streakeagle

The choice is between updating as required with brief downtimes or getting hacked and losing everything with very long downtime or even permanent loss of this site. I think it is an easy choice. Do what needs to be done. No apologies necessary.

From the Third Wire web page for the complete SF2 package you can go from a WW2 P-51D and Meteor F.8 up to the F-16A: Player Flyable Aircraft • A-4A/B/C/E/F/G/H/K/L Skyhawk • A-7A/B/C/D/E/H/P Corsair II • A-10A Thunderbolt II • F-100A/C/D Super Sabre • F-105D Thunderchief • F-4B/C/D/E/EJ/F/J/K/M/N Phantom II • F-8C/D/E/E(FN)/H/J/K Crusader • F-14A Tomcat • F-15A Eagle/Baz • F-16A Netz • Harrier GR.1/3 • Hunter F.1/2/4/5/6/50/58/FGA.9/73 • Kfir C1/C2/F-21A • Lightning F.1/2/3/6/53 • Meteor F.8 • Mirage IIIC/CJ/CZ/EL/O • Mirage 5BA • Mystere IVA • Nesher • P-51D Mustang If you download the full SF2 Korea package, the flyable aircraft count increases dramatically. There are similar comprehensive mods for Vietnam, NATO, and Desert Storm. But each of these mods is a separate install. They are not designed to be intermixed. I tend to keep a Korea and a Vietnam install, but at times I also had the NATO install. I never tried the Desert Storm mod, but people who prefer more modern scenarios and plane sets love it.

There is no other combat flight sim that will allow you to fly aircraft over such a vast range of technology. If you buy the complete SF2 $100 package, the volume of flyable and AI aircraft is unmatched out of the box. When you add in the available mods, there are almost no aircraft you can't fly. The only restriction is that if you want a WW1 experience, you should get First Eagles 2, which revises the Strike Fighters 2 game engine to better match the WW1 aircraft performance and scale. The game was not designed to go past early 1980s avionics nor was it designed to support Soviet style avionics, but that didn't stop modders from finding ways to make decent modern aircraft and flyable Soviet aircraft. The big disadvantage to the SF2 series is that the terrain engine was obsolete compared to contemporary flight sims from the day SFP1 was released. So, you are not going to see high resolution meshes of mountains, hills, canyons, etc. Also, the stock maps were imported scaled down from 1 mile to 1 kilometer, approximately 2/3 scale. I believe this was a design choice to make distances shorter on historical maps because air-to-air refueling is not available in this game. However, using a dated terrain engine has its advantages: performance and file size. You can have multiple terrains covering all major historical and hypothetical air combat situations without buying a 4 TB drive and run them at high frame rates. User mods for the terrain textures can help make the terrain look better, but at a cost in hard drive space and possibly performance. When SF2 development ceased, I migrated to DCS World. Over time, DCS has expanded to include aircraft from WW2, Korea, Vietnam, and all the way to 1990s/2000s level of technology. Officially supported payware modules only cover a limited range of aircraft compared to SF2. Even adding in free mods, the flyable and AI plane sets are a tiny fraction of what SF2 has. To play DCS and have all the payware aircraft and terrain requires not only a lot of money to buy all the modules but needs a high-end PC with 32+ GB RAM and a 4 TB drive with the strongest GPU you can afford, especially if you want to fly in VR. As much as I enjoy DCS World and flying in VR, SF2 is the only place I can fly an F2H-2 Banshee over Korea or use an F-101 to shoot down Bears with nuclear Genie missiles. IL-2 Korea is going to add aircraft carriers and the F2H-2 in Q1 2027 (supposedly), which will scratch my Korean War itch. User mods already support the F-104C, F105D, and F-106A. The F-100D was recently released and a payware F-104G is nearing early access release. So, my days of keeping SF2 on my harddrive are numbered. But for the time being it is still there and I can even get it to work in a basic VR mode using VorpX.

I own them all. My preference is the UH-1H. No electronics, no stabilization, all stick, collective, and rotor pedals. I recently got an AB9 Force Feedback stick, and it makes flying the UH-1 even more fun. If you like the idea of being multirole as a gunship and light transport able to ferry troops and rescue downed pilots, then the UH-1H is a good choice. The OH-58D Kiowa is a fun ride, but I prefer traditional analog cockpits to glass cockpits, and it doesn't have the payload/armament of the UH-1H (I love large rocket pods, miniguns, and door gunners). But if you like higher tech sensors and weapons, the OH-58D is a better choice than the UH-1H. Being able to grab a rifle and shoot out the door is a fun capability. The AH-64D and Ka-50 are both high-tech gunships. They are much easier to fly and have the best weapons. Of the two, I am partial to the AH-64D because I am partial to US instrumentation, weapons, etc. The coolest feature is using the helmet mounted sight to fire the 30 mm gun. The Ka-50 is a single seat helo and has contra rotating main rotors, which makes it unique compared to any other helo in the game. This gives it naturally good handling qualities even with the stabilization turned off. If you don't mind Russian avionics and weapons, it is a great ride. I almost never fly either one due to my preference for older technology, especially the avionics. I don't care to fly aircraft or helos with glass cockpits. The CH-47F has another unique configuration and flight model that makes it fun to fly. But its only armament is door guns, so the main mission is hauling cargo/troops and performing CSAR. I would fly it more, but this a later model with a glass cockpit. Servers that support flying cargo/troop transport missions allow you to enjoy the best cargo capacity of any helo in DCS World. The fun is trying to drop off/pick up troops in tight landing zones given the size of this helo. The Mi-8/Mi-24 are two sides of the same coin. One leans heavy into troop transport with a secondary gunship capability, the other leans heavy into a gunship with a secondary troop transport capability. Of the two, I prefer the Mi-24. The cockpit reminds me of the MiG-21 (one of my favorite aircraft) and the ability to carry tons or rockets and/or guns and/or anti-tank missiles and/or air-to-air missiles makes it flexible and fun. The SA342 Gazelle is the odd on: It has a light, unstable flight model that flies like an insect. It has limited payload capacity, but there are many variants with a variety of weapons capabilities. It is fun/challenging to fly, but I much prefer the OH-58D for the light helicopter role. The two I fly the most are the UH-1H and Mi-24. I have far more hours in the UH-1H than any other helo with the Mi-24 coming in a distant 2nd place. I originally flew the Mi-8 frequently, but I stopped after the Mi-24 was released. I flew the Ka-50 back when the only aircraft available were the P-51D, A-10C, and Ka-50. I flew the AH-64D just enough to try out the helmet mounted gunsight and see how it handled from takeoff/hover/transition/high speed/transition/hover/land. I would fly the CH-47F more if there were more missions focused on pushing the limits of its cababilities.

Out of the box, the aircraft were some of the best looking models and textures at that time. Mods pushed it over the top. The terrain was a little less impressive. Jane's USAF looked really sharp. The Nevada terrain was amazing. The Germany and Vietnam maps were not nearly as good.

SF2 is great out of the box, especially if you have the full $100 package with all the games and DLC. I agree with Wrench that it is best to get a feel for the stock game before adding mods. Get your controls mapped to your liking and find out what kind of aircraft and missions you enjoy flying. You can spend of a lot of time just experimenting with the settings which can tune the graphics experience, AI behavior, etc. However, if there are specific aircraft you want to fly that are not covered by that package, you might want to start with those first. If you are an F-5 fan, you are in for a treat. Some recent SF2 F-5 mods are top notch. You will find the quality of mods highly variable depending on when they are originally developed and the preferences of the modder who made them. Some are older with lower polycounts and smaller textures to maintain performance. Some are newer with higher polycounts and larger textures that push the limits of the game's rendering engine. SF2 mods adapted from SFP1/WoX mods will usually show their age. But most mods work well and look more than good enough to enjoy flying them. The three big total mod installs I always favored were Korea, Vietnam, and NATO, but others prefer a more modern one like Desert Storm. It is best to create a separate custom install for each total conversion mod to avoid conflicts/bugs. There are some payware mods that are not hosted here, but you might like if you are still able to purchase them. RAZBAM had several addon aircraft. They never got fully upgraded to SF2 standards, but they are still great mods. My favorite is their F2H-2 Banshee, which I have thoroughly enjoyed flying in the SF2 Korea mod for so many years. I also love Century series fighters, particularly F-101B Voodoos and F-106 Delta Darts trying to stop hordes of Soviet Tu-95 Bear bombers with AIM-4/AIM-26 Falcons and Genie nuclear rockets. There is a mod to add the nuclear detonation of the Genie based on the actual video of the only live test. Watching an airburst take out a flight of Bears is pretty cool. Another big mod that you may be interested is the Yankee Air Pirate series (a Vietnam history experience) which also has modern and WW2 mod packages. The original mod was payware, but after the owner died, the modders picked up the pieces to make an updated SF2 compliant version. If you are into carrier operations, there are many mods to add new aircraft carriers from many Navy's and time frames as well as graphical upgrades of the stock aircraft carriers. Yankee Air Pirate has some really good aircraft carriers. My favorite is CVAN-65: the Enterprise as she looked during Vietnam. There are too many options to list. Just think of something you like and search Combat Ace to see what you can find. Some mods are still hosted at their original sites, but the links have been disappearing slowly but surely over the years. Good luck! I hope you enjoy this game as much as I have over the years.

There is a separate combined FE1/FE2 forum: First Eagles 1 & 2 - CombatACE But you posted in a place that got the help you needed, so it isn't really wrong

I had pre-ordered the WinCtrl FFB stick and rudder pedals. But WinCtrl seems to have problems with quality control, production schedules, communication, and customer support. So, I canceled the order and got a MOZA AB9. I have been using a VKB Gunfighter Mk2 upgraded to a Mk3 for years. I didn't want to give up the MCG Ultimate grip, so I got an adapter. The AB9 provides the force feedback, the VKB grip is connected to the VKB USB black box and retains the custom configuration I love so much. The VKB was the smoothest, most precise stick I ever owned, but the AB9 equals that and adds force feedback. But force feedback is only as good as the software profile driving it. It turns out the two aircraft that I love and fly the most, the DCS F-4E and DCS UH-1H also happen to have the best in-game profiles. Both are an absolute joy to fly with the FFB stick. In the meantime, I have learned how to customize the MOZA profiles to accommodate DCS modules that have poor native profiles. I have also been using a vibrating seat pad for many years. The force feedback stick complements the seat pad very well. I have waited a long time for a decent force feedback solution. The MOZA options are somewhat affordable and have established a record for decent quality/reliability with decent customer support. After the WinCtrl FFB stick and rudder pedals have been around long enough to work out the bugs in the software and hardware, I may end up getting them just to compare. By the time that happens, my bank account should be in a position to afford it.

The glide slope of the space shuttle. Really just a controlled free fall before popping a chute. If the wind isn't gusting, probably safer than jumping out of a plane. I went hang gliding once in California. Again, safety is subject to the wind. But you can stay up as long as you want if you are good at finding thermals. It is true flight rather than a controlled descent. My launch consisted of running down the slope of a mountainside at 5,000 feet until the ground dropped away. Peak altitude was 7,000 ft above the desert floor.

I have tried the "exams" for the P-51D, F-84G, F-86A, and MiG-15bis. Once I got my controls mapped correctly, I had no problem taking off, dogfighting, and landing. The flight models and controls are so similar between IL-2 Korea and DCS World that experience in one will largely make you proficient in the other. I have not tried multiplayer. The graphics are comparable to DCS World, but that comes at the price of performance. Unlike the older IL-2 titles, the frame rates in VR are the same or lower than in DCS World. However, even with lower frame rates, the game looks smooth: I don't really see any stuttering. As some YouTube reviews have cited, the 0.50 caliber guns seem to be somewhat more effective than most other games. The only problem I have had so far is that the F-86 wings would snap off easily. But the 0.2 patch appears to have solved that problem despite not being listed in the patch notes. Besides having period correct aircraft and ground objects, the big advantage over DCS World is having a proper Korea map. It generally looks as good as the best DCS World maps without the performance penalty down low that some DCS maps have. I will say that after flying the Caucasus map as a substitute for Korea in DCS for so many years, that I see quite a bit of similarity between some parts of the IL-2 Korea map and the DCS Caucasus map. But I still wish DCS had a Korea map. As IL-2 Korea has turned out to be very well done, I suspect that this level of competition will guarantee that DCS will never focus on Korea. Someone interested in the Korean air war will be much better off buying IL-2 Korea. I hope IL-2 Korea is successful enough to justify continued development to further expand the flyable aircraft set as well as adding aircraft carrier operations. I still have Rowan's MiG Alley in the original box. I loved that game, but it was never fully patched up and was quickly rendered obsolete by newer games... especially SFP1 with the Korea map and mods. IL-2 Korea has taken the crown for best Korean air war combat simulator, leaving Rowan's MiG Alley and SFP1/SF2 Korea mods far behind. SF2 Korea is not totally obsolete: it still has a much more diverse flyable aircraft set and supports aircraft carrier operations. But IL-2 Korea's support for VR and multiplayer and its modern graphics quality make it the better choice if you can live with the current flyable aircraft set.

IL-2 Korea Early Access is available for download/gameplay. I installed and played it for a few minutes last night. It is in fairly good shape for early access. The MiG-15bis and F-86A-5 both flew decently.

It is an amazing park and museum. Years ago (spring 2019), my son and I spent a long weekend in Pensacola seeing the Naval Aviation Museum and the Alabama Park/Museum.

The F-100D is another outstanding DCS module. The cockpit and external 3d models and textures are amazing and the flight/systems modeling is outstanding, especially for an initial release. The Early Cold War DCS servers that I help administrate/host had large numbers of people coming in to try out the F-100D in a Vietnam setting. The lack of a proper Vietnam map is an inconvenience, no different than the release of SFP1 with a Vietnam era flyable plane set, but a fictional Middle East map. The basic geography and order of battle can be recreated both in the air and on the ground. US forces can fly close air support, interdiction, strike, SEAD, CAP, escort, etc. against ground units that have period correct air defenses like the SA-2, ZU-23, and KS-19. The main thing missing is the correct colors/vegetation. The closest DCS maps to Vietnam in terms of colors and vegetation are the small Marianas maps. These small maps look great but have some of the worst performance of all the DCS maps. DCS Vietnam is planned but won't be possible without advanced in the DCS terrain engine. It needs to be a large map covering Thailand to Hanoi to Yankee Station and it is covered with performance killing jungle vegetation. If useful performance breakthroughs are made as the graphics engine migrates to AMD's Vulkan API, DCS may finally get a Vietnam map and perhaps Korea, too.

I am buying the upgrade expansion, but I doubt I will ever fly it much. I primarily fly the F-14A rather than the F-14B. At some point, the RAZBAM F-15E will no longer function in DCS World. When that day comes, the F-14BU will be there as a substitute. Of course, I don't fly the F-15E very much either. I focus on 1950s to 1970s Cold War aircraft and principally fly the F-4E and UH-1H.

The main Third Wire web page is back up. But the all-important store and downloads sections are not. At least TK made some progress.

CAP2 is on Steam with forums where you can ask for help from the developers and other owners of the game: https://steamcommunity.com/app/347170/discussions/

Still one of my favorite skins for the F-15.

As for TK/Third Wire putting Wings Over Europe on Steam: I think you will find that it was the publisher, Strategy First, that put it on Steam. If you read the reviews, it is evident that it is an old, buggy, unpatched build so people who buy it have to find their way to Third Wire's website to get the most recent patch. But at $8.99, it is a steal compared to $39.99 on Third Wire's website. I suspect TK keeps his prices high to encourage people to buy the final all-in-one SF2 package. But most people don't understand that it is worth the $99.99 price tag and just buy one of the other SF2 games for $39.99. Of course, this is where the open game framework hurt TK: if you buy the right game, you can get mods to make it anything you want without having to buy the all-in-one package.

TK started with an almost completely open sim, which resulted in his IP getting pirated. 3d models were stolen. It was interesting that he never resorted to anti-piracy systems as it is very clear that a lot more people pirated the games than bought them. TK's decisions were logical. He locked down files that were costing him time and money. To say he wasn't listening simply isn't true. He spent a lot of time on Sim HQ forums both prior to and after the release of SFP1. A lot of the things that were implemented from Wings Over Vietnam to Wings Over Europe to Wings Over Israel were exactly what people had been asking for. SimHQ forums became hostile to TK. He opened his own forums and never looked back. The transition to SF2 marked the beginning of the end. Most people who bought one or more of the SFP1/WoX games never bought any of the SF2 games. The criticism was valid: why buy the same game(s) twice? Modded versions of the older series were largely comparable to the new series. Each SF2 release returned less revenue: notice I didn't say profit because as far as I can tell, TK was losing money throughout SF2 development, particularly when he developed the mission editor and North Atlantic. Apparently, the free-to-play games were much more profitable. 3d models/texture quality are much lower requiring less time to add new aircraft. Virtually no cockpits modeled. Minimal controls. He doesn't even have to interact with the customers anymore, which greatly reduces stress. He did attempt a crowd-funded cleanup of SF2 to make it more Windows 10 friendly. But that didn't draw enough support, perhaps deservedly so since SF2 generally works ok on Windows 10 and Windows 11 for most people and there would have been no new content. What's left is still a decent workable game with tons of mod support and room for many more. But for me, SF2 has been dead for years. DCS World isn't that much harder to fly than SF2. Hop in an F-86F or F-5E: you can use a key-combo cheat to get started up, then you largely have the same controls you would have had mapped in SF2. Most of the older aircraft don't take that much effort to do a full-blown by-the-manual startup. Again, the F-86F and F-5E are great examples. I have been looking forward to the GD F-100D. It will be even more fun than the SF2 F-100D with its higher fidelity flight model and systems modeling. The GD F-100D will support one of the most challenging aspects of DCS: inflight refueling. It will essentially be a supersonic F-86 with poor handling qualities and less maneuverability. DCS will now have the entire line of fighter designs produced by Edgar Schmued: P-51, F-86, F-100, and F-5.

TK wanted a survey sim. But when you look at the changes from SFP1 to SF2, there were a lot of improvements in realism. The modeling of ECM was drastically improved and is still equal or better than the ECM modeling in DCS. The F-4 Phantom variants each had correct cockpits and systems (RWR/ECM changed constantly) with detailed flight model variations. The A-4 Skyhawk variants were the same way. The modeling of the F-14 and F-15 avionics were very realistic with the main limitation being the lack of clickable cockpits. At the very end, when SF2 North Atlantic did not do well enough, TK was threatening to start dumbing down the game to more of an arcade level by taking away mapped controls such as having automatic landing gear and flaps. Instead, he simply ceased production and migrated his idea of a simpler arcade level game to free-to-play Android games. At that time, SF2 was a more realistic sim than LOMAC/Flaming Cliffs. Until the Heatblur F-4E was released, there wasn't a more realistic combat simulation of the F-4 in a PC game. LOMAC/Flaming Cliffs had superior terrain graphics, but the 3d modeling/textures of aircraft in SF2 were more accurate and more detailed. It wasn't until DCS World Flaming Cliffs 3 that the flight and systems modeling of the F-15C exceeded the SF2 implementation. DCS has come a long way. But still falls short of SF2 in several areas. The biggest one is the terrain: No Vietnam. But they recently released Cold War Germany which beats SF2 Europe and the Kola map which is superior to SF2 North Atlantic. There is no shortage of desert maps to beat SF2 Israel with Syria, Sinai, Iraq, and Persian Gulf. While TK never released a Korea themed expansion, the free mod version is comparable if not superior to official SF2 terrain. If DCS added decent Vietnam and Korea maps as well as the appropriate era asset packs to support them, it would be real close to surpassing SF2. The dynamic campaign for DCS World is still a long way off, but it should end up being superior to SF2 campaigns. In some ways, SF2 AI was better than DCS World, but a lot of AI improvements have been made recently and will continue to be improved to make the dynamic campaign work. Ultimately, it should be possible to have online dynamic campaigns similar to if not superior to Falcon 4.0/BMS. SF2 would need a lot of money/time/work to get it up to modern standards: 1. Aircraft and cockpits with high poly counts/hi-res textures and fully modeled for looking in all directions. 2. VR support. 3. Proper online multiplayer support compatible with offline missions/campaigns. How many people would buy an upgraded SF2 compared to staying with the already established DCS World? Even when SF2 was at its best, it ran out of money while LOMAC continued to evolve. Arcade people have Warthunder. Hardcore people have DCS World. Is there a market for an in between game? I honestly don't know how DCS World has survived. It is a niche market. DCS World is going to have new competition: Il-2 Korea. Its existence may guarantee DCS never makes a Korea map. But Il-2 may discover why there has never been many Korea themed combat flight sims: everyone loves World War 2 and the only other popular era was the modern teen series fighters. World War I sims never do that well and Korea/Vietnam era sims are almost non-existent. It is a tough market. I hope SF2 continues to be playable despite its age and that both Il-2 and DCS continue to move forward.

When Strike Fighters Project 1 was released, the flyable aircraft were the F-4B/C/D/E/J, F-100D, F-104G, and A-4E. DCS has the F-4E and now the F-100D. A free A-4E-C mod is available for download whose quality is comparable to payware. The F-104G is in progress (and a free VSN F-104C mod is already available for download). Red opposition already has the MiG-15bis, MiG-19P, and MiG-21bis. The MiG-17F is close to release. If Heatblur ever gets around to releasing a naval F-4 variant (or you download the free VSN F-4B/C mod), then DCS can pretty much match the original SFP1 lineup. The F-8J Crusader and A-7E Corsair are in progress. Heatblur will eventually release a flyable A-6E. The A-1H Skyraider was cancelled by ED, but may get relicensed and continue moving forward. So, a Wings Over Vietnam equivalent plane set is not too far off. The biggest problem is the lack of a Vietnam map which presents performance problems with the current DCS World terrain/graphics engine. It has taken a lot of years to reach this point and is going to take quite a few more to reach parity with the Strike Fighters series. But the results are amazing: both a survey sim allowing you to fly almost any aircraft on any map combined with a hardcore study sim for nearly every flyable aircraft. It is like combining Strike Fighters with Falcon 4.0. DCS also covers the main complaints against the Strike Fighters series: record and playback missions, air-to-air refueling, ejection sequences, dated terrain engine, and excellent online multiplayer that supports advanced scripting.

As Steam OS rises in popularity, I expect more modern games to begin favoring compatibility with LINUX. I am actually rooting for this because MS Windows has been a monopoly for too long, and MS has been abusing that position for decades. The problem is that SF2 is an update of SFP1, a game that was originally designed to run on Windows 98 with 3dfx Voodoo cards. While the update made it far more compatible with DirectX and Windows 7, some people have struggled to get it running well on Windows 10 and Windows 11. The various LINUX windows emulation layers have largely been developed to run far newer games and work with much newer gpu drivers. It does not surprise me that SF2 is having issues running on LINUX. I have thought about purchasing a new hard drive just so that I can experiment with running Steam OS or a straight LINUX distribution. But I am waiting for DCS World to support Steam OS/LINUX, as that is my primary reason I am still on Windows. Beyond DCS World, I need the Quest 3 for VR and several utilities like SRS, Voice Attack, and VAICOM to be compatible with LINUX as well as support for WinWing/WinCtrl USB controllers and its associated software, SimAppPro. I have no advice or experience to offer in your quest to run SF2 on LINUX, but I do offer support since Microsoft deserves to lose and LINUX appears to be the future to escape the Windows trap. Good luck. If you finally figure out the solution, please post it here on Combat Ace.

It could all be AI slop, but I can't find any better references.

Google changed it mind and spit out this: "Chan. Ind." on Turkish F-4 Phantom (specifically F-4E 2020 Terminator) instrument panels refers to the Channel Indicator for the UHF radio or navigation system, likely associated with the 18-channel preset system of the ARC-150 UHF radio or the updated MFX-484 UHF/VHF system installed during modernization. YouTube +2 Context: It is part of the UHF/COMM or AUX radio control panels, enabling the pilot or Weapon Systems Officer (WSO) to see which pre-programmed frequency channel (1-18 or 1-20) is currently selected. Function: In the Turkish F-4E/2020 Terminator (modernized by IAI and Aselsan), this indicator works with the updated CDU-900 (Control Display Unit) to show selected comms channels.

I think it is labeled "Chan. Ind." as in Channel Indicator. Google AI spit out this in response to my guess: In the context of the Turkish Air Force F-4E 2020 Terminator cockpit, "CHAN. IND." is an abbreviation for Channel Indicator. Global Aviation Resource +3 Function: It is part of the upgraded avionics suite, often linked to the radio or electronic warfare systems (such as the EL/L-8222 ECM pod) operated by the backseater (Weapon Systems Officer) to show the current active frequency channel or Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) channel. Upgrade Context: Following the Israeli-led modernization (Terminator 2020 project), the cockpit was overhauled with new digital displays and modern mission systems, retaining some analog switch labeling. Usage: It is commonly used in Turkish Air Force F-4E 2020 jets flying in modernized, 111 Filo (Eskişehir) 111th squadron training operations