garyscott

You cant keep a good man down . . . .

Im in no way pro, i just like to have a camera with me most times . . . you never know what may present itself!

My bag - Sony A-230 with small 18-55mm kit lens, a Tamron 70-300mm and a Sigma 70-300mm, and a 500mm f4 tele lens. (+ a few filters etc)

I am using full manual more now, but its a learning curve, at least i dont have to pay for reams of film to experiment with! Thank god for SD cards!!

Some of the shots i am proud of are to follow. They aren't as good as a lot i have seen, but i like them and am happy that i took them.

Thank you for viewing.

Gary

That was the Boeing super Phantom proposal It also had an optional modular conformal fuel tank / equipment / weapon pod between the sparrow wells and used the PW 1120 engines.

And informally nicknamed the "BigMac" !

Noticed the pics of the Ace McDonnel? and the defected mig?

 

Falcon

I believe that that particular MiG is on display, still in the same markings, in a US museum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-15 In this link, go down to the section on Korean war service and there is a pic of the same machine, in its new home.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?195594-Allied-Aircraft-in-Korea

Whilst roving the internet, i came across this rather fascinating thread with a collection of photos taken during the Korean conflict.

Quite a slice of history here, so enjoy.

Gary

. . . . or if my wife is looking, i want a couple of these!!!!

http://www.rogerdodger.net/diyflightsims/aim-9_lamp.html

http://combatace.com/files/file/10453-fictional-parani-saeqeh-thunderbolt/

Could this be what you require?

Just a few from Duxford airshow held earlier this year in September.

Early morning hazy sun, F-86, Duxford or Korea????

Some high speed pointy thing . . . . (Lol)

Hogs teeth . . .

Sea Fury getting some TLC.

XH588 Vulcan.

Curtiss P-40.

c-47 "Drag-'Em-Oot"

Fairey Swordfish.

P-47 Razorback "SNAFU!"

P-47 & P-51 crossover.

Crowd control was a little excessive i thought . . . . . .

SA-2.

EE Lightning.

Tornado GR.4.

Thanks for looking.

Gary

The single piece wind-shield was seriously considered as it enhanced forward view by 22% due to the bow framing no longer impeding the view. In the CAS and A2A aspect, it was a winner. However, without a serious redesign of the canopy bow sub structure (and forward fuselage attachments), the design suffered from lower impact limits compared to the original design (same spec bird carcass could only be deflected at below 350knts). It was that reason that precluded the single piece transparency from becoming a production article.

That said, both the US E & G units had nothing but high praise for it in the visual arena.

Ive had quite a few AIM-54 shots hit target, pass through, and come out the other side heading backwards! Also occasionally they pass through, and in a very wide arc (almost like they are trying to come back for a second pass!), climb for altitude!

Sometimes i get it with the AIM-120, mostly its the -54, yet to see it with the 'winder.

As a side note, i quite often get problems with JDAM. Drop the store (within parameters!) and it will just sail over the target and carry on for a few miles.

I experimented with this a while ago but it ruined the planning maps in mission briefing screen. When I tried to match the scale of the planning map it was low rez & not much improvement over what we already have.

None the less the few I tried out looked great in the pit even if they were of the wrong, scale & region.

 

Something like this looks more realistic or at least better than the stock/standard pit maps.

 

SteelFlanker, that's what i'm aiming for!

With regard to placement of targets etc (Wrench), then as long as the map is correctly proportioned i see no reason why it shouldn't work. I know absolutely dick about terrain creation, but it seems to me that there is a certain number of tiles that are of a generic type that are laid around the "coast" of a terrain to mimic as closely as possible the RL terrain, however, RL terrain cant (?) be recreated exactly as each tile that goes around the "coast" would be unique, and the resultant terrain folder would be of an impressive MB size! (Please tell me if i'm getting this wrong, as i really don't know!).

However, i could take an ONC chart or upper airways chart, and break it down into small sections to overlay onto a Planning map piece by piece, and "squish" or deform (slightly!) to approximate the terrain features and outline of the original Planning map, thereby ensuring as much as possible that what you see on the map MFD, is very close to what you see outside your 'pit. Pertinent features such as power stations etc will correlate to the in game locations.

Airbase symbols represented on ONC charts etc can just be moved a bit if, after laying the ONC onto the map, the symbols are off by any distance to the in game airbases.

What do you guys reckon?

Im going to do this anyway, success or not!

It just may take a little while as with our newborn son, my SF2 time is a little constrained!

I plan to do all the terrains that i have on my install, and when it comes to upload, i will seek the approval of the respective authors to go ahead with the maps that relate to their terrains.

Hopefully i can do you guys proud.........

Cool!

Didn't realize it was that simple!

Would it be worth uploading to the masses once ive got them accurate??

Hi there, ive looked through the KB and done a search, and am sure that i havent missed anything.

My question is, i would like to substitute the in cockpit Moving Map (looks like the planning map in the terrain folder) for a more authentic copy of an aeronautical chart of the region(s).

Scaling etc the new map wont be a problem, but im confused as to where the callout is? Ive looked in aircraft cockpit ini's to no avail.

Where is the callout specified and what is it called?

Sorry for being a muppet if i have missed the obvious!

Gary

yeah, the navy contracted langley to do the tunnel tests, and eventually did tests seeing if vectoring the thrust would help with spin recovery, in the end i think they modified the vanes and dropped the "paddles". the same paddles were fitted onto F-18 HARV and X-31 before the new 360 degree vectoring that was later fitted onto Test F-16 MATV.

 

Grumman Said the Same 360 Nozzles would have been on the next Tomcat had they won a contract.

Yep, nice one SkateZilla. If they had won that contract . . . . that would be one hard 'Cat to beat!

That's the Spin / ARI equipped bird isn't it?

Caesar, if Turkey's on the menu, you da man!

I know the program i was referencing wasn't a NASA job, i believe it was a NAVY run thing alone, but my memory is hazy on it. You know any further? I can definitely remember seeing the vane equipped bird in publications of the time, and a family member who was near Pax took photos of the airframe with the modifications (long since lost!).

Any memory refreshing gratefully received!

Gary

Yes, NASA had two F-14A+s with special Thrust Vectoring Engine Nozzles, with increased thrust and less weight/drag.

(Outgoing!)

In absence of links etc showing the airframes (it isn't NASA 991 by any chance is it?), then the only program i can think of with TV connections relating to the F-14 was the spin program in the 80's - 90's. Initially carried out at Langleys 14ft wind tunnel, the findings of that (TV control for enhanced manoeuvring response in future combat aircraft) were carried over to an F-14 which was firstly ground ran at Pax River, then flown successfully. The vanes were of a similar design and function to those installed on the X-31 research aircraft. The test results of the program, although very compelling, sadly did not materialize in any upgrade for the F-14 fleet.

From what i remember, the engines were actually de-tuned (thrust limited slightly, so as not to blow the vanes off!), and the vane installation added 1100lbs per engine.

Caesar may be able to expand on this, as from what ive seen on CA, he's the Tomcat-Meister.

(Incoming??)

so i can upload a NASA F-14B with experimental engines and he can download it and it qualifies as a straight up downloaded Plane :p

Is it / has it been in service?

Lol

Kinda beats the fun outta it if you just crank up the engine specs to Star Trek warp factor 90!

Ill stick to timing my pull up and climb profile to get astro-wings.

(incoming!!)

dont see the point in poping flares.

 

.

The other option was dance a jigg, but how do ya prove that??

Its just for fun, dude.

And no modded aircraft ianh755! lol.

Straight, downloaded, out the box, vanilla aircraft. No limit on what though . . . .

Thank you, friends. Means a lot to us both.

:) Another future flyer!

You dang right!

Thank you all very much.

On Saturday 14th April, at 3:36 in the morning, my wife Katrina gave birth to our second son, Jaydn.

Weighing in at 9lb 13ozs, Our family is now complete! In a few years time, there will be 3 of us attending airshows!

Jaydn, 40 minutes old!

This morning, its very hard being a baby, so tiring!

Wrench . . . nice!

I wasn't aware there was a "roof", because of that i thought it would be fun to see who could gain an alt record. . . . . .

Since the roof is there, it kind of caps it.

Oh well . . . .

Im still going to gun it regularly though . . . .

Heres my first alt attempt.

F-22A, 235kts IAS, over the top at 111706FT. That was the best height i could get on that flight with that bird. Control response at alt was mushy to say the least! No air to bite into.

Pick an aircraft, and go for it! Just dont forget the flares.