kct

And some of the weapons from the other aircrafts are needed to top it up as well (like the IRIS-T and the Meteor from the Gripen).

In real-time, it would probably take several hours with a B-52 to fly to Russia via a plane from Japan. I'm interested to see how this turns out.

...And from there you can try to edit it to be more accurate, base on whatever information available (Wikipedia would be a place to start). ...In which contained quite a lot of information about it.

Good to hear a different perspective of the story, everywhere I've seen the Phantom II is being somewhere on 'mythical', in terms of being a parts distributor.

It is, I think it is in the ENVIROSYSTEM.ini or somewhere there.

And somehow I learned to live with British Phantom IIs.

When in doubt, use brute force.

Pound them with guns...only if the AA batteries are not about to set you on fire. This is why I love Mavs.

Why drop them? Launch them via ballistic missiles!

Is there a way to use a different weapon rack for dual A2A missiles (like the Sparrows and AAMRAMs) on a pylon, since whenever I load a pair of AAMRAMs (this is for testing) onto a pylon, they would be using the LAU-105 rails, which would obviously 'join' the Sidewinders above it. What I wanted to create is something like this (pic shown), in which I want to use another weapons rack for the said missiles, instead of the LAU-105 rails. I tested it with 'Use Launch Rails' checked (especially the Sparrows), but I could not load dual Sparrows on each pylon (unless I mess with the loadout.ini, but then again I could only use one particular Sparrow version), and the AAMRAMs would still use the LAU-105 rails. Both Bunyap's WP and MF's WP were installed. This is the weapons station for the 2ARs: [LeftInnerWingStationAHM] SystemType=WEAPON_STATION StationID=14 StationGroupID=3 StationType=EXTERNAL AttachmentPosition=-2.05,2.74,-1.23 AttachmentAngles=0.0,0.0,0.0 LoadLimit=2400 AllowedWeaponClass=SAHM,AHM,2AR AttachmentType=NATO,USAF LaunchRailNodeName=2BR_USN_AHM ;ModelNodeName=wing_pylon_inner_left ;PylonMass= ;PylonDragArea= LaunchRailHeight= MinExtentPosition= MaxExtentPosition= [RightInnerWingStationAHM] SystemType=WEAPON_STATION StationID=15 StationGroupID=3 StationType=EXTERNAL AttachmentPosition=2.05,2.74,-1.23 AttachmentAngles=0.0,0.0,0.0 LoadLimit=2400 AllowedWeaponClass=SAHM,AHM,2AR AttachmentType=NATO,USAF LaunchRailNodeName=2BR_USN_AHM ;ModelNodeName=wing_pylon_inner_right ;PylonMass= ;PylonDragArea= LaunchRailHeight= MinExtentPosition= MaxExtentPosition= This is the weapons rack that I intend to use: [WeaponData2147] TypeName=2BR_USN_AHM FullName=AAMRAM x2 ModelName=bru-55_mav Mass=120.000000 Diameter=0.230000 Length=1.770000 AttachmentType=USAF,USN NationName=USAF StartYear=1980 EndYear=2025 Availability=3 BaseQuantity=10 Exported=TRUE ExportStartYear=1980 ExportEndYear=2050 ExportAvailability=3 WeaponDataType=6 WeaponsRackType=2AR NumWeapons=2 LoadLimit=500.000000 LengthLimit=5.000000 MaxFuelAmount=0.000000 Attachment01Position=0.342000,0.000000,-0.210000 Attachment01Angle=0.000000,0.000000,0.000000 Attachment02Position=-0.342000,0.000000,-0.210000 Attachment02Angle=0.000000,0.000000,0.000000

Ah, in which the ONLY aircraft that I have that will be affected is the Vampire.

Is anyone badass enough of a pilot to avoid this? Also, a tac nuke would take them out in any day, provided that one can get near enough.

Nope, already tested, the AAMRAMs still use the LAU-105 rails. Current tweaks: [WeaponData2147] TypeName=2BR_USN_AHM FullName=AAMRAM x2 ModelName=bru-55_mav Mass=120.000000 Diameter=0.230000 Length=3.770000 AttachmentType=NATO,USAF,USN NationName=USAF StartYear=0 EndYear=0 Availability=2 BaseQuantity=4 Exported=TRUE ExportStartYear=0 ExportEndYear=0 ExportAvailability=2 WeaponDataType=6 WeaponsRackType=2AR NumWeapons=2 LoadLimit=500.000000 LengthLimit=5.000000 MaxFuelAmount=0.000000 Attachment01Position=0.342000,0.000000,-0.210000 Attachment01Angle=0.000000,0.000000,0.000000 Attachment02Position=-0.342000,0.000000,-0.210000 Attachment02Angle=0.000000,0.000000,0.000000 Weapons stations: [LeftInnerWingStationAHM] SystemType=WEAPON_STATION StationID=14 StationGroupID=3 StationType=EXTERNAL AttachmentPosition=-2.05,2.74,-1.23 AttachmentAngles=0.0,0.0,0.0 LoadLimit=2400 AllowedWeaponClass=2AR,SAHM,AHM AttachmentType=NATO,USAF LaunchRailNodeName=2BR_USN_Mav2 ;ModelNodeName=wing_pylon_inner_left ;PylonMass= ;PylonDragArea= LaunchRailHeight= MinExtentPosition= MaxExtentPosition= [RightInnerWingStationAHM] SystemType=WEAPON_STATION StationID=15 StationGroupID=3 StationType=EXTERNAL AttachmentPosition=2.05,2.74,-1.23 AttachmentAngles=0.0,0.0,0.0 LoadLimit=2400 AllowedWeaponClass=2AR,SAHM,AHM AttachmentType=NATO,USAF LaunchRailNodeName=2BR_USN_Mav2 ;ModelNodeName=wing_pylon_inner_right ;PylonMass= ;PylonDragArea= LaunchRailHeight= MinExtentPosition= MaxExtentPosition= To further describe my predicament:

Yeah, I somewhat forgot about that from the moment I tried to play with multiple Skyflashes on a Phantom FGR.2. But still, how can I make the AAMRAMs use another rack?

And Norris did make a response to this news.

Oh God, the memes about Chuck Norris will go to real life.

That, and most of the time people would download add-ons to enhance their game experience. Which is what matters the most.

Don't mention it, my Fujimi F-4E is in a sad state.

No, actually locking the target via the TV like usual, except on aircraft. Although chances of this happening is far from usual, since most of the time I end up in dogfighting matches is less than 2 nautical miles radius.

And believe me when I said that the Tomcat looks weird with two Tomahawks strapped on it's wing pylons.

Or in any case, you should have a LANTIRN-equipped aircraft (such as the afro-mentioned F-15E and the F-14D, but the Tomcat won't mount Mavericks) or something similar. That is why I made the SE my test platform for WMDs, as mentioned in another thread. My installation does not use NATO Fighters 1 and 2 though, since I would prefer to have my own set of aircraft to toy around with (like the SE and the Tomcat).

Of course, that is without considering the current version of the games (WoI supports far advanced cockpit features for the current version, while WoV/WoE does not at the moment, as demonstrated by the Eurofighter add-on). And yes, I was annoyed at the limited moddability of LOMAC, if that is anything. And the fact that they refused to allow pilotable 2-seater aircrafts (like the Su-30 and the Tomcat) on grounds of realism is a joke to me. Generally, I would play the game if it had a flyable Tomcat >.> .

Not a big issue, it is actually good to see some good historical relics (or those somewhat related) in good hands.

You're actually somewhat right in this case, but that was also because of the current state of the sim market (not everyone is willing enough to take the learning curve, especially the casual gamer/console market). It was more of a general situation. The last sim to feature a predominantly Russian line-up, LOMAC, was quite popular. That was actually because a sim featuring predominantly Russian planes is not common in the market.

Lexx: You are right, I am somewhat questioning about the chop. Looks like I still need to play around with some of the .inis, since I am more of a day person, but.. Unfortunately, the last few pics are the reason why I still have the Paveways on the Strike Eagle. They would work at less than 25 radius, then fired from a high altitude. Warhead is not huge by any standards (150kts).