Gocad

Spitfire LF IXE, XII/XIV also Bear & Backfire F/A-18D

The MF Crusader has GLASS armor for its cockpit. I wonder whether you could combine two sorts of ARMOR for the same location, i.e GLASS for FRONT & TOP side, STEEL for BOTTOM and REAR... Anyway, thank you for the info, capun.

I have said it already in the other thread about this topic, I doubt that the decision in favor of NG/EADS will survive.

I think I have said it before, but I say it again: That's one nice package (pit&plane)!

A question about the 'ArmorMaterial'. What kinds of material does the game recognize? Is there a difference between, let's say, 'STEEL' and ALUMINIUM? (In-game, that is.) Also, nice tank, Craig. :yes:

IIRC you might be able to fix it by changing the decal positions. I know that there are some posts here that do explain what causes these distortions, but unfortunately I can't tell you where they are. Sorry about that.

LOL

IIRC this is caused by the decals and not by the textures themselves.

Heh, Clan Wolf insignia.

I can't help it, but it seems to me that some politcians that are quoted in this report seem to be more concerned about fishing for votes than the actual matter, which is getting the best equipment for the armed forces.

Damn, I should quit stalling on this carrier ops article I intend to write. Yes, there are a few modern carrier models in the d/l section (look under add-on ships) and a few campaigns that make use of them. Carrier ops in the TW sims is in my opinion rather basic, you can take off from a carrier and may land on it...but only in campaign mode or in a single mission made with the mission editor. Instant action or single missions, created with the ingame mission generator, will not feature carriers.

Hmmm, this sounds like it's the perfect terrain for a Blue vs. Red (Yellow vs. Green, etc) campaign, set around 1940 and with both sides flying Spitfires (I would use them not only because I like them, but also for the reason that I have a template for the Merlin Spitfires...and there's no question that each side would need to have its own skins) Seriously, this could be interesting, especially since both sides would have the same equipment. Anybody interested?

Heh, I was expecting a thread about Michael Bay's Pearl Harbor. Anyway...screw Ubisoft. If I need a patch I usually look here first: Link: DLH.net

That's sad. R.I.P.

Sort of. ICBM silos as a target is one thing (and probably no big deal to make), but asking for working ICBMs (in a tone that sounds like 'right now!'), well, I don't know about that. Not to mention that I doubt that the game is capable of anti-missile operations.

I'm tempted to say that no Cold War would be complete without cows, but CA_Stary apparently has already read my mind. Also, what use would working ICBMs (in-game) have anyway?

The FARC is recognized as a terror organization and willingly open your border for them wouldn't be a smart move, especially when you miss no chance to explain to the world that a superpower is constantly plotting to invade your small, innocent nation and to remove a saint of a leader from power...

Good buddies or not, you don't get these aircraft for free, you know? Also, recalling ambassadors does not mean that a war is imminent, just that there is severe friction between two nations (FYI: Serbia has recalled several of its ambassadors after the countries they were serving in acknowledged the independence of the Kosovo. However, I do not think that Serbia is going to declare war against half of Europe now.)

Quoted from the Boeing statement: "Obviously we are very disappointed with this outcome. We believe that we offered the Air Force the best value and lowest risk tanker for its mission. Our next step is to request and receive a debrief from the Air Force. Once we have reviewed the details behind the award, we will make a decision concerning our possible options, keeping in mind at all times the impact to the warfighter and our nation." Sounds like it, but then again the last part sounds like they don't want to delay the program much further. And I doubt that NorthropGrumman or the representatives of the states that would profit from NG/EADS' getting the contract would not protest also against an attempt by Boeing to overturn this decision...

Btw, the WOV back cover makes a similar misleading statement...since there's also picture of a MiG-21 on it and below the text states: 'fly 12 authentic aircraft used during the Vietnam War'. But, yeah, I don't think that TK ever planned to make any MiG flyable out of the box...nor is there anywhere a statement made on either the WOV or WOE dvd case that says something else.

Indeed, the image on back cover seems to imply this, but then again it's not mentioned in the text that tells you which aircraft you can actually fly. MiGs are cannon fodder anyway. *gets beaten up by the numerous MiG-lovers here*

3500m? Now that's one B.F.G.!

Cool. :yes:

Sweet!

You have my sympathy, drdoyo. FYI: my system is even slightly older than yours...