jeanba

What do you mean ? No tactics here Topolo's work is an estimate of performances based an available Flight Manual. The data and curves were then converted and adapted to a format which made them easier to compare under the NATOPS framework

Hi I made some corrections here : (check at the end of the thread) I hope it will help you a little

If TK wants to sell more SF2, he needs to introduce a "disruption" and VR MAY (I am not even sure of it) be it. If he does not invest, then the number of player will decrease slowly and SF2 will die, and this si likely what will happen. Going "open Source" may slow down the phenomenon, but I am not sure it will increase significantly the number of players. I will keep my old install ... and continue playing it for quite a longtime, but like everybody, I wish it can improve and more people discover this hidden gem. There is some room for a middle core jet era fighter simulation, but SF2 is not up to date for this. Would need better nicer terrain, VR and multiplayer (if we compare to heliborne, for instance). The rest is ok, I think.

This is what I like with SF2: If I read an interesting account of a mission over VN (or Israel, or Korea or ...), I can play it in SF2 in 2 clicks

VR implementation may really boost SF2 sales This may be the last hope for TW

Topolo on checksix forum extrapolated from fligh manuals comparisons between various planes of the 60s 70s : http://www.checksix-fr.com/documentation-performances-f-5e-mig-21-mirage-iii-f-4/ Globally, the Mirage III is outclassed by the Mig21bis except in manuevrability below 15000 ft

Tried to fly My GC is not better than yours, but I did not notice significant performances loss

My new campaign : Br7 in April 1918:

No, this is in the webpage

Sinking a Krivark Frigate :