Typhoid

yes - but you get some odd results sometimes. I have some separate WWII loads that I still use Bunyaps pack for. But have been shifting more and more for everything else to either the TMF packs exclusively or the theater variation (OTC, NF, etc.)

initial testing looks good. I think it will solve most people's wishes.

concur. I even went so far, briefly, as to go to normal on the flight models. But not challenging or realistic enough on most of them. But a very definite change and much too far.

what is wierd is that with all the problems that I have been having lately with all of the editors, the Skyray tanks came up perfectly for me without any of the reported problems. don't know what will work the best. There are some very strange things going on with some of these packs and the interaction with various patches pushed by Microsoft. I've been in "recovery" mode now for several weeks.

sweet! :yes:

oops! http://www.lasvegasnow.com/Global/story.as...mp;nav=168XDWn7 I love how the news guys manipulate the pictures and video to magnify the size of the bomb. Nice sensationalism. I'll be that BG really enjoyed being out there explaining how he bombed a truck. Wonder what that insurance claim for the truck will look like................

the original, civilian designation of the rifle under development was/is AR whatever. eg; The M-16 when originally fielded was the AR-15. There is an AR-10 which is marketed for civilian use (at least was a few years ago) as a 7.62 civilian semi-only version.

I think that was probably a static one they brought out to show the news team what it was. I rather doubt the one that hit the concrete and then the truck would look so clean.

hadn't noticed that. Flies straight and level for me.

I guess that is the replacement for the old Mk-76? that one did have a spotting charge roughly the size of a shotgun shell in the nose. Not something that you would want to detonate in your hand.... I actually dropped one on the range. Got an E-2 Bombadier Designation Letter and out-bombed our fighter squadrons for accuracy.

right on! If I want that level of detail, I'll use my Microsoft Flight Simulator. There is a reason that one is gathering dust...... enjoy being a line swine while you can! Be glad to swap places.........

an awesome model. Really enjoyed flying this one. I now have a 50's - early 60's install set aside just for all these awesome early jet flight models. Lots of fun with this. Heard a lot of stories way back when I was first flying from the "older hands" who survived these early jets. Quite entertaining.

stock on both. Haven't tried the others, yet.

concur. Landed normally on the angle and everything was ok. Taxied forward to clear the landing area for the wingman and then the plane fell through the deck and exploded on the hangar bay. Only the A-4 so far.

I think its pretty close here in the sim. Increasing the track strength to 80 as Crusader points out is probably just about right. It wasn't completely invulnerable, just pretty good. Same with the latest F-15C and E.

System Mechanic took down two computers at my place. Mine had the data on a separate drive so 98% of my data was safe (but not backed up). My daughter's computer however was not backed up so she lost all of her college work. I had a tech restore my computer to save some data and programs together with some mods and settings, but it was still unstable and crashed again. So 3 computer failures in the last month. I am just now finishing the rebuild of my computer with patches, upgrades, and such. (it runs sweet now) so two points - Back up your stuff!! Don't install System Mechanic!!! :angry2:

The F-111B was being designed to carry and shoot what became the Phoenix. So an F-111B model should have six Phoenix.

Don't get System Mechanic for automating any of your computer maintenance!!!!! The #@$@!#^ thing trashed and crashed two of my computers! There tech support consisted of emailing me (on my trashed computer) two weeks later asking me how was I doing with that problem report.......... and back up your files..................... :angry2:

there are some nice shots of the F-111b (spit) on this link; http://www.f-111.net/t_no_B.htm some short clips of the carrier suitability trials on it too. definitely a much shorter nose so that the unlucky pilot flying that overweight beast could see the landing area.

meaning the F-14 radar is modeled too well or the F-14 radar in a jamming environment is modeled too well? I actually think its pretty close to being accurate, at least in a non-ecm situation. In an ecm situation I simply don't know if it is or not.

I've been a bit buried for awhile (and rebuilding my computer all weekend) but mission planning is something I can do pretty well. I am hoping to have some more time for that soon. Let me know what you want built.

My daughter's fiancee flew in yesterday in that new T-6. Pretty sweet plane and nice glass cockpit.

concur

excellent post, Jug. From an air defense and offensive air ops planning aspect - hours and hours (days) of tedious mission planning followed by a few hours of airborne tedium (there I was at 25k ft, straight and level humming along with a scope and computer screen......) followed once in awhile by a few very intense moments. and very, very meticulous mission planning, debrief, and the next mission planning.

just weather balloons....