my flying skills aren't quite all they could be either ;) Realistic or not, I still find DCS to be challenging, fun, and rewarding. While I still fly SF2 for the plane set and maps, I am pretty close to flying DCS exclusively.

And there is the end result: None of the combat flight sims ever released have been perfect or ever will be. Just a matter of finding the one that suits your needs best. The problem for me is that each one has key flaws that can't or won't be fixed. But I expected SF2 to keep improving and moving toward my ideal, instead it actually started moving backwards and at the moment is completely frozen "as is". DCS on the other hand, has improved quite a bit, especially in comparison to LOMAC/FC, and promises to continue making dramatic improvements for at least a few more years if ED doesn't go bust. For the moment, SF2 remains the superior sim for dogfighting. But as much as I love dogfighting, I want a whole lot more than SF2 currently provides. For me, DCS only has a few significant limitations compared to my ideal: 1. One small, flat map instead of modelling the globe (SF2 is equally guilty here). All flat maps are significantly inaccurate and if they cover a large enough area, become grossly inaccurate. To be fair, it has been stated that Edge can support a global model, but can DCS: World support it? Kind of ironic that the "world" is so small and limited when "World" is in your product name. I only know of two more maps on the near horizon: DCS:1944 and DCS: Nevada. 2. Planeset. I am not a huge fan of 1990s and later air combat. I don't want combat to be a pushbutton missile fest. I prefer combat in the 1960s with the diversity of aircraft and weapons ranging from small gunfighters to heavy weight gunless missile interceptors. It will be a very long time before DCS can compete in this category if it even lasts long enough to try. 3. AI. SF2 isn't exactly the gold standard for AI behavior, but in many ways exceeds what DCS is using. For my purposes, dogfighting in Battle of Britain 2 Wings of Victory is the Cadillac of air-to-air AI, at least for close-in guns. But DCS has done so many other things so well, that it is painful for me to go back and fly SF2 after flying the A-10C, UH-1H, and P-51D in DCS. Despite flying it for years, I can still have fun flying SF2, but I have even more fun flying DCS:World. The unmatched detail and accuracy of the UH-1H is enough to hold my attention for quite some time. If, I didn't have any other DCS aircraft, I could easily devote all of my time to mastering the UH-1H. But the P-51D is every bit as much fun to fly... especially in a dogfight. Both of those aircraft will take a back seat once I have the MiG-21bis. The F-15C AFM about to be released might get me to spend a lot more time in the F-15C. All I can do right now is sit back and wait to see what actually gets released and when I can get a hold of it.

It would take some serious work to remap those old WoV skins to the SF2 F-105D

The only hi-res skins I recall are those made by easy kill. He has (had?) is own dedicated website, but posted some of his work here. I don't recall SF2 era releases, and I haven't tried to splice his SFP1 work into SF2. http://combatace.com/files/file/3636-f-105d-high-res-sea-1-1-4/ The website is here: http://www.digitalstrike.eu/ I would say that he did for F-105s what Sundowner did for F-4s. While I don't always agree with certain artistic choices of either one, they are both the best I know of for their respective aircraft specialty.