streakeagle

If I knew the answer, I would gladly tell you. But in all of my years playing this sim and following almost every associated forum, I don't recall ever having this problem or any posts about it. I started with a Voodoo 5500 and have been using ATi cards ever since, all of which had various driver issues over the years, just not this issue. Perhaps you are using an nVidia product? Radar screen goes white...

The base where we moored was surrounded by trees. As we were there in October, the leaves were on the ground in such large quantities that the access road was indistinguishable from the shoulders. I drove a shuttle van between the hotel and the base on my duty days and had trouble following the road during the day and even more trouble at night. The large 4-legged animal with horns frequenly blocking the road must have been a Roosevelt Elk? Didn't ever get a good look at his head, always assumed it was a Moose since I was in Canada. I believe the Navy Research base we moored at was Nanoose. There was a buoy in the center of the bay and a bald eagle would circle around and then perch on it and scaring away all of the other birds and small animals (i.e. the area would go silent before I could even see the Eagle). I stood a lot of watches overnight in the cold and rain. Didn't really enjoy the trip other than seeing the Mk 50 torpedoes try to find us in shallow water at slow speeds. Hint: never, ever volunteer to be a diesel submarine sailor if a nuclear boat is available. Nuke boats are much more comfy, if a sub can ever be considered to be comfy.

I was a Submarine Sonar Tech in the United States Navy. I served from 1989 to 1997 (exactly 8 years). I was on USS Dolphin, AGSS-555, when I went to Canada (twice) to act as a torpedo target. Both times to the same range. Our sub was so small (165 feet, designed for a crew of 20 but manned by a crew of 40), that we stayed in a hotel in Nanaimo. I had trouble getting between the base and the town because the road was covered in maple leaves and frequently blocked by a moose. I went in October of 1995 and about the same time in 1996. The North Pacific is very cold, especially when 20 foot waves are coming down while standing lookout in the sail and cruising at 2-7 kts on the surface.

The key mapping should be identical if you are patched up to the point where animations became available via the numeric keys. Aside from adding vector thrust keys, HUD mode toggle (Alt-D), and default mappings for animations, I don't think there have been any key mapping changes since the original Walmart release of SFP1.

Try here: http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=6892 Or here: http://sites.google.com/site/streakeagle68/pc-games/strike-fighters/key-map For the most recent releases from me. My last site died when I moved and couldn't get Verzion FIOS anymore. I have now abandoned using ISPs for hosting. For now, Google is free and does the job :)

AFAIK, the only reason FE exists is because a certain someone bank rolled it, who might also be the certain someone who bought BioHaz from Jeff and created CombatAce, who might also be the same someone who created Alienware computers and then sold out to Dell before the market collapsed. Be thankful FE exists at all... much less FE2. I am simply happy that the expansion to FE1 was completed as I can't imagine any WWI sim without the Camel and the Dr.I. Of couse, I would love to see TK round out the planeset with Nieuports, Sopwiths, E.IIIs, etc. But at least there is a moddable framework up to SF2 standards that can be expanded without bounds by third parties. A detailed, accurate bug list might lead up to a minor bug fix patch. But I don't play nearly enough to have any complaints... just single missions every now and then. As for mission editing, If you have no patience to edit using notepad, I am pretty sure you can import the terrain and aircraft into SF2, at least well enough to create missions? Once, again, I have never had the time nor interest to even try to import/export stuff between FE and SF. But I know that some people have experience doing so. The difficulty would be what types of missions are supported in FE versus those in SF2.

File Name: 650404 First F-105 Losses for SF2V File Submitter: streakeagle File Submitted: 20 January 2011 File Category: SF2 Series Add On Missions and Campaigns Three F-105Ds were shot down on April 4, 1965. At least two of them were lost to MiG-17s from the 921st Regiment at Noi Bai. These were the first US aircraft lost to VPAF MiGs in Vietnam. Zinc flight of the 354th TFS was bounced while orbiting the Initial Point. The lead pair of F-105s never saw the MiGs and did not respond to radio calls. One pair of MiGs fired on the lead pair of F-105s and badly damaged them. The trailing pair of F-105s evaded another pair of MiGs. The damaged F-105s tried to divert to Da Nang, but could not make it. Both pilots ejected at sea, but neither survived. Zinc 01, Maj Frank Bennett in 59-1754, drowned before being recovered. Zinc 02, Capt James Magnusson in 59-1764, was never found and declared MIA. /*****Sources******************************************************************/ A. USAF "Red Baron" WSEG Report 116 Event II-1 Incredibly detailed account. (very detailed, most accurate) B. Osprey Combat Aircraft 84 F-105 Thunderchief Units of the Vietnam War by Peter E. Davies, pp. 24-25. (general account) C. Osprey Combat Aircraft 25 MiG-17 and MiG-19 Units of the Vietnam War by Istvan Toperczer, pp. 30-31. (from enemy's perspective) D. http://taskforceomegainc.org/m007.html (interesting but very inaccurate) /*****Design*******************************************************************/ After extensive testing, this mission uses the following design decisions: Written for a stock SF2V install, no mods required. The stock environment does not permit multiple levels and types of clouds/haze. So the only the haze and cirrus layer are modeled. The F-105 mission is a STRIKE on the Thanh Hoa "Dragon's Jaw" bridge. The initial aircraft positions reflect WSEG Report 116 Event II-1. The F-105s are in an orbit at the IP, 10 miles south of the bridge. The mission starts when the 2nd pair of MiGs are first detected by Zinc 03 & 04. The lead pair of MiGs start very close to the lead pair of F-105s. The lead pair of F-105s have poor pilot quality to simulate their unresponsiveness. This almost guarantees that the MiG-17s will immediately shoot down Zinc 01 & 02. The trailing F-105s are modeled as a separate flight with the same Zinc callsign. This permits historical positioning of the aircraft and different pilot quality. The player is flying as Zinc 03 (Zinc 01 of the 2nd Zinc flight in the game). The MiG-17s have been broken up into two flights. This permits historical starting positions and target objectives. Two flights of F-100s were in the area and may have gotten one or more MiG kills. However, the F-105s never saw them, so I have left them out. Outcomes are typically very close to the historical results. /*****Playing Tips*************************************************************/ The mission begins with the enemy very close at 7 o'clock and closing fast. The first thing the player should do is jettison all ordnance and break hard. The player should also issue a "break" or "cover me" command to his wingman. If the player survives, try to support any other survivors. Continuing the bridge attack after escaping the MiGs is the only way to "win", but the game engine victory conditions should be ignored for this mission. A true victory is landing at Da Nang with more than two F-105s. It is possible to pick up some kills, but very risky, so consider disengaging. In reality, the undamaged F-105s ignored the MiGs to help the damaged ones. Do the following to make this mission challenging and realistic: ONLY USE THE NORMAL IN-COCKPIT VIEWS: <F1>, <F2>, and <F3> Do not use map <M>, target <T>, padlock <F4>, or any view target <F8> keys. Doing so provides the player with exceptional situational awareness. The player unrealistically always knows everyone's location. This extra knowledge allows a skilled player to escape and possibly kill MiG-17s. Be proficient with the POV hat, look up <NUM 5> key, and zoom view controls. Due to the way the game renders distant targets, spotting MiGs is very hard. MiGs that are not very close cannot be seen at all when zoomed out. Learn to zoom in and scan the horizon for small moving dots. This will be frustrating and the spotting distances may seem unrealistic. The end results are exceptionally realistic. The player may frequently get lost or disoriented. Like real pilots, level out and/or use check turns to find your way back. It will take skill and luck to spot MiGs. It requires even more skill and luck to get one or more kills. Of course, TrackIR makes this whole process much easier and realistic. Play the mission several times following these restrictions. Once used to it, the player will learn two skills critical to real pilots: 1) Visual scanning discipline to focus and pick out distant contacts. 2) Situational awareness to mentally track planes not within view. Good luck! /******************************************************************************/ This mission was designed by Stephen "streakeagle" Flores. For questions/comments, send email to: streak_eagle@hotmail.com This mission is intended solely for free distribution. It may be copied or changed by anyone as long as it is not for profit. Click here to download this file

Great shots! I wasn't allowed to even speak to Russians, much less drink with them. I did get to meet some Canadian sub sailors on Vancouver Island while doing playing target on a torpedo range near Nanaimo. I gave them my ball cap for a beret. Still have the beret :)

Sound like real life became more important than the online simming community in terms of time and money.

Right now it is a lot of marketing fluff. But if this works really well and matures into the free SDK for developers, imagine A2A Simulations F-4 Phantom with properly implemented fully functional weapons and avionics. It may be at least 2 to 5 years before FSX addons with full combat avionics and weapons could become the norm and the whole system could be thrown a curve with the release of the new upcoming MS FS... but the potential is virtually unlimited. If this happens, Third Wire's SF series would fade into the background as FSX has a much larger user base AND astronomically more addon support both freeware and payware. I am still skeptical, but I have a copy of FSX and the expansion collecting dust waiting for the A2A Accusim F-4. If accurate weapons and avionics could be added to the mix along with some equally well modeled AI opponents and/or a decent multiplayer base arises, I would be very happy: great graphics, reasonably accurate fight modeling, clickable cockpits, AND multiplayer combat! Presently, SF2 is the only sim that even comes close to meeting my needs, but the TacPack could be the beginning of something even better.

Unless you choose to have it locked down slow on battery, it should ramp up as needed. My wifes EEEPC would last 7 or 8 hours on the battery continuously doing surfing/email etc when new, so surely it could play games for an hour or two with the cpu and gpu maxed out. Mech Warrior 4 Mercenaries has been available for free for awhile. As said before, use their MTX software to grab it. Once you have it on one PC, you can copy the whole game folder to any other PC.

If you can trust Wiki: he Bf 109 was credited with more aerial kills than any other aircraft. One hundred and five (possibly 109) Bf 109 pilots were credited with the destruction of 100 or more enemy aircraft. Thirteen of these men scored more than 200 kills, while two scored more than 300. Altogether this group were credited with nearly 15,000 kills between them.[56] Official ace status was granted to any pilot who scored five or more kills. Applying this to Luftwaffe fighter pilots and their records reveals that "Ace" status belonged to more than 2,500 German pilots.[57] Against Soviets, the Finnish-flown Bf 109Gs claimed a victory ratio of 25:1 in favour of the Finns. Think about it, thats more than the P-51 and F6F together :)

No doubt about it, must be a WW2 fighter. I would venture a guess: Bf-109 if you count all variants together. What other aircraft had multiple 100+ kill aces and even a 300 kill ace? The allies had many fighters to divide their kills up, the Luftwaffe had principally just two, Bf109 and Fw190. The Bf109 flew air combat missions from the Spanish Civil War through the establishment of Israel in 1948. Between daily massive bombing raids from England and the Eastern Front, there were certainly plenty of opportunities to score kills. But, as effective as the Bf109 was, what was its kill ratio? The F-15 has served far longer and is supposedly still undefeated in air-to-air (can't ever trust Israel to be 100% accurate about losses). But how can you really compare combat statistics of anything that has happened since WW2 with WW2? The USAF had over 100,000 aircraft at its peak and almost every aircraft was produced in numbers over 5,000, typically 10,000 or more. Since then, the lucky few like the MiG-15, F-86 Sabre, MiG-21, and F-4 get produced in numbers like that. Since the A6M served from the start of WW2 to the end, it might have a decent total as well. Though its effectiveness fell off rapidly after 1942 as technology passed it by and more importantly the quality of Japanese pilots fell dramatically.

While this looks nice, the lack of a functioning RWR display in the cockpit 3d model leads me to prefer using a late MiG-21 cockpit as the baseline. The only bad flaw with using the MiG-21 is having the radar display on the panel, and I would rather have that than not have a RWR ;) Of course, the Su cockpit has the rail running down the middle of the canopy... So how do we get an Su pit with a RWR? Or better yet get a dedicated accurate MiG-23 cockpit comparable to the quality of the MiG-21s.

I never got around to getting Wings of Prey because I simply don't have much time for the games I already have, but Steam had an offer I couldn't refuse yesterday ($13.50 for the game + addon). So I bought two copies with the Wings of Luftwaffe addon ($27 total cost!) just in case I want to do some multiplayer (my son already plays Blazing Angels with me on Wii). I found it difficult to get it set up the way I wanted. Lots of tedious stuff like figuring out which joystick axis' need inverting and registering the product key, etc. I must say, I am impressed with the look and feel compared to IL-2 and Aces High. I have only tried the Battle of the Bulge in a P-51D and a Bf-109 mission. The look and feel reminds me strongly of Jane's WW2 Fighters, just with modernized 3d models and textures. The glint of metal aircraft in the distance is well done... the first sim I have played to do it as well or better than MiG Alley. I haven't played very much and probably won't bother with it at all unless my son is interested. I have been focused on jets for so long that I have no idea how good the flight model is. It felt okay, but is it as accurate as Aces High? i.e. dead-on the published power, time-to-climb, and speed charts? My only immediate complaint besides setup hassles is the view through the canopy glass/prop. All that HDR/pixel shading looks cool, but I can't see much straight ahead between all the glare and prop-blur. The work around is to use the virtual cockpit/HUD view, but I would rather be blind than not have an excellent 3d cockpit wrapped around me.

Having just flown the P-51D in both IL-2 1946 and Wings of Prey, the gunsight is much better and realistic in Il-2 (even if the diamonds are oversized). Also, while the WoP terrain looks good, the airplanes stand out against the terrain as if you are flying in front of an old cheesy blue screen projection (think Elvis Presley movies where you see the background going by as he is talking to someone while driving a car). This is especially evident when flying down low and looking at your own aircraft from an outside view. Some aspects of Il-2 look very dated in this type of comparison, but the trees look pretty good from the air, just not so good when you get down in the weeds. I haven't played enough of either to say which I like better, but WoP doesn't seem as sterile. I also did some head-to-head comparisons with Aces High and SF2 Israel Expansion Pack P-51Ds. By far, SF2 is the most fun since the AI really likes to dogfight. Aces High has much lower numbers of polygons than the other games and sacrifices cockpit accuracy for gaming convenience, but its flight model is by far the most accurate. So, if I wanted to do some serious dueling online with high fidelity flight and gun modeling, I think Aces High is still my sim of choice. However, for WW2 simulation and immersion, its probably a tossup on IL-2/WoP. If TK ever made an SF2 EAW release, the fun factor of his sim lite approach would put it in a category of its own. So I can see why modders like to build SF WW2 installs when they already have a ton of dedicated WW2 air combat sims to choose from. I don't know of any other WW2 air combat flight sim where you can fly a P-61 Black Widow AND even have functioning radar. But there is one WW2 air combat sim that I think is better than all of these: WoV BoB2 (Wings of Victory Battle of Britain 2). As long as you are happy flying Hurricanes, Spitfires, and Bf109s, I think it wins across the board with fidelity, fun, immersion, etc. If they ever take that sim up to the next level with more terrains and aircraft, it would easily outclass Il-2.

Yeah, I read that as well. They started out with the idea that it would be quick and dirty to port IL-2 to a console, but found it easier to develop a completely new engine to suit their needs. It does not "feel" like IL-2. Nor does it look like it. I think its relationship to IL-2 from a realism standpoint is much like Strike Fighters to Falcon 4.0... yet from my brief experience it didn't seem that lite, more like LOMAC compared to Falcon 4.0 as it includes an awful lot of engine management options for a lite sim. TK would never use so many controls for a "fun" game.

Excellent piece of history. I hate that North American stopped winning fighter contracts. They were the best.

Try looking up info on this A-5 variant: NR-349 Retaliator, Proposed Improved Manned Interceptor (IMI) for U.S. Air Force with two, later three engines and an armament of six AIM-54 Phoenix missiles.

My wife's Asus eeePC will basically play anything that would run on a Win98SE Pentium 3 PC with at least 25-30 frames per second. I have several games on it to entertain my son on long trips including Aces High 1 and Mech Warrior 4. He doesn't really notice the lower resolution or lack of FSAA. Even I can enjoy flying in Aces High 1. I think SFP1 up to about SP2a or WoV would work ok with the right settings.j From WoE on, my P3 computer with a Radeon 9800 Pro video card just couldn't keep up, so I assume an Intel Atom would have similar trouble.

Have you tried using prop TGA files from stock aircraft (assuming they are still working) ? If that doesn't fix it, I would bet a change in the 3d model is necessary. I know others have found this problem and were working on it, too. Don't know what their final results are.

I have been involved with PC flight simulators for a very long time. Why have I never heard about this one? http://www.proflightsimulator.com/index5.html I haven't downloaded the demo, but from the screenshots, it looks like X-plane did years ago. The planeset is quite interesting with many military types from many nationalities. It has an optional air combat addon complete with multiplayer and ACMI review. The air combat part looks very LITE, with sole focus on air combat maneuvering. The sales pitch looks a bit gimmicky leaning toward shady, but you can try a demo before buying it, so it must be legit? Going to google this now for reviews... Just noticed a blurb I missed: based on the open source Flight Gear project. So I have heard of it. "Flight Pro Sim is a commercial product that simply rebrands FlightGear. Investigation by a number of the FlightGear developers has found no difference between this and the FlightGear v1.9.1 release other than a change of name. Flight Pro Sim is in no way endorsed or supported by the core FlightGear development team. Given the similarities between Flight Pro Sim and FlightGear, we would recommend that prospective buyers download FlightGear for free and satisfy themselves that Flight Pro Sim provides worthwhile value for money before purchasing it." Translated: Shady deal, charging for an open source sim. Now I get why I haven't ever heard of it. They payware package (if the advertising is telling the truth) appears to have two features that Flight Gear does not: working multiplayer and basic air combat. How well these are implemented is unknown. The combat flight sim aspect isn't a module for flightgear, but an entirely different freeware project found here: http://aeron.sourceforge.net/sshot.php The graphics are abstract, but it is a multiplayer environment.

I can't believe someone came up with a simple fix to getting Jane's Fighters Anthology to run correctly on Win 7 64-bit. The fix was actually created for another game (Starcraft), but someone else figured out that FA was suffering the same problem and therefore could be fixed using the same solution. Simply use a batch file to start the game. The original batch file posted for Starcraft didn't work for me, so I deleted parts that did not apply to me and edited the rest to fit Fighters Anthology. This is the text of the batch file I am using: rem First kill Explorer.exe, which messes up the colors taskkill /f /IM explorer.exe rem Change to the application directory cd C:\JANES\Fighters Anthology rem run the application FA.EXE rem Wait for the game to quit, press Enter to continue pause rem Restart Explorer.exe start explorer.exe exit

I have spent up to 82 days straight submerged in a submarine. Typically serving 6 hours on watch and 12 hours off watch. The off watch time included doing clean-up routines, system maintenance, and training as well as meals, showers, etc. Sleep time was typically 3 to 6 hours. Throw in some fire drills, flooding drills, battle stations, etc. for good measure. The stress is minimal when there is a known schedule and fixed daily routine. Unexpected events and an unknown schedule dramatically increase stress. These guys were unexpectedly trapped, didn't know when or if they would be found, but did eventually get a nice schedule and routine going. As long as they had sufficient air, water, and food, I don't see where they went through too much more than any submarine crew. One year, I was at sea for 220 days of 365. A friend of mine was at sea 360 of 365 days on one very reliable submarine (they only came in for food and spare parts). It is great news that everyone made it out alive, but I am not too impressed or amazed by the whole ordeal of being stuck below the surface for a couple of months with little or no comforts.