Jump to content

greendog

NEW MEMBER
  • Content count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About greendog

  1. Yup 22's and the badgers to a lesser extent.
  2. Good Afternoon, I am currently modding the above stock missles so they are closer to the original spec, match gun camera, first hand accounts and chase plane footage. The RedTop was a brute of a missle and was agile off the rail, very reliable (after initial problems were worked out) and accurate. It used transistor technology so needed no seeker cooling and fared very well if used correctly on monovering fighter sized drones. Yes it was old but it was far ahead of its time. Even up to the 80's it was more reliable than most misslies and was very adapt at collision course intercepts. It was also the first missile of its kind to make head on intercepts. This was all gathered from actual lighning pilots, film footage and gun camera footage of firings over Valley in Wales. I even have been shown footage and reports of a firestreak preforming a collision course intercept rather than a tail pipe job which surprised me a great deal. I have managed to mod most of the specs to the original specs and adapt the characteristics to match the actual footage and reports but I have a problem. The redtop (and to a lesser extent firesteak) has a large 32kg anular blast fragmentation warhead capable of knocking out very large aircraft, the fusing system is excellent on the real missile detonating the missle near the mid section or closer to the cockpit. But on many occasions in game the missle detonated close to the tail causing little damage to the bomber. On collision intercepts the bomber would be knocked down no problem but tail chase there seems to be a problem with closing close the the aircraft or even impacting it. The firestreak for instance actually physically hit the aircraft 80-90% of firings. Does anyone have anysuggestions of increasing the kill probability when the missile detonates when striking the tail of and aircraft? I have increased the warhead size to the original spec, increased accuracy, arming times reduced so missiles are more agile off the rail meeting eye witness accounts. These bomber swatters are still not detonating in the right place or causing the damage they should. I would welcome any suggestions.
  3. Thanks for the replys, the GR.1 is too small and its performance is some what wanting. I had a go at adding some decals to the yak-41 and I also added the Harrier FRS1 Cockpit. I also used the Harrier FRS 1 flight model I have tweaked for SF2:E which works really well (injected it with some steroids to reach 1154 performace figures) I find it is a good stop gap but it is about the pinicle of my modding abilty (which isnt realy that high). Hawker Siddely 1154/1216 Osprey FG.1
  4. I am in the process of creating an alternate history type campaign for the RAF during the 60's and 70's. A "what if" the defence white paper never took hold. So there will be TSR.2's and Lightnings zooming around doing there business (when the bucc is realeased that will feature too). The problem is that I was looking for P.1154 or P.1216 aircraft to act as the main multirole fighter type and was wondering if any models do exist, in the works or otherwise. If they do not exists I would like to know if anyone could skin the YAK-41 (or 141) in 60's and 70's era RAF grey, green and white belly and RN Blue and white belly. As I feel it would look the part as a mix between the 1154 and 1216. Thanks
  5. Firestreak is slaved using the radar. The letter A should appear on your gun sight when aquired. When you acheive the right intercept aspect and distance at the right of the gun sight (on the the glass part itself) another cue should appear in the form of an orange square this is the IR seeker locking on to your target. Close distance then fire away.
  6. http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/lightning/history.php second paragraph i think.
  7. I have a SF2E install with most recent patch with NF4+ and patch. When i fly the jaguar the cockpit is missing many textures. I have serched the cockpit folder and the textures are there and everything seems to be ok. My computer is more than a match for the game so is not a hardware problem. any help ?
  8. Is anyone aware of an active project for this glorious machine ?
  9. F1, F2 and F3 fantastic cant wait
  10. thanks I'll stick to LIDS and TIALD for the loadouts then lol
  11. when the gun pods are added to the loadout, they do not fire anyone have any suggestions on how to make em go bang. I have had a look at the ini's and nothing seems to make them work.
  12. wow thanks for the quick response, as for weapons i think it was intended that the aircraft was to be used primarily as an interceptor with secondary attack capabilies. It would have had the standard RAF 4 winders and 4 Skyflash and later may have had the upgrade for 4 ASRAAM and 4 AMRAAM. thanks again for the quick response your work sounds very good
  13. i have been reading a book by Ian Black and his phantom days and came across an extract about the Phantom being upgraded in the RAF to the standard of the German ICE phantoms. The projected life expectancy of the airframs was to be extended well into 2000 with airframe strengthaning programmes, a new wing, improved avionics, HUD, defensive subsytems including disposable countermeasures. Also to improve the phantoms lack luster visability a clear view frameless forward canopy was to be included. I feel this would have been more of a match than the F3 although the phantom lacks the range. Unfortunatly the goverment decided to put all its eggs with a few F3's and Hawks with winders for a number of years. I was wondering if anyone with modding knowledge would be interested in creating a RAF super phantom from the original third wire F4M, adding F3 style HUD, Avionics and ECM systems.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..