daddyairplanes

thank you everyone for the assistance scientific wild ass guess, but this is how it will release (best judgement from provided pics and my own google fu). damn near completely scratch made (ok plane silhouettes are from patch, and i didnt draw Europe ) but i will be doing the 1986 Skyblazer Reunion Team .....

Bitburg Wing King in 1986. i believe it has to do with American German Tricentennial (still wrapping my head around that one) i think i got it close, but would like to get it better. Esp since DCS didnt bother with it

i think thats the same image i used to make the one displayed in lod viewer above!

Thank you, on teh decal it appears there is some writing but not in red, and i dont think its "Skyblazers". but zooming in wrecks the detail. i will keep it as is for now that bottom pic isnt totally correct, as they were a TACTICAL Fighter Wing at the time. but i got that already from the disc insignia for even earlier in teh Bitburg era that lasso tool can be useful sometimes sadly, i think i will have the most correct version, but to add it in with the line birds the placement has to be somewhat off (mesh issues). alot of the profile arts are just abit off from the photos, and DCS didnt even bother with the Skyblazer logo on the left. cant speak to FSX (if they even have this skin debating a what if reconstituted Skyblazers tho, that could be all the wing kings and insignia on skin.......

"LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, SKYBLAZER SOLO WITH THE SUPERSONIC SNEAK PASS...."

way better than before, tho still unsure if the skyblazer title was on. ravenclaws posted profile says yes, ABpic's library and other real photos say no. so i did options for both available as will be released

much appreciated between that and other research, have figured out it was the Skyblazers patch from the F-105 era. although in the photo i think it doesnt actually have the skyblazer name. now i can jimmy up a better scratch decal though

welcome back! as for reinstalling, do it man. im finding out that setting the install is half the fun. the other half being modding something to fit your install. with the next half being then flying what you modded (or seeing it pop up in the threads)

chill dude, its outgoing mandatory screenie, a rare shot of the infamous Yankee Air Pirate, Col U. Nam. Ehere

Eagle One

i wouldnt consider it a discontinuation, say extreme back burner with deeper research into the aircraft, general Cold War history, and build up of other skills, im sure you'll come back to elements of this. what you had proposed would be a complete revamp of hte SF2 universe* so to speak and that is massive. hell, there was alot that went into the new ODS and that is with established air arms, history and weapons and it was only 8 months timetable. your talking about alot from scratch over decades. look forward to whatever you put out. just remember every meal, even a buffet, gets eaten one bite at a time. *(ah shit, am i proposing we set canon for the SF2U )

hey thats my line!!!

GKABS, arent you a member in at Coyote Aerospace? if so post there and someone will pick it up im fairly sure. real life is kickin my tail just to get basic decalsets done (ok basic yet historical) for Eagles. it will be the fall before i can touch it myself, although im always wanted to do another airliner

dude, could you imagine if we had a terrain with a real Kai Tak with billboards, funky approach and all? mandatory screenies, out east this time

that make the boom lower. it already did that base on the animation the original modeler did and the entry calling out in the data ini it operates automatically lowering at a given airspeed. I lowered the value of that airspeed so it lowered shortly after takeoff. this was due to how the drogue assembly goes on the boom (i also did a lot of constant code edits to place it) essentially the hose sitss underground during take off, then the boom lowers and fits where the drogue is hanging out in space. not hte best solution, but a viable workaround.

the booms come down at a preset airspeed, set withing the data ini. i had to lower it on the KC-135 to make it look ok when putting the basket on the probe (for NATO and Navy) and hitting the boom is the same in game as hitting anyother part of the plane, rather strongly discouraged. pausing is the reccomended way to go. allen has a whole thread on that topic, and is a bit better than me at getting close for the most realistic shots

E is for Eagles

checking out an airliner with reported engine trouble unfortuneately it seems to have taken out a bit more than the engine

i've said it in other places, F-15EX would be an excellent buy if they used it for its original role when proposed 5 or so years ago: replacement of the F-15Cs used in the air soveriegnty role by the Air National Guard. but the US military being what it is, we like to tack things and missions on. that said, it will still be a good investment in that - it will be a newer airframe accomplishing the same mission. less maintenence down time, meaning overall cheaper to operate - the USAF will finally move away from its F-15 platforms being solely air to air. the second seat is expected to be utilized for training and to have a WSO for air to ground. when pure air to air one seat is expected to be used - with the recent experiments in using F-15Es as literal bomb trucks (up rated loads just for carrying from one base to another), another CFT'd platform would help accomplish that mission set, further enabling the USAF's goal of being able to operate from small remote airbases in IndoPac the F-22 and F-35 are expensive, and while the USAF would have loved to replace entire fleets with them, the fact is they are going to be a combination of Day1 silver bullets and day... the rest... quarterbacks, using their greater situational awareness of the air space to direct the 4th gen platforms. Those 4th gen platforms are more likely to be there when needed if they are built in 2022-6 rather than 1982-6

on top of unstable China in the 60s, China in the 90s and beyond is more likely to align with Paran, if only to offset US/UK influence in the region. the Soviet Union first and formost is a Parani ally because they practally gave away weapons to anyone who would pay lip service to the international socialist dialect, even if those supplied didnt really truly go for it. post 1992, its all about the cash to clarify Finlands situation, they were severely restricted in what they could do militarily after WW2 by the "peace" treaty with the Soviet Union. havent looked it up, but if they could only have a certain number of fighters, and werent allowed until the late 60s/early 70s to even put heat seeking missiles on them (no radar guided until after 1992 and no more Sovviet Union) i do believe they would not be allowed to have an aviation industry allowed to do more than repair work. the French is in Dune: you haz the coin they has the weapons. but they watch out just enough for their closer allies that they will have difficulties with delivery or tell on what they did (Exocet deliveries in 82, KARI intel in 91) in all things, keep an eye on realpolitik; as was said in the past nations dont have friends, they have interests. its true esp in the Middle East. Dhimar is Saudi Arabia (with a differrnt government), they want the best weapons and strong allies to protect from the menacing neighbor. For that matter, if you have them independantly competent rather than bringing in mercs they are like Iran before 1979. Paran is a more aggressive Syria or Egypt; has some resources but wants more and is willing to sell their soul to get it. the major nations want oil and influence, while the smaller nations want oil. Tech transfer is nice and all, but its a major shift to have Middle Eastern nations with major industry, even fictional flight sim ones. Hell, its actually a big coin flip to have the really rich ones doing the heavy defense lifting on thier own (again, look at SA) i have had my own vision of how the Dhimar/Parani conflict looks for a few years. but other projects and real life say it'll be a few more years before they see light of day just my two dinar on the subject

guruu, that interior brings one thing to mind: "Next time Jack, write a gawdamn memo"

thoughts on interceptors: the F-102 and -106 were nuclear capable interceptors. the -102s only exported to two NATO allies, i believe to get both to behave within the framework of the Charter (didnt work) the 106 was assigned to the air defense of the Continental US. the only operational deployment they undertook was to Korea after the Pueblo incident for about a year. ther were also a couple of few week excercises to Europe. otherwise strictly homeland defense, so also not a likely candidate for export (not htat Convair didnt try) i think the F-104 would be a more likely candidate for export to Dhimar given teh politics of the time, although i like the inclusion of the Lightning as i always saw the DhAF as a alternate version fo the RSAF, but with an actual self reliance rather than the way the Saudis did business

welcome, to the wonderful world of eyecandy..... still it can be fun if you have mission editor to set a tanker on an hour long orbit as sonme point along your route, form up and pretend to tank

like Yakarov said, make a new one. well in my case, ish i trace over teh original panel lines myself with 1 pixel straight black brush or pencil. then when its complete, i duplicate and invert so there is a white offset for a bit of depth. takes abit of time, but i figure they took the time to put the original panel lines on, might as well use the location unles its badly off i then put them into a layer group, and adjust the opacity of that until i think it looks right. usually somewhere between 12% and 30% all depending. usually, panel lines and exhaust stains are about the only thing i would reduce opacity for on a skin (jpg or bmp). unless your getting really fancy and having sand blasted areas of paint over an original metal skin (a thought given your subject matter). but in beginning basic practice most of the skin colors should be solid if working a basic camo Yakarov, you now also now the pain in creating fresh skins for another modeller too but its good that you have been working with them, their game has picked up a bit this year since you started collaborating. EDIT: back to Eagle; that video is another way, and working on the fighters rather than big birds youll have more details to pull out. again personally i would have the details that show through the paint in layers above the paint job but to paraphrase Bob Ross, this is your show, you create it how you want to

like Yakarov said, make a new one. well in my case, ish i trace over teh original panel lines myself with 1 pixel straight black brush or pencil. then when its complete, i duplicate and invert so there is a white offset for a bit of depth. takes abit of time, but i figure they took the time to put the original panel lines on, might as well use the location unles its badly off i then put them into a layer group, and adjust the opacity of that until i think it looks right. usually somewhere between 12% and 30% all depending. usually, panel lines and exhaust stains are about the only thing i would reduce opacity for on a skin (jpg or bmp). unless your getting really fancy and having sand blasted areas of paint over an original metal skin (a thought given your subject matter). but in beginning basic practice most of the skin colors should be solid if working a basic camo Yakarov, you now also now the pain in creating fresh skins for another modeller too but its good that you have been working with them, their game has picked up a bit this year since you started collaborating.