Fubar512

The SA-7 works fine for me.

The R-73 is already in the weapons pack, and it does fire and track well off-boresight. Getting the AI to do so, without wasting shots, is another matter, unless you limit the launch platform (aircraft) to carrying high off-boresight IRMs (R-60MK, R-73, etc.)

This is in SFP1, with Polak's desert terrain. It's all a matter of placement, and ground object role assignment. I placed AAA units near all the SAM batteries, and then re-designated the ground object role of the mobile SAMs to "Mobile_AAA". This is something we've been doing about four years, now....thanks to Wrench, who AFAIK, is the first one to have come up with the idea. If you roll in below the minimum effective altitude of the fixed SAMs, you still have to contend with anything from ZSU-23-4s to SA-8s, SA-9s, and Tunguskas. The latter are quite nasty, combining guns with SA-19 launchers.

A tough nut to crack. An SA-3 battery, defended by an SA-8 mobile launcher, with an SA-9 mobile launcher nearby (off screen and to the right).

Then they died, turned into oil, and then the Arabs came along....

And then, the F-4G made its appearance....

Oh, and BTW, The SA-2B was meant to kill bombers and other non-maneuvering aircraft, It's historical launch to kill-ratio is probably no better than 1 kill per 200 launches. The SA-2 series did not really become a major threat to tactical aircraft until the deployment of the E and F models, the latter of which were equipped with HOJ (home-on-jam) tracking. Even then, the kill ratio was still probably no better than 1 per 50. By the time of the Yom Kippur War in 1973, the SA-2F was not considered much of a threat by the Israelis.

I have absolutely no issues with the Hawks tracking and firing, though I use my own data.ini's, and I try to emulate the default Strike Fighters SAM battery layout, as there are limitations to what you can get away with.

Show us the same view, but with the MavTV display. That way, you can prove that this wasn't due to a slight of hand, via the weapons editor.

RP is not listed as one of the load out choices available on any weapons rack. AFAIK, this is hard-coded, and not .ini modable.

I've had the S-300 (SA-10) and it's launcher vehicle in-game since late last year. I'm using the SCUD transporter, as it's essentially the same MAZ-543M chassis that serves the S-300 (and other) weapon systems. It's still a beta, and will not be released until the necessary refinements are in place. And yes, it's quite deadly.

Wow, that's a tough one for me to answer, as I have a lot of species to choose from. I'll name a few, but the order does not imply that I like one over the other. Dolphin (no, not the mammal), also known as Mahi Mahi or Dorado Blackfish (Local name for Tautog) Wahoo Albacore tuna (best eating of the large tunas) Blackfin tuna (ranges from Florida to North Carolina, almost as good as albacore) Bigeye tuna (somewhat tangy) Yellowfin tuna (somewhat tangy) Codfish (tough to fillet, great in chowder, etc) Atlantic Bonito (smaller member of the tuna family)

You mean "every Navy fighter"....if you want to get technical, the Northrop F-17 was named the 'Cobra', the F-5 'The Freedom Fighter'. The F-20 was named after a fish.... Which leads me to this idea: How about resurrecting fighter names from WWII? Warhawk II, Cobra II, (etc.)

No, just the tods and any associated bitmaps.

It's a very simple mod. Simply locate Polak's "City1.tod" (grom his desert terrain, copy it over to your GermanyCE terrain, and rename it GermanyC1.tod, GermanyC2.tod, GermanyC3.tod, GermanyC4.tod, and GermanyC5.tod. The nice thing is that you're not replacing anything, so if you should change your mind later, you simply delete the files, and the sim will revert back to using the original .tod files (which are in the GermanyCE.cat).

I thought that the cities in WoE looked rather "flat" at times, so I decided to do something about it. I took the city .tod files from Polak's desert terrain, renamed them to match their GermanyCE counterparts, and...presto....high-rises!

Not yet....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_ve37gVwxw

And, how, preytell, did you arrive at that conclusion?

It depends on what service accepted it. Being a Grumman, had it become a USN fighter, it would undoubtedly had (in keeping with Grumman tradition), been named after a cat. In USAF service, it would have been named after a raptor of some sort ( for example, Eagle, Falcon, Night Hawk, etc.). How about "Peregrine". That could possibly have been the X-29 design team's joke on General Dynamics and their "Falcon"

Oh Nicky, sounds like you did not properly prepare for the trip.... Step 1: Properly pitch and organize your tent, make sure that you have at least the bare essentials close at hand (TV remotes, snacks, beverages, etc.) Step 2: Make sure that you set up your sleeping bag on a flat and dry surface (remember, one does not need to really "rough it" in this area) Step 3: One must ensure that at least (once again) the barest of essentials for a succesful fishing trip are present and accounted for, and properly laid out for rapid deployment. Despite all the above, one must learn to be be satisfied with the smallest of "keepers"