column5

Would love to try out that Goblin.

Me too, but SF isn't the best way to simulate it, given that flying something like the SR-71 is more about systems management than seat of the pants flying. For example, I was surprised to learn that for the bulk of their missions, the Blackbirds were flown on autopilot. However, we win either way as Del's does great work and any plane he makes for the game should be a beauty. OT but consider a real SR-71 simualtion. Of course you would fly the mission, which would be cool, but equally intriguing would be the opportunity to perform all of the mission planning for such a complex operation taking place over thousands of miles and involving as many as eight aerial refulings, etc., etc. Schedule a tanker wrong and swim home...

Dels, great work on the F-22! I think you should make whatever aircraft most interest you, but my vote would be for something other than the SF-71, simply becuase it doesn't offer much utility in this game with no recon features to speak of and relatively small maps. But, like I said, it comes down to what you are going to enjoy building the most. Either way I look forward to the result. ;)

LABS is basically all about timing and flying a precise profile at a precise speed. There is a very good description of it in Rampant Raider.

One would need considerable computing power which was unavailable in the 1950s, too bulky in the early 60s (the A-6 again, for example) and just started to become miniaturized enough in the late 1960s to become practical. What you are asking for is a CCIP, which started to appear in advanced strike aircraft in about 1968 with the A-7D.

Its really not that strange. Even the most advanced systems of the 1960s such as that in the A-6 relied on calculating the target position as an offset from a known point that could be discerned by the radar--a terrain feature, or something like that. So, if the target was 2 miles from, lets say, a large hill, the coordinates of the target would be entered into the system using that hill as a reference point. Then you needed an accurate, calibrated Inertial Navigation System to tell the aircraft where you were in relation to those coordinates. As you can imagine, it was not very accurate.

Check here: http://home.att.net/~jbaugher4/newa4_11.html

I think some people use Fraps.

Of course it doesn't matter when it is painted on a burnt piece of ex-MiG laying in the desert baking in the noonday sun.

OK OK, don't send the Mafia! For WOI only: http://www.column5.us/private/JAS39_DATA.INI This is beta so I don't want to hear ONE WORD of complaining!

Not to get too far OT, but seeing the A-10 over WOI terrain...makes one wonder why the IDF/AF never got any of them. Great skins by Sundowner as usual.

FYI, I put the Gripen in WOI and got it working with the F-16 aerodynamics. No more sloppy roll. Now I just have to tune it for more Gripenness.

NATO Fighters has not been tested in conjunction with any mods, so it is impossible for me to say what might be causing the problem. I would suggest starting fresh and adding one mod at a time, then have a few test flights before adding the next mod.

Not a matter of if, but when.

This is the second poll in the Community Produced Game series. The question is, which aircraft would you like to see featured in a "study" simulation based on the ThirdWire engine? This aircraft would be the primary flyable aircraft, and would be modeled in more detail than the stock aircraft. For the purposes of this poll, please list three choices, in order of preference. When I compile the results, I will weight the choices appropriately. Also, please list only one aircraft on each line. Limit yourself to aircraft that served in the "classic" jet era, roughly 1950 to 1980. Finally, try not to list just your favorite aircraft. Give some consideration as to whether the aircraft you choose would be fun in a flight sim and attract buyers. For example, I would like to have a detailed A-7 sim, but it would be far less likely to sell well compared to an F-4 sim. As an example, I will give my resposnes: 1. F-4 2. F-14 3. F-8 If you have not voted in the first poll (multiplayer), please do so here: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=25437

You should read the official thread. Most of the changes people have found are mentioned in there.

I wasn't going to say anything but DAMN they would be stoopid to buy Supa Hoenets in a theater where they may have to face the best from Sukhoi.

The Kitty Hawk is an oooold boat. But a thorough refit could probably give it plenty more good years.

Yeah, with this new AI you can't get cocky just because you are in an F-16. Gun kills are tough as hell. I find short range shots with the 9L and Python to be very effective though if you lead the target enough to lessen the g the missile has to pull.

I can't make any guarantees about how it will perform in WOI. However I will revisit the FM when the patches for SF/WOV/WOE are released. At that time I will probably compeltely rebuild it using the WOI F-16 as the base and tweaking from there, which should put us closer to reality.

No greater praise than that! Now if we can just get the ladies to recognize our God-like qualities...

Hmmm...that would make sense. I was wondering why TK left them as air objects and not ground objects. That would explain it.

Go easy on the flight model, it was tough to do and I will be the first to tell you it is not perfect. But the plane feels stable, handles well, is wicked fast and turns tight. Should give those Flankers a run for their money.

Cool. Vista has a couple of known problems with the SF series, but we have workarounds. Details are in this KB article: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=19172 Basically, you need make sure that the latest DX9c update is installed (not DX10). Then you have to disable some pixel shaders by editing one of the game's INI files. Instructions are in the link above. Let us know if you have any problems.

Are you running Vista?