Gocad

I know that, but I would like to have one made by the TMF Btw, XIVC or E, with or without clipped wings? Maybe both?

That and the RF-8. I want to be able to some skins for the VFP units without being told "Dude, VFP-XXX flew the RF-8A/G and not the F-8B/C/D/E/etc. you've used there."

"When you want to mod, mod, don't talk." Yeah, I replaced a word or two.

Tough call, but I would say #2.

Surprise! Nah, not really. CNN.com: Air Force may reopen $35B tanker bid

Interesting stuff.

The VFP-63 skin would be just decal work...I find the idea of making a single skin that would cover all Detachments and the Home Guard interesting, but not as a TP scheme. The overall gull grey scheme looks much better. It's strange, my desire to make a TPS for the F-8 was the reason that got me into painting aircraft, but by now (and about 12 Crusader skins later) I'm much more interested in making high-viz skins, like this one: It's just a modification of my VC-5 drone controller scheme...I simply like that checkerboard pattern...and the F-8B.

Cool skins. :yes:

It shouldn't cause any problems, after all, you can replace 'squadron=' with 'unitname=', which you have to do anyway if that unit is not included in the Squadronlist. The 'squadron=' entry has two functions, one has to do with the planning map and the other has to do with the stock skins.

Well, I made a joke there. When I asked c5 about the F-8 template I said that I just wanted to make a low-viz skin for the F-8....and now look at the F-8 skin section....none of that was planned. I just couldn't stop...and still can't. However, I do seem to run out of ideas for F-8 skins, so it can't hurt to look for the next project...and the A-7 seems to be an almost logical choice here. Besides, the Hellrazors skin I would like to make is a 'low-viz' skin.

Hmmm, I do want to make a TPS for that Corsair...and maybe a Barn Owls skin...and a Hellrazors skin...and a few reserve units skins.

You could try and edit the carrier's data.ini to reduce its speed to zero. I'm not sure though whether that would work and how it would affect CarrierOps. Short version: No. Maybe. So? Unlikely. Ships acting as an airbase can't be sunk. Also, anti-ship missions in campaigns? Mwhahaha. On a more serious note...even when the enemy would be able to conduct anti-ship missions it still would be impossible to attack the ship air units operate from since it doesn't exist in the target_list.

IMHO some data.ini files of prop-driven aircraft aren't that accurate. The B-29 addon is a good example for that...it's engines are overpowered and as a result it's way too fast... Bottom line should be that it's sufficient to use the nominal hp value and ignore the potential (and not to mention just temporary) increased hp output generated by additional systems.

Prop-driven aircraft usually have only one hp value, just like jets without an afterburner. Sure, there have been mechanisms that allowed fighter pilots to get more power out of their engines during combat (i.e. the German MW50 system, used in the late war Me109), but you can't compare those systems to an afterburner.

TPS...a never-ending story. Still so much work to do (fuselage texture, insignia, etc.)...I should have never read the MIL-STD 2161. At least I have managed to reduce the number of decals used...and since there is no TMF RF-8 around it's rather a low priority project anyway. I rather focus on making skins of less known(?) Crusader units. VC-10 Challengers WiP