FastCargo

Yep, I've read this guy before...he's got a hard on for the F-111, and all his papers are based on that one fact. He tends to discount a lot of the issues the F-111 has, and so tries to kill everything that competes with it. FC

skyviper, You must be very young to get worked up over something like this. In time, you will realize what is really important and what people really count on you for and what you really need to ask forgiveness for. FC

Jedi is exactly right. During SALT and START we were happy to reduce or eliminate our Titan II and Minuteman I missiles, because we had Peacekeeper coming on line...going from single warhead missiles to 12 MIRVs per missile. FC

The 'we were here first' argument is fundamentally useless...there has been competition since before man learned to walk upright. This thread is being watched closely...if needed, it will be moved into The Arena. FC

That picture is actually a link to the website, right click on it to get the website address. A good book for details on the YF-17 is "Northrop's YF-17 Cobra" by Don Logan. http://www.amazon.com/Northrops-YF-17-Cobra-Pictorial-Schiffer/dp/0887409105/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_6 Has lots of info, includes comparisons between the YF-17 and F-18 showing the differences...a revealing picture is showing the aircraft parked next to each other, showing how the F-18 was simply a bigger aircraft overall., Also shows how the original YF-17 evolved from the F-5. In effect, you can see the linage of the Super Hornet...all the way from the original F-5A. Also, the USS Alabama museum has one of the 2 original YF-17 prototypes, I have several pics of it, showing how physically smaller it was to the Hornet. However, one thing to take away from most US prototype aircraft is that very rarely do the contours of the prototypes match the final production version. If you'll note, the YF-16, YF-17, YF-22, B-1A do not match in nose profiles...because the prototypes lack radar. In the B-1A's case, it lacked it's defensive ECM as well. A production B-1A would look closer to a B-1B in everything but the engine intakes and wing glove area. FC

Well, to be fair, that's not really anything new...various armed forces have been using decoys for years...inflatable, radar and thermal correct, and otherwise. Still pretty interesting though. FC

Some predators come out at nightfall.... FC

Will they never learn... Repeat the mantra: Do not install a patch over a modded install...more than likely, you will dick something up! Now that we have that out of the way...more than likely, the tracer material statements require the same shader line entries as the Afterburners, HUD, etc. That would be my initial take on the problem. FC

Easy. Note these entries in a typical data.ini for an aircraft with gunners: Basically, each gun station requires 2 entries, one for the turret, one for the actual gun. FC

If you look closely at the F-18A and the YF-17 you will note several significant differences. Yes, the general overall shape was the same, but there were enough differences that to do it right, you need a whole new 3d model. FC

If they would have, it wouldn't quite look like that... FC

Though I only got to work with him a short time, he proved to be a great modder and a good leader to the MF and to me. We miss you Oliver. May the skies be clear and the wind stay at your back... "He belonged to the sky, and the sky has taken him." FC

Haha, that's a good one Gepard! FC

Easy peasy. Look at any aircraft data.ini in the Engine section. Note this: The xxxxThrottle number is the relevant number. FullABThrottle is your full throttle detent, IdleThrottle is your idle throttle detent. The numbers you want to adjust are the MilThrottle and MaxThrottle numbers, as those tell you your max dry thrust throttle setting and your minimum AB throttle setting. FC

If that's true (and I'd imagine time travelers would have fully explored this option), then it doesn't matter...you won't be able to change your own 'track', you'll merely become inhabitants of another time track. In other words, you don't change 'your' history...so why bother going back? Also, if you subscribe to the 'many worlds' multiverse theory, then ALL possible futures exist...including those without a nuclear war...yet taking away one more reason for going back in time to affect a change in the timeline. FC

But then you run into the 'grandfather paradox'. And the other question...with the end of the cold war, why hasn't there been anything from Russia about UFO visits to ICBM sites? After all, it doesn't do any good to disable one large arsenal if another large arsenal still exists. FC

If you sometimes wonder whether the military looks at the BIG picture... Check this out from 15 years ago: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/csat/2025/ Though there is some dry material in there, it makes for fascinating reading. (And no Lexx, no posting about the financial system in this thread...though there is stuff in there you might find interesting about that...) FC

I do plan to release it once I finish the rest of the conversion of SFP1. I'm doing a total conversion referencing this thread: http://combatace.com/topic/37272-idea-for-a-new-mod/page__st__15 However, I was able to find a direction for it after I figured out both my sons like a PBS program called 'Super Why!'. So, after wrangling with the menu, it's a very simple program. You basically just fly Instant Action, 'shooting' down balloons or clouds with words on them. The screenshot with the flaming T-38 was a test...there will be no dogfighting in the sim. Simple gameplay, but a lot easier to manage. FC

He's been around a few years, even had a TV series on FOX in the early 2000's. A clip from his special "Norman Rockwell is Bleeding" (for mature audiences): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP1kKcZtnkQ His stuff is funny, mostly because he's describing his own family in the process. "Hey, once you've driven a drunk father to mom's parole hearing, what else is there?" FC

We solved the problem! FC

Yep, look very nice in the cockpit there Julhelm! FC

Ed, now stop teasing people! FC

It could be because of this: http://combatace.com/topic/59665-stuxnet-in-china/ FC

For the purposes of USAF procurement, there isn't a difference. FC

PC Magazine Article By: Mark Hachman The results of a successful 2008 class-action suit against Nvidia for faulty graphics chips are now being made available to consumers, although the compensation will vary dramatically. The suit, filed in Sept. 2008, covers a defect Nvidia discovered in the packaging material of several notebook GPUs built in 2007 and 2008. While the suit applies to dozens of notebooks computers from several manufacturers (see graphic) the compensation those notebook owners will receive depends on the manufacturer of the notebook itself. In any case, a user with an affected GPU does not have to settle, but must exclude himself or herself by Nov. 5. More information (including claim forms) can be found at NvidiaSettlement.com. Users with a notebook manufactured by either Dell or Apple, and containing one of the affected chips, are eligible for a replacement of the affected part. However, if a user owns a notebook that was manufactured by Hewlett-Packard, that user is eligible for an entirely new notebook "similar in kind and value" to the one that was affected. Users are also eligible to compensation for repair expenses accrued while trying to solve issues associated with the faulty Nvidia chips. But those funds will be paid out of a general pool, and the amount per person will depend on the claims received, according to the settlement notice. Users will have to prove that the affected notebooks are suffering from problems related to the faulty media controller or GPU, including distorted or scrambled video, random characters, or, in certain cases, an inability to detect a wireless network.