streakeagle

Each skin folder needs to have its own hangar.jpg file. The absence of a correctly named hangar file results in the blank default hangar jpg. I already did a quick test and relocated my existing hangar.jpg down to a skin folder, which resulted in the hangar screen working correctly.

The real A-10A, as originally released, had a minimum of electronics. The GAU-8 30mm rounds have such velocity that its trajectory is almost flat. The gunsight was a simple fixed reticle. I have documentation that explains the whole procedure used by A-10A pilots. Range was estimated by how much of the target was covered by the pip at the center of the reticle, then the That-Looks-About-Right (TLAR) method was used to place the pipper per training/experience based on the estimated range. The actual gun camera film reels I have show how quickly the A-10 pilots can acquire, fire, and disengage against little black dots that I can't even see without reviewing the footage several times. So, the game uses a fixed reticle just like the real A-10 had. I don't know if the A-10 had a gunsight depression adjustment knob, but I would guess that it did. This is not possible in the game, but it can be adjusted manually in the ini files.

Finally got to try this out. Looks great!

Very well done...kind of like the movie "Heavy Metal" with a bit of "Matrix" style combat thrown in. Thanks for the link. It was well worth my time.

No recent Korean War flight sims. Last one was "MiG Alley". If you don't mind older graphics and a few bugs, this sim was updated by a third party to support TrackIR. It runs on my Win7 64-bit machine just fine. Flyables include F-80, F-84, F-51, F-86, and MiG-15... can't remember if any others are flyable. Very detailed sim. If the graphics were updated and the bugs fixed, it would be a top-notch sim.

It is only obvious because the photographer's on my submarine used the same trick. The filters make cool looking photos... but having seen the trick, I now look for it :P Much like movies/tv shows where they put a blue filter to make it look like night time while still filming everything under hot, bright lights.

In SF2, I can beat F-15s flying MiG-23s... if I successfully survive the merge. I stay low and close as fast as possible, but go perpindicular to break locks. If I don't make any mistakes, I can get into a close-in turn fight. From that position, I have at least a 50% chance of getting into firing position before running out of fuel. AA-8s can get the job done or at least slow down the F-15 enough for a gun kill. Sometimes, I even manage an AA-7 RH kill. But it takes precise flying. If I keep my view inside the cockpit, I can't see/judge the angles well enough to win consistently, but I can still win more than 25% of the time. It really depends on how the F-15 AI flies. If it flies perfectly, it is a draw or I lose.

Thank you, I needed that... just in time :)

What patch level? At one point, chaff/flares/ecm were too effective, working almost 100% of the time.

Must be firing the phasers near a black hole to have light bend like that ;) Guess the Enterprise needs a good LCOS to use phasers in the SF series.

I would rather an unmanned drone suffer the consequences of a virus than a manned F-35. Modern planes are highly computerized and it would be very painful to lose pilots to virus attacks. Think the recent Battlestar Galactica on Sci-fi where the pilots flying newer Vipers were immobilized and killed by viruses. The real solution is not to avoid computerized systems, but to handled them in a secure fashion. There is no reason a virus should ever come into contact with a military system. Military networks should be using secure VPNs and no one should be moving files by USB between non-military networks and military networks. How much you want to bet that the virus that got the Iranian centrifuges got transmitted by a USB key. Back to the drone issue... the current drones are unmanned, but no autonomous. That means that the difference between a drone and a manned fighter is the radio link between the pilot and the control system. I just don't see where manned/unmanned makes a difference in this case, other than a man would be at risk if it was a manned aircraft.

I would say neither... just an orange filter on normal daylight photos :P

I-75 is not heavily patrolled along certain long stretches. Lots of Florida is swampland anyway. Back in 2004-2008, I was driving back and forth between Atlanta and Tampa. Posted legal limits were in the 65-70 mph range, but I could do 80 mph in parts of Georgia and 90+ across quite a bit of Florida. Georgia had a substantial highway patrol presence between Atlanta and the Florida state line. They pulled people over in massive numbers... but never messed with me. I simply did the pace of the fastest group of traffic I could find and never hit any kind of speed traps. Before I joined the Navy in 1989, I-75 was hardly used at all from midnight to 4am. There were highway patrol / speed traps right as I got back to I-4/I-75 interchange, but no real threats outside of Tampa, especially going south. I would clear the known threat areas and then cruise between 100-130 mph for 2 hours out and back depending on weather conditions. The Firebird would start lifting at 130, so I had to back off on the speed if there was wind. Back then, the speed limit was still 55 mph, too. At the time, a lot of traffic did 75 mph. I was doing 80 and was passed by two Sheriffs who had to be doing 90+. I assumed they were heading for a call, but soon found them when I got off at my exit... they were at a donut shop! While I never got pulled over for doing the 100mph+ speeds, I did get pulled over for doing 90 in a 55 while coming home from USF. For some reason the officer guessed that I was an electrical engineering student and was sympathetic. He just gave me a verbal warning. Looking back, I can't believe my luck: no accidents, no tickets, no arrests, etc. Now, I feel uncomfortable doing more than 10 mph over the limit unless everyone else is going faster (like my return trips from Georgia). If only I had then what I have now: an mp3 player with a virtually unlimited number of great songs instead of a few 90 minute tape cassettes. But I still enjoy hearing all of my old cruising music when I am driving between Orlando and Tampa at 70-80 mph... in an Altima. My current 1981 Corvette has power steering and A/C issues that have kept it in the garage for most of the summer. The stock engine in my 1981 also gets horrible fuel economy and has much inferior performance to my 1980 L-82. Someday, I'll fix that and be cruising again with windows down, t-tops off... and my entire 6-700 CD collection in the form of a 64GB USB key :)

The $80 million luxury sub is absolutely amazing. USS Dolphin was only 165 feet long and nowhere near as comfortable. The fact that it is rated for 1,000 feet is impressive. However, no matter what the writeup says, there is nothing routine or safe about submarine operations. I can't imagine operating a sub purely for fun. The operating/maintenance costs would be staggering. But I guess if you have $80 million to blow on a sub, what's another $5-20 million per year to keep it operational?

One song I used to love cruising to late at night at insanely high speeds on the interstate was Bob Seger's "Turn the Page" (1986-1989 time frame in a 1974 Firebird Formula 350). Whenever I here this song, it takes me back to hours and hours of 100-130 mph cruising. Just plain lucky I never got caught? http://youtu.be/FaxjUUdGdH8 In the Navy around 1995-96, I found another song that I could here over the wind noise at high speeds with the t-tops removed: Stan Ridgway's take on "Ring of Fire". The pulsing deep base beat sounded great with my 1980 L-82 Corvette. My son loves Johnny Cash, but he loves this version of "Ring of Fire" even more:

There is one other option. There is now a flag that enables or disables the new view system fade-in. If you disable it, you are supposed to get the old system back, but that means you also lose some of the other improvements. I tried both ways, and I have learned to live with the new way to stay compatible with the future of SF2.

The user setting for horizon distance does vary the view distance, but even at the max horizon distance setting, you will probably be less than happy.

I never cared for the shotguns. I fired both Remington and Mossberg while attached to submarines. I prefer rifle the most and I like the feel of the M-16 over the M-14 regardless of ballistic data. I don't like using any weapon that can eat my fingers during normal operation :P The M92 is a great range weapon: fire fast with great accuracy, but with a 0.45, you only need one hit per target to get the job done :) I have always preferred the fell of the 0.45 grip/weight/balance over any other pistol I have ever fired. If I was going to go NATO 7.62 mm/0.308 cal., I would very much like a modern AR-10 equivalent to my AR15A2, though it would be better if I went with the modern detachable carry handle to make it more practical for scope shooting. But my favorite way to shoot is with iron sights in a standing position with no support or sling... just the rifle and me. When I was shooting every weekend, I actually got fairly proficient on a standard 100-yard target, but of course nothing near the 5-shot group I could cover with a dime that my HBAR did with competition ammo and a bipod while laying prone. I really miss shooting. Since 2001, Operation Flashpoint has been my way of scratching the itch to shoot. But there is no substitute for the real thing.

I jumped the gun. At a glance, I thought it was Don Kilgus' 55-2894 416th TFS skin associated with his probable MiG-17 kill. However, your base template makes it very easy for me to consider making that skin. Thank you (and Sundowner) for the templates.

Where can I get the skin in the preview pic? I just released a mission that would benefit greatly from that skin :)

Templates are a necessity if you want to get anywhere fast. Otherwise you need to make your own templates by building layers from existing skins: something I have neither the time, patience, nor skill to do as well as the good skinners that can be found here. Find out who the author of the best skins are and shoot them an email if you can't find templates already available for an aircraft you are interested in.

I haven't fired a pistol or rifle since 2002. Far too long. From 1995-1997, I went to the range almost weekly firing 0.45 M1911A1 and/or 0.223 Colt Sporter HBAR (AR15A2). Those were good times :) In that same time frame, I also maintained USS Dolphin's M-14, 4 x M1911A1s, and Remington 870. The M1911A1s were replaced by M92F Berettas during 96 or 97. I also coordinated the ship's range shoots with the tender's gunner's mates. We qualified with all three weapons using their weapons and ammo.

I use TARGET to select the profile and start the game. Alternatively, you just run TARGET and select and run the config you want, then start the game. The key is TARGET must be running AND the desired config must be selected and running prior to starting the game. You will know things are going right when you here windows recognizing the new virtual joystick, keyboard, and mouse. Of course, you may also have to select the correct axes in the game prior to flying.

In the virtual world, you are fully functional. We wouldn't even know you were disabled in any way if you had not ever told us or posted photos. Now stay healthy and stay online I haven't had a Five Guys burger in a while. My wife went vegan to get her cholesterol under control and my son only wants Happy Meal toys, so that leaves me a little short on choices eating out

Another trick in this profile is that the engine start/stop is programmed into the throttle detent off position. When you move the throttle into the off position, the key is pressed. If you move the throttle out of the off position, the key is pressed again. So, since the game always starts with the engine running, you need to start with the throttle out of the off position. Then the engine will stop when you go to off position and start again if you leave the off position. I tried using the afterburner detent. It does work for the F-4 Phantom, but you can only reach about 67-68% at MIL instead of 70% and it starts at like 73% on the other side of the detent. Other aircraft have the transition from MIL to A/B at their historically correct positions, such as 80% or higher, so rather than edit countless ini files to match the detent, I am not using the A/B detent.