SkippyBing

Yeah, but that's a Spruance Class, not a Tico. My recce instructor would be so proud....

Rus, minor point, it looks like you've got the early S.2 wing which I don't think the RAF ever used, the later one moved the outboard pylons further out for Martel fin clearance and lost the fifth vortex generator, counting from the inside, the outer pylon ends up under the gap. The new pylons used the new standard NATO connection vs the original single point UK connection so I'm 99% sure all the RAF examples had it and all the RN ones got it by '72 at the latest. Oh and I think that's an S.1 cockpit going by some of the magnetic indicators and the engine gauge layout, if you want references I have the Pilot's Notes for both in PDF format which have some nice shots of the cockpits. Hands up who thinks I'm making a Buccaneer for FSX?

Looking good. If you want a few more pictures for reference/textures etc. I could uploaded some.

Ahh, the Admiral Chabenko. Due to the end of the Cold War they only actually built the one. Yes that is a bottle of Vodka in my hand and no I'm not convinced by Russian flight safety!

There was a USS Gorgeous? I'll get my coat...

You think that's bad, try and figure out how fast the bullets from the tailgun on a B-58 go.

To be honest I can't remember where I heard that it was a while ago and I never really questioned the logic!

For the Skysim FSX Hawk, available from the link in my signature.

Ahh, disclaimer, I didn't paint it my texture monkey did! I've got some photos of the real thing lying around though.

I think QEII was avoided so it didn't sound like a liner! Fair one, but it does make it tricky to give the Officer of the Watch a slap when he's been stupid! W.R.T. catapults, it would be very expensive to fit steam cats to a gas turbine powered ship. There is actually a version of the design with steam cats etc, but it takes up a lot of room with dedicated steam generation and storage and ends up being about 80% the cost of a nuclear carrier without the handy saving in fuel costs. Essentially the STOVL design makes the ship nice and cheap but makes the aircraft pricer, but they're on a different budget......

Have they been talking to Gordon Brown?

Victorious circa 1941. Waiting on textures and ini editing.

Giggity Giggity Hz. Sorry. To be slightly helpful the RN used to use it's own system (no idea why, probably to be difficult) Band 1 - 0.6 - 4GHz Band 2 - 4 - 8GHz Band 3 - 8 - 12GHz Band 4 - 12 - 20GHz Suffice to say there's still some legacy equipment that uses bands 1-4 but most things use the NATO band and it's up to the user to make the conversion.

No. QuintiQ have a first generation twin stick Harrier that has fly-by-wire controls in the front cockpit that removes the need for a nozzle control which has done a lot of work for the JSF programme, but all other Harriers have conventional controls.

I think the two islands also improves air flow over the deck, although I can't remember where I heard that originally. Personally I'm not convinced it's a rgeat idea separating Flyco and the bridge that much as if you have a comms or electrical failure during flying ops it's going to get a bit emotional. As to the names, by convention the first capital ship launched in a monarchs reign is named after the monarch, obviously we've left it a while. I'm not sure if it's pessimistic or pragmatic to name the second one Prince of Wales....

I tried Russo's Hawk last night and kept getting a CTD, tried it in WoE and WoI both with the most recent patch. Anyone got any ideas, if I can get it to work I want to do a Fly Navy 100 paint scheme to match the ones flying from Yeovilton and Culdrose.

I'm trying to find the figures referenced on a post on Pprune, but the GR.5 allegedly had an accident rate only slightly worse than the Jaguar in RAF service. Considering they were both in the low level attack role the difference can easily be explained by the extra engine in the Jag. Also worth considering the GR.7/9 was the only aircraft in the UK inventory that could deploy to Kandahar for operations in Afghanistan initially due to the length of available runway (you know without mines and big holes) because of it's STOVL ability.

Yeah, I guess RAFG were doing a role playing game when they deployed to the field.......

Interesting. So the fact that the AV-8B/GR.5,7,9 can carry the same load the same distance off the deck as a classic F/A-18 says what.... And you'd be pretty stupid to limit yourself to only doing vertical take-offs when you can carry more with a rolling one, which will always be the case it's a matter of physics. If you haven't noticed the USMC game plane is to have a force that can co-locate with the men on the ground, hence AV-8B -> F-35B and the Osprey. The Harrier allowed them to implement their doctrine more effectively than an aircraft based on a carrier 50+ miles from the battle could. Not sure about the IR missile problem in the Gulf, after all the plume from a Harrier should be more dispersed than other single engine types, and it didn't seem to be a problem in the Falklands. How do the profiles they were flying compare to other aircraft?

They should be in the weapons pack, here then follow the instructions at the intermediate modding forum.