Fubar512

If you'd spent a few minutes perusing recent posts, you would have found your answer

Nele posted his updates for the MiG-23 series in another thread....his work is solid. The '29 will be updated soon, but in the meantime, yes, check it's sea level top speed value. As for the '25PD, try this: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?act=a...ost&id=3323

Wrench. I've edited the data.ini for the Hawk launcher to prevent Salvoing, but had to locate the launchers in a semi-circle (ala Soviet-bloc), with each launcher guarding it's own sector. If you want, I'll post the basic layout, and send you the updated data.ini file(s).

Nele, Thanks for your contribution, that represents a ton of work. USAFMTL is rught, though, you should assemble them in one package along with the text of your post, and add simple instructions that those new to the game could follow.

Hey Typhoid, Do you have the current weapons pack, and which terrain are you using?

SO U TAK TAHT COLUM%!!!!11!! MEESTER USFATBLT W/CHEEZ SPEKE TEH TRUFUL TIHNGS!11!!

LOOK....DECEETEFULL COLUM5 LIVES!!!1111!!!

Actually, in the book at least, the MiG-31's stealth was active, not passive (as is the case with actual stealth aircraft). In the second book on the series, "Firefox Down", Gant had to land the MiG-31 on a fozen lake in Finnish Lapland (due to a losing fuel from battle damage incurred during his aerial encounter with the second Firefox), where it broke through the ice and settled to the bottom. A NATO team was flown in to retrieve it, and, to make a long story short, Gant had to fly it back out! Upon doing so, he discovered that the water had damaged the MiG's stealth system, so Gant was forced to evade interception by relying on the Firefox's speed.

They pretty much knew what the MiG-29 looked like by 1979, based upon spy satellite shots taken of the Ramenskoye test center during the later part of 1970's. The MiG-29's prototype was code-named "RAM-L" by the DoD, the Su-27's, "RAM-K". I recall reading a hard-cover, titled "Soviet Military Aircraft", which was published in 1981, and it contained line-drawings of the '29 (based on the aforementioned spy sat images), that were right on the money. As for the '31 'Firefox', Craig Thomas described it as looking pretty much like the '25, except that it had drooping wings, and a chined forebody. In retrospect, I find it ironic that Hollywood depicted the Firefox (in 1982) as having a somewhat faceted appearance, almost like the nose of the F-117A!

Really?

I recall doing that to someone, once, myself. I believe that it was Maverick, back when he was spamming the boards regarding the F-14A's progress. But at least Lexx's looks more like an airplane than mine did; If I'm not mistaken Column5 said that my rendering looked like a "Klingon Bowel Movement"

Yes, Perform a bit of research, find the exact position of the counter measure dispensers on the aircraft in question, and adjust the coordinates of the dispensers accordingly (and the eject velocity/direction, too). For example: EjectPosition= -1.26,-6.855,1.4 EjectVelocity= 0.0,-1.0,15.0 The 1st set of values value locates the CM dispensers on the model's fuselage or wings. For example: ( + value = right - = left ), (+ value = Forward - value - backwards), (+ value = towards the top - value = towards the bottom) The 2nd set of values sets the velocity that the counter measures are ejected at in relation to the above coordinates.

What amazes me, is this is about the third post from someone asking about a model, that was mentioned as a WIP in another post, just a few threads down. In fact, I found it quite ironic (and hilarious) that one individual actually started a thread inquiring as to the F-22's status, when there was a thread that mentioned the '22 in its title, just two posts beneath his! As Hrntfixer would say...DUR TA DUR!

I'm glad you like it! I'm sorry that I didn't get it out to you before the release date, but between real life events, and other models/projects that are (or were) in the pipeline, I had no free time. As it is, I'm just starting to catch up.

I take it that if they ever built a carrier and named it after USAFBLT W/Cheese Dave, it would only have half-a-deck?

The featured a/c is Gabilon's Yak-41, which can be found in our downloads section. The carrier in the video is the Kiev, though you were correct in your assumption that it is Marcelo's work. As for it's release, one can say that it's not quite ready for prime time...yet

Craig Thomas wrote "Firefox" in 1977, and followed it up with "Firefox Down", in 1984. When the book was published, the MiG-27 was the newest Mikoyan production aircraft known to the west, though the existence of a newer model (the '29) had been speculated since 1976. That's why he choose to make his fictional aircraft the MiG-31. By 1984, the existence of the '31 had been verified, but Thomas wisely chose to continue using the '31 model number for his fictional aircraft, for continuity's sake. The movie based on the fist novel came out in 1982.

Nope, that's not the problem at all. The issue is one of an incorrect sea level speed value in the data.ini. Change it so it reads "MaxSpeedSL=361.10" and it will be fine. Better yet, wait until Doc Nele releases his data.ini updates that are based on real-world data.

Ummmm....nah!

Crusader (with Kreelin's invaluable assistance) put both your "babies" together: Video: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autom...si&img=2790

Remember the "Badger" video, Wrench? "Mushroom! Mushroom!"

Well, now, that's a clear and civil response. Let me clear the air on my side, Gunrunner, by providing some background. Kreelin and I once released an FM (the MiG-21F13), that was based on accurate data, It was so close in fact, that its takeoff speed was exactly on the mark, and its turn rate and max sustainable G at altitude was within a few percentage points of the real thing. This model was based on data provided by the USAF on a "borrowed" F13 that was tested during the course of the "Have Dough nut" evaluation. Anyway, when we released the FM, a gent PM'ed me regarding its tendency to feel nose heavy at cruise speed (approx Mach .9). I explained that (assuming that the SF flight engine was correct, and the flight dynamics were close enough to take advantage of the flight engine) this may be a result of a phenomenon known as "Mach tuck", that effects delta wing aircraft. I promised that we'd look into,just in case it was an issue regarding Xmac or wing and tail plane CL0 and CLa values. To make a long story short, this gent suggested moving the CG position back, and said that he'd release an FM with that correction. His FM was terrible, of course, as the model bounced around on the ground like a kangaroo on amphetamines. And, it was still "nose heavy" at Mach .9. Now, Kreelin and I both spent a cumulative total of several hundred hours on this FM, and while my qualifications may be called into question, in my opinion, Kreelin had forgotten more about aerodynamics than this gent will ever know. So I was of course, more than just a wee bit miffed. When I attempted to explain to this person that the CGvalue was meant mostly for the model's behavior when on its landing gear, he became more than just a bit unreasonable. In short, I just don't like when people provide misleading information to potential newbies. The reason is that I'm often the poor dumb SOB that has to clean up the mess, afterwards.