ST0RM

Thanks for the treat. Will be nice to fly some 57th FIS F-4Es and hunt Bears. -S

No, actually they don't. The JASDF does have four KC-767s, as does Italy. But none of the other partners have their own. Why buy a stealth jet that has to have external tanks? You can't train for stealth ops with them on. I'm just not getting the real pluses of the aircraft over Gen 4.

If you want it from TW, never. Many of the third-party aircraft have them if they are indeed part of the actual aircraft. Chutes were part of the initial release of SF:P1 way back when, but were never delivered.

Japan will most likely be the only place where we see them flying clean/stealthy. Other than the US training units of course. The jets has short legs. It needs a tanker. You add external tanks, your RCS goes up and you are now flying a REALLY expensive F-16. -S

All of the talk of cutting features has me curious. Just keep waitin'

Rugg, Thanks for the contest. Your group has been outstanding with the giveaways. Just wish it would go to a long standing member of CA instead of the newbs that sign up just for your freebees. -S

Really like seeing the Abu Dhabi M5. The smaller Air Forces skins are awesome. Thanks!

Score! Teach the little SOB a lesson. -S

Looks like an RC plane I've got in my garage.

Sick!

I wasn't talking about their A/R ability. I was referring to the Middle East Air Forces. I missed out on the Gripens. Sorry for the confusion. On the flip side, Swede Gripens were at Red Flag in 2008.

Looks fake. More plastic/vac form-ish. I saw the guy pull up on a spoiler, but am not 100% convinced.

Newer IRM/SAMs have flare rejection, so more flares isn't always better, nor will guarentee a miss.

Just curious. Would be a great match up. And with ezlead's formation takeoff. -S

Kevin, your reply made my head hurt ;) So, the short answer is No, but with some editing, Yes. (maybe) Thanks!

Not all. Starting with the AIM-9L, the Sidewinder got an all-aspect capability. The MiG-23 in the TW series seems to be very resilient against AIM-9 hits in the tail.

Yes! From my standpoint, Comms was the largest limiting factor. We had the French running it, but the language barrier/accents plus the distances between transmitters caused a ton of lost comms. We'd try relaying for each other. Tanker to Tanker, or fighter to tanker, etc... Thanksfully we have 5 voice radios, plus SATCOM, so I would have to bypass the primary controller and go straight to our tanker planner with the updates. Things were happening at such a fast pace, that an ATO would have changed 3 times by the time we arrived on station. The lack of A/R training for the non-NATO forces, was really apparent as well. I agree that the Swedes need to work themselves into more NATO combat plans. They came in late, almost like an afterthought. Not getting political, because honestly I don't really know their policies. -S

True, but of the 5 nations to get them (Sweden, Czech Republic, South Africa, Hungary, and Thailand), the Swedes have been the only force to use them in action. Sure the Euro nations have flown them in air police duties, but that doesn't sell jets. Additionally, not much has come out from what the Gripens did during the Libya ops. I would have thought they would have used it as good PR for the aircraft and what it brings to the fight. The Swiss are an interesting nation when they acquire arms. So many wickets. This might be held up for some time, awaiting full approval from all parties. Are the F404/RM12 engines on the Gripens, common with the Swiss Hornets? -S EDIT: I just read that the Swiss opted for the Gripen NG or JAS-39E/F. It has the F414 engine as on the Super Hornet. So no commonality.

Iceland: 57th FIS F-4Es

A-10 Warthogs going anti-ship against the Soviet Fleet.

I've installed this and love the ability to finally take-off in formation. However, it overwrites all of the new airbase mod equipment. Has anyone successfully imported exlead's data into one of these modded airfields? Thanks! -S

The new models look nice. A couple of accuracy issues with the Tomcat, from what I see from the screenies. But nothing that will interfere with playability. I just hope it's more than an SF2 add-on. There will be the normal mad dash to buy this from the people who blindly follow TK no matter what. I assume some of the vets will stand-back and let the smoke clear before jumping on. After their review, I'll make my own decision.

Because the SAC crews (both bomber and tanker) back then were performing the nuclear deterence mission and the helmets had mounts for the nuclear flash blindness goggles. Additionally, our Tech Orders specified the wearing of helmets during bailout. Since then, they've relaxed the regs to allow us to wear our headsets for the flight, but have our helmet close by, attached to an oxygen source. Hope it answers your question. -Jeff

I think you are right. The money is about to dry up and Hawker-Beech has drug this out. I think the USAF wants to award the contract quickly to preserve funds. -S

Might I suggest another change? I flew ver 1.1 and love it. The new values for sighting the rockets help alot and the AI does a better job of hitting the targets on the first pass. However, the tail-rotor/yaw control seems to be excessive. Can we reduce it's effect or slow the inputs down? If I put in the tiniest amount of rudder, the tail swings around wildly. You could say to reduce the overall rudder inputs on the "CONTROLS" page, but that would affect all aircraft which isn't necessary. Thanks Dels! -Jeff