Gunrunner

Nope, that's probably Vought submission to the VFX (in collaboration with Dassault for the swing wing technology, hence the ressemblance to the Mirage G). However I was not aware it went as far as the full-scale mockup stage (or further ?). I think this picture (or a link to a site featuring it) already came up on the boards (on the topic of the F-14, Mirage G and/or F-111B, but I couldn't find it with the search engine).

That's... wonderful Krizis

Human spam bot more likely... Otherwise it would have popped up too in more recent threads (DDoS was mentionned in the recent case).

One may argue it also may be because the only Fulcrum seeing any action were "monkey-models" sometimes poorly maintained and in the hand of poorly trained pilots. The Indians and Germans (while they had them) seemed to have liked the machine. In Russian service its main problem seems to have been the lack of funding for proper maintenance. Poland seems not too displeased with the type either. You also have to take into account the original purpose of the plane, in PVO service it was meant as a point defense interceptor, while in VVS seervice it was supposed to clear the skies over battlefields, not acquire air superiority or operate in overly hostile skies. It seems that by that point, the real job of theater air superiority was passed on to SAMs, planes only being used for local actions or HVT. As Lindr2 pointed out, the original Fulcrum were not even equipped with AHM (after upgrades and for export customers though it ended otherwise). You'll also note it's the exact same problem with most red birds... far easier to take out at long range than blue birds, yet, once it gets to a gun fight, their maneuverability makes them usually harder opponents than blue birds, the MiG-29 is no exception it seems.

AleDucat> The Skyflash were better missiles than the contemporary Sparrows they were based upon. Likewise, Alenia's Aspide (another Sparrow derivative) was also far superior to the original, being the best "Sparrow" for a long time. As for the Super 530D, it was identical to the 530F except for the seeker, whose additionnal abilities were not so much range and ECCM but better chances of taking on low-flying aircrafts and look down capacities. So it's not all inconsistencies...

Silverbolt> The AV-MF used Fencers, but as shore-based strike aircrafts, they never were intended as carrier based aircrafts. AFAIR it was less than 100 planes, passed on from the VVS to replace Blinders, and they were attached to the Baltic Fleet.

They would be wonderful ! Imagine that... The activist in front, haggard, stumbling on the battlefield, yelling, half-panicked "stop ! stop firing ! we come in peace, we mean no harm, don't kill the poor creatures !" and while the enemy's laughing, they don't notice the chimps getting closer and closer, ready to tear them apart... Delicious idea.

Well, unless I forget others, there are 3 great F-104 families for WoX : - TW's, actually only the F-104G and the community derivatives. - Ajunaidr's F-104, the whole family, unfortunately they date from quite some time, meaning the FM might possibly not be up to the actual standards, also, the mapping and skins often don't match the feel of other planes which may be visually disturbing for some people. - Wpnssgt F-104s, mostly early ones, while the comments on the FM also apply, their skins on the other hand are often a better match with the rest of the planeset. It's all a question of tastes, needs and verisimilitude. They're all quality products by the standards of their release, but may seem quite dated with the stream of very high quality (and polygon count) planes we get these days.

It's always been there, except in this case, either a) the angle on the picture make it appear quite high, b) it is too high or c) the "windows" are too small. Its design (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AMX30_bustle.jpg) was meant to offer 360° visibility to tank commanders even when buttoned up. IIRC, the MG on top of the cupola could be used when buttoned up and could rotate independently from the turret, and the secondary 12.7mm (later 20mm) was independent in elevation from the main gun. It was a nice little tank, more meant for mobility and skirmishes than real tank battles (well, we couldn't afford them, and if we had come to use them in that role, we'd be doomed anyway).

Have you tried from C5's site as well as from CA ? And be sure to erase the original copy, instead of "replacing" the file after the new download, just in case.

Same thing... The lack of "social" education is a modern plight, it's relatively recent that people think they are entitled to... well, whatever (success, wealth, respect), and that society is there to serve them, without having to give anything in return (be it respect, work, efforts, taxes etc...). Likewise, with a globalised "culture" (if you can still call the result a culture), ideas and behaviours travel fast and far, with little resistance as there is little education and local culture to fight.

Welcome to the modern world and global "culture"...

Great, especially since we could use them in ODS... Just one thing though, the commander's cupola seems a tad too high.

C5> OT, but has anyone tried to explain to Lindr2 how obnoxious he end up being, and why ? I think he sincerely doesn't understand the errors of his way... tempbanning him won't do any good if he doesn't understand why, it will only make him frustrated and either drive him out of the community or make him even more obnoxious and neither of those options are benefits.

AFAIR, the A-7D took over the Sandy role during the Vietnam war, and probably would have done so until the service entry of the A-10/AV-8.

Next TMF project... Is that a moon ?

Well, if I'm not mistaken, it's the new "in" method to get them out of hovercrafts, one might say there are more efficient methods, but one has to admit it's got a certain je-ne-sais-quoi, style, or flair, for lack of better word. And it might help us solve the ultimate question for rivet-counters, how many eels does it take to fully infest an hovercraft (a worthy intellectual quest if there ever was one) ?

A Tu-126, that's wonderful Europe was lacking red HVTs

Kindly ask FastCargo (he has a real life and other projects), IIRC he's the one coming up with the ALE-50 (the towed decoy) for the Super Hornets.

Those things are monsters... A dream to fly (had to check twice I really was in Hard FM, as they are a really smooth ride), and a nightmare to face in knife fight, even worse than the Flankers.

Pros : - Lighten the load and bandwidth requirements on CA hosting, which is a good thing. - Allows to share on other forums easily. - Makes it possible to see pictures while not logged in. Cons : - Makes it more work to include pictures respecting the width/height limits of threads. - Might preclude pictures from showing in some environments/with some security settings. - More work to post pictures. Looks like a tie to me

Amazing... It will make life over European and Parani skies... interesting in the mid-80's. As for the polemic on details, guys, it's a simple .INI job to "correct" these things to your liking, live with it, it's not as if the 3D model wasn't top-notch, the FM wasn't convincing or the pit was an A-4 repaint. -_- I never understood the need to fuss about things requiring only a text editor and 5mn of your time to "correct".

It is suitable for XP/Vista, you just have to right-click on the .EXE, and in compatibility settings, set it up for Windows 95 (under Vista, depending on your setup, you should also check Execute as Admin). Save the changes, and it will work. Be aware that if you bought the download version and/or are patched up to date, you MUST use the newest weapons editor (the 2.x branch). If you have more specific troubles, please try to post more informations on what seems to be going right and what doesn't work.

Another hunch (hey, I'm no aeronautic engineer), since you removed the dog-tooth from the wing, the variable incidence is gone, the intakes are moved and you apparently diminished the anhedral of the wing, I'd suggest that the stabs now have no good reason left to be dihedral, in fact, in addition with the large and tailfin I'd be willing to bet the present configuration is more subject to yaw-roll coupling than the original design. I'd also add ventral fin(s) to help yaw stability (most planes of such a configuration had fins or quickly adopted them). If you're going for a dirt cheap plane, you could also remove the avionics hump inherited from the bullpup-capable Crusader. It couldn't be used to store enough fuel to be interesting, and the lack of need for advanced avionics in such a cheap plane would not justify the presence of spare space. Oh dear, next I'll suggest a smaller tailfin, a moving intake cone and an angled landing gear to improve the ability to use centerline plyons, and we'll end up with a Mirage F1, except you could have your plane up in the air in the early 60's, whereas the Mirage entered service in the early 70's.

Everything's in the title... I've tried backporting the Hunter F.5 (using parts from the F5 from SF2 and the FGA9 from WoE) into SFP1 (fully patched), to no avail so far... Any clues, ideas or simply confirmation it's (im)possible ? PS: Ok, seems "impossible" as the SF2 LODs seem to map textures differently than SF1 ones.