Typhoid

the real configuration of the Humraam was still being refined when I left the program (a couple of months ago) and I don't think they've really finalized what they will actually field under the SLAMRAAM Army program. I'd go with the 5 missile config as most likely and tested under CLAWS. The actual fielding date has been pushed back several years and the USMC was playing with CLAWS (also based on the Humvee http://www.army-technology.com/projects/surface-launched/ ) but have since dropped that. The Hawk launcher was just used to test the concept, that was never a planned a fielding option. NASAAMS was fielded for the Norweigans and we leased/purchased back 4 launchers to defend the capitol until the Army fields SLAMRAAM to replace the Avengers (which are also deployed in the capitol). The Norweigan fielding used AIM-120B and the Army SLAMRAAM will field 120C or maybe D. That's the real world program. For here, I'd use the Hawk and Humvee unless one of the 3d modellers can be induced to build a NASAAMs. So ini modding, which is all I can do either, is the way to go. I haven't turned on my computer at home in three days so I haven't had a chance to play with this yet. I like this one though and hope to help you refine it and post some test missions.

that was what I recommened you try. Good data point. I have my effects and shadows both on low. I suggest checking to see if that info is in the Knowledge base and if it isn't, adding it.

always nice to see the young guys cross those milestones in life

I have a much weaker system than yours. I found the effects was a key one that I have always had to put to low. sounds like you are cooking with this setup.

that rings a bell from another project. It is a pretty effective weapon in real life. the NASAAMS was fielded with the AIM-120B and the upcoming Army fielding of HUMRAAM is planned to use the AIM-120C. So you might try those others too.

how good of a system do you have? mine is mediocre and is somewhat stressed if the graphics settings are set to high. Try turning down all the settings down to low or off and see how it runs. If that fixes it, start increasing the settings one at a time, one step at a time - until you find the optimum tradeoff.

merge! (but don't blame me if something breaks......)

it will generate problems with some third-party add-ons. Most of those problems have been figured out by now and there are fixes, but you have to work through them, one plane at a time. If you don't have any mods - merge. I have one massive merge of all of them, and also a stand alone NATO Fighters, stand alone Vietnam with the most excellent mod, and a stand alone SF2I just because.... check the Knowledge Base on the fixes.

I think I misread the min range as the launch range - I'll look at it again over the next day or two and try to figure it out.

"a company called Ecotricity" wonderful... with wind farm generation. So they will charge you triple for rationed power that quit whens the breeze dies.........

warm beer for all!

haven't had a chance to test anything on this, but I think the issue is the launch range. The range is in meters and is currently set to only 500 meters. so at just over 1/2 miles is when the missile would launch. in the surface launch mode, we plan on shooting a bit further out......

groan.....................

they don't. I flew with them a couple of times between about 1975 to 1980. I controlled them a lot.

I was just along for the backseat rides with VF-126 and couldn't recall for sure. but a quick check "http://a4skyhawk.org/2c/productionhistory.htm" includes "The TA-4J differed from the TA-4F through the removal of the tactical weapons system and aerial tanker components, and utilization of the J52-P6 engine instead of the higher-rated J52-P8." which certainly implies the guns were removed. the photo backs that up. I don't see them although from the angle it is kinda hard to tell. http://a4skyhawk.org/5e/g155072/html/155072c.htm

that looks like a pretty decent bag. I used to use the standard helmet bag with the extra stuff either in the side pockets or where my cranium would fit. I still have and use the bag for all manner of stuff hauling around on occasion.

very intriguing. I did some work with this system in the NCR not too long ago and the idea of adding SLAMRAAM from one of the various launchers either currently fielded or in development to the game is one of personal interest. I'd like to look at your ini's and see what I can deduce.

and we will! let the circus begin!!

and a couple more great links http://zapatopi.net/afdb/ http://zapatopi.net/afdb/links.html http://zapatopi.net/bsa/militia/ http://users.chartertn.net/tonytemplin/FBI_eyes/index.html and just to finish up - http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm

I had some really awesome shots from the Iowa including some great gun shoots. except when I developed them after I got back to the states, I found out that the muzzle blast from the 16" had broken my camera and I ended up with nothing..............

I have to differ with you on a couple of points - although I agree fundamentally with your overall position. "For something to be an act of war, it needs to be a state actor, not a stateless entity." this is the core and key point. But I will differ on whether a non-state organization can engage in war and commit acts of war. I would suggest they most certainly can and have over the years. Any revolutionary group would be considered a non-state actor until the day they won. That does not make them any less a combatant in a full scale war. I would point out that our own history bears that out as our forces were not considered a "state actor" until we won, but were most certainly accorded and treated according to the general laws of war at the time. in this specific case - a non-state actor (Al Queda) has formally declared war on the US. Do we pretend then that any participants are not accorded the laws of war but are to be treated as civilian criminals in the courts? It is a rather key question since under the Geneva Convention - member states are prohibited from subjecting POW's to prosecution in their civilian courts. Now, with respect to treating these enemy combattants under the Geneva Convention, there are some very detailed requirements, such as operating under the command and discipline of a recognized enemy and the wearing of a distinctive uniform as well as recognizing the Geneva Convention and internatinal laws of war. The enemy combattants we have captured belonging to Al Queda, the Taliban, and any other number of splinter organizations have certainly been organized, have been in a declared war with us, operate without uniforms and do not recognize or adhere to the Geneva Convention or any other internationally recognized laws of war. We did, however, as a matter of policy directed by President Bush extend to these enemy combattants the Geneva Convention which prohibits subjecting them to prosecution in our civilian courts. Instead, they are supposed to be tried by a military procedure to establish their status and then be held indefinitely until the end of the conflict. so now, having first extended to them the status of POW and the protections of the Geneva Convention as enemy combattants engaged in a recognized war authorized by our Congress (with a resolution authorizing military action in the absense of a declared nation-state (although one could certainly argue about Afghanistan)), we are now going to violate those Geneva Conventions and subject these vermin to a civilian trial likely leading to a death penalty. somewhere, the rule of law has gone off the rails. In my opinion, they should be treated as POW's and subject to military proceedings as enemy combattants. This move will turn this entire issue into an incredible circus. It will be us who is put on trial more than the mass-murdering terrorists.

yep, most of the time. if fuel hasn't puddled in the engine chamber for some reason Which points out that the deranged smear is totally off-base even IF any jet was actually pointed at the rockets (which there weren't) not to mention that the idea that anyone strapping into a machine with 6k to 26k of kerosene or avgas (depending on aircraft type) would intentionally start off by deliberately initiating what is essentially an engine fire is simply deranged nonsense. "I will not I just was wonderig if anybody else heard this B.S. The tail of his plane was pointed over the deck out to sea." exactly!! I hadn't heard any of that until you happened to ask. When I went through flight deck fire fighting school (absolutely one of THE BEST military training schools one can ever go through!) we got the detailed post-analysis of all of the carrier fires. This was the first I'd seen of those pathetic, deranged morons fabricated smear. and permit me to thank you for asking about it.

"The first crewed flight of Orion is planned for no later than 2015, with crew transportation to the space station following within the same decade..." from http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/366590main_Ares_I_FS.pdf but that schedule is slipping rapidly. The recent commision on human spaceflight noted that the earliest realistic operational flights won't happen until almost 2020. http://www.nasa.gov/offices/hsf/home/index.html The ISS is presently scheduled to be de-orbited in 2016 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/12/AR2009071201977.html?hpid=topnews the committee recommends keeping the ISS until at least 2020 but that will require a plus up of funding.

I did a little digging looking past the actual accident reports and flight deck firefighting training that I went through. are you asking about the deranged lunatic smear campaign that falsely and deliberately fabricated his responsibility for the Forestal flight deck disaster? If so, I give you full credit for asking about it rather than blindly accepting such a blatant and disgusting campaign of lies and deceit and commend you for some degree of skeptical analysis. My disgust is with those diseased and deranged lunatic fringe who somehow fabricates an utterly false sequence of events that somehow proves the responsibility for some event is other than where it is - usually for some brief political advantage. the sick authors of this fraud and deliberate hoax/smear share the same derangement syndrome with the 9/11 Truthers and Moon Landing Hoax pysychotic nutcase fringe. rant off.....

how about both? a WWII version and then the 80's version which you have there now?