JediMaster

Sounds like you drove a crappy automatic. Most automatics don't even stop accelerating when they shift, at least not that you can perceive. Compare that to being able to pick out every person on the road using a manual because you see the car rock and even slow down when they shift... Manuals are for people who don't have to deal with traffic. The most miserable experience in my life was dealing with my manual tranny going to college each morning in stop-and-go traffic.

Oh, so I wonder what the ETA on the WOI expansion is then? I'd thought that was coming before SF2, actually. Sounds like he's concentrating on the SF2X stuff right now. I must admit that although I understand why MP was dropped from the SF2 line, I'm still disappointed. Yet for $20 it's a no-brainer to buy them.

What year is it supposed to be? I just ask because I see a red star which is of course not what Ukr uses now.

I'm just wondering on the ETA for SF2:WOE. Would presuming an interval similar to the one between SF2 and SF2:WOV be appropriate?

I've owned a Toyota of one type or another since 1993, my parents and other family members since 1978, and we've never had one rust. Ever. Anywhere. Worst thing that's happened is the paint would wear down on the older ones, but starting with our 1998 Solara the paint seemed to last better.

There are Raptors stationed at Langley and Tyndall, and the humidity in both those places is pretty high.

LOL, I remember the first time I heard the ambulance! I liked WoG, but I never finished it. The later missions got ridiculous with the "fight 4 planes, fight 4 planes plus zeppelin at target area, fight 4 MORE planes..." You just never had enough ammo. The creaking of the crate as you pulled hard was an awesome invention for the time, though.

I take it you will be loading Vista in 64-bit? Otherwise you're just wasting some of that 4GB of RAM. You could probably get an E8600 and a GTX 260 for only a little more and you'll see a noticeable difference.

There's gun camera shots of that C-130 shot down over the Caucasus somewhere I believe...

All I can say is as much as I like FE and OFF, I still miss the days of RB and RB3D (when they were new and not nostalgic!). There was just something about the way Dynamix did WWI that I thought was awesome.

I'll just say I was perversely happy when Maggie G got blown up.

Buy a midrange card like the 4850, it will match your CPU better.

This is what happens when people pay their ransoms...you get more pirates, not less.

There's some H-5s used for development work out there, like testing new radars and such, but they're not in combat service AFAIK. I was just reading about the JH-7/7A program, they use the WS-6 which is pretty much a licensed copy of the Spey engines as used in the old Phantom FGRs from the UK. In fact, the JH-7's actually had used Speys while the 7As have the WS-6. Anyway, the Su-30 was originally called Su-27 something if I recall, wasn't it? It was designed to take over for the MiG-25/31s and that's why it had a backseater to operate the radar systems as opposed to the Su-27UB which was just for training. I think the only thing the J-11 program didn't satisfy was their desire to be totally indigenous, needing Russian engines and such. The B rectifies that. So the question becomes is the J-11BS a trainer version of the B, or a 2-person combat optimized B?

I concur, the Swedes made some very unique looking aircraft over the years, with only the Gripen really ending that run. The J-32 looked like the manly big brother of the T-33/P-80..."step aside, little bro, I'LL handle this!"

...that's a rather personal question, sir...

The A-10C upgrade is for all intents and purposes doing exactly that. Those planes are going to be in service still 50 years after they came off the production line as A's.

Well, if that's true than the UH-60 has a combined 3000 shp and the CH-47 has 15,000 shp. That's a big difference, even granting the CH-47 weighs more.

I was reading about the new CH-47F and each of its engines are 7500 shp! I forget what the Blackhawk's are, but they're less than 1/3 that, certainly.

Might that not be perceived as over-indulgent?

No...more...brisket...*burp*

I don't know how much a Chinook costs, but it has to cost more than smaller helos. I'd think we could get more for the same money if we went smaller.

I have my TV control mapped to my Ant knob on my Cougar. For every other sim out there, keeping that in the middle is appropriate for controlling radar azimuth and/or scan bars. But for TVC, it means I start a mission with the nozzles at 45 degrees. That can be a problem!

I'm having spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, baked beans, spam, spam, and spam.

You can build the airframe any time you want, sure. Maybe even the engines, which usually stay in production longer than the plane itself to satisfy demand for spares. The issue is the avionics and to an equal extent the suppliers. Since aerospace production lines last so many years, they wind up using parts ONLY there. If the line shuts down, the suppliers stop making the parts. The F-22 uses processors that are obsolete now. They were top of the line when production started 10 years ago, but they're still using the same ones today! The F-35 will use current processors, but in 2020 when they're out in force those things will again be very obsolete. Suppliers keep making things if there's a market for them. Shut down the line, no demand, they stop making them and throw out/convert the tooling to make them. Come back in 5 years and want more? Nope, sorry, we can't make them anymore! Under the best scenarios you get things like the B-1B, U-2R/TR-1, or C-5B programs where a new variant of the plane based on the old design can be built years later. However, while the B-1A program was never in production, the other 2 had very simple avionics and such that were far more easily replaced than todays integrated designs. So, to "restart" F-22 production would result in 1) the F-22B because it would be very different from a parts commonality standpoint and 2) extra costs for development and testing to get the new parts certified to work as well as the old, better if you're lucky 3) just plain higher costs because parts and labor will go up In short, we can buy more F-22s now, or we can restart later, pay more for fewer, and take quite a while to get them.