santroM

So this is off some animation studio, but I figured that if there was anywhere this could be really "simulated" it would be SF2. Disclaimer: Not my video, and clearly not agreeing to the whole 5th Gen bit

But ISIS isnt the only one here. We got ISIS-lite a.k.a Hizb-ut-tahrir supporters and members spewing hate frequently on the web from their cosy refuges in the UK and even some dumb tools here in the US. And what do I get for reporting them to the FBI "We have considered your request", and to FB.. "We found no hate material".. so thank you and no thank you. Signed A muslim.

Anyone familiar with SKIJUMP operations might help with why there seems to be a longer takeoff run position in the last minutes also shown? Because we saw the two forward positions but this one seems to be pretty aft of them. Also, Is anyone making a J-15?? I have been using that good old Su33 to stand in but there seems to be certain differences that warrant a model tweak.

Way too much motion sickness packed into that one video. They were better off using SF and bandicam but then those F-4s might not survive at all.

Would it be too much to wish for one in SF-2?

10/10 WOULD F--LY the campaign. Favourite what if subject. However, I believe the designation would still change from the P to F which was apparently in the works prior to the USAF being formed.

Wargame Red dragon, World in Conflict, Kerbal space program Also got FC3 but somehow I think my setup is inadequate to have any fun with that.

There are (dumb) LGBs in the weapons pack.

Well, guess that Su-34 I have needs some adjustment to the FM.. clearly does its roll in less than 4 seconds.

So apparently the Textron Scorpion might end up being the CAS angel for the next visit by the US military to a third world dustbowl. Once the F-35 reaches its full potential within the next decade, the service is considering purchasing a relatively inexpensive replacement for the A-10 to perform CAS against enemies that lack sophisticated air defenses, Gen Herbert Carlisle, chief of USAF Air Combat Command says on 6 March during a discussion with reporters at the Pentagon following a weeklong multi-service discussion of CAS. An aircraft like the Textron AirLand Scorpion jet could fit that bill, Carlisle says. “It could. That’s not something that is outside the realm,” he says after being asked about the Scorpion. “We have gone out and looked at other platforms to see if they could meet the low-end CAS capability at a reasonable cost per flying hour,” he says. “We are keeping our eyes and our opportunities open.” http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/one-week-study-re-affirms-a-10-retirement-decision-409888/ So if a charitable enough individual with the appropriate skill set might be so inclined to give us one to play in SF2, it might not be a bad occurrence.

Well the sim is linked to the Gripen so again I cant comment on the flight model used for the F-16. However the FC-1 has been modelled extensively and so I was wondering how to get the buffeting issue resolved. Will do. Thanks.

Ok, Ive got an odd report and query all rolled into one. I work as en embedded systems consultant in my country and so due to it(while involved in a small project regarding MFDs) I've had the opportunity to fly the actual simulator for the CATIC/PAC JF-17/FC-1 at PAC Kamra in Pakistan. At the same time, I mod SF2 for fun and initially had the the incomplete(not not so) JF-17 from the A-team site which I "fixed" and now also have the privilege to try out Banidos JF-17 which they have been generous enough to let me try as a beta. Both aircraft use very different FM techniques but the Banidos aircraft is closer in some respects to the JF-17 while "Mine"(A-team site) is closer in some respects. Now, with the real deal the situation on DACT was set up with a 1v1 with a F-16 and Mig-29 later. I wont go into the detail of the entire experience there but lets compare it to the ones Ive got in a DACT with the excellent F-16-52 by the Viper Team. engaging in WVR with Guns only both the JF-17 from Banidos and my Frankenstein are able to get the better of the viper in a vertical scissors(although what the SF-2 AI does cant really be called that) which is sort of contrary to what the real deal shows since in it the Viper's better T/W starts to show. In a horizontal fight however the the SF-2 Viper performs better which goes contrary to my experience in the sim especially since I tried to tweak the FMs to the slightly lower corner speed of the JF-17. Moreover, the actual sim(made with European assistance and with direct input from the flight test program) the aircraft buffets a lot later than it does in SF-2.. How do I fix this? trying to reduce the Alpha stalls seemed to have lesser impact. The results of the real sim are best left untold as the AI there is a little more potent than SF-2s.. But suffice to say that the Mig-29 was an easier fight than the Viper in guns only. The SF-2 aircraft both are better at the instantaneous at the merge but as mentioned before in a sustained 2 circle or one circle fight the Viper and Mig both gain the edge(contrary to the real deal) because these SF-2 models start buffeting(stall onset) much sooner than the sim if I go beyond 5-6g in the JF-17 compared to 5-6g in the F-16. The real deal is quite the opposite. Any ideas?

Hypocrite. This guy is an insult to Muslims man.

They wont learn unless the Saoodis with their Salafi crap are shown the way of Saddam Hussain. Till then, there'll be more jokers with guns going around beheading anyone they dont find "pure" enough.

Had the same issue , and I could not tell what was up until this came up. Thanks guys.. and DIE AVAST!

Thanks. The model is a bit off in terms of matching the actual planform. I used the one from A-Team's site to create my own JF-17 but as such that was incomplete. Thanks for this one.

Hi, I cant seem to get the mission editor to work in the North Atlantic where it allows me to place waterborne assets(Carrier groups). Even the ships behave erratically in every campaign except the default Iceland one. I removed and reinstalled the game in the order SF, SFV,SFE DLC1, DLC2, SFNA. Is there is something else I need to do since it used to work fine before the disastrous last patch which messed up my entire install and I had to redo everything. Since then it just does not work with the mission editor properly.

Apparently the problem is with all Desert Terrain and the problem stays in both the old and new terrain editors. Weird.

Ive tried following Gepards great tutorial on terrains to the letter T. The Kashmir terrain he shows builds fine. Yet there is not much luck when I try to get the India/Pakistan terrian to load like it does. Any ideas?

Well, I tried figuring that. However, Here even aeronautical charts would show a bit off. To give you an example.. the distance between PAF Mushaf and PAF Lahore in he game is thrice what it would be in Real Life. Additionally.. PAF Mushaf is Above PAF Lahore in latitude while in the mod it sits all the way below. The map I posted above is basically the SAME map used in the mod except I put the political overlay on it. The geography matches perfectly and it is a very accurate representation in 2/3rd . Its just the locations that are off.

I live on the opposite side of the border, and Its nowhere close to accurate in any location. The map image I posted here is basically an overlay over the original map..the geography was spot on.. so all I did was put a political map on top of it. And as you can see by the cities and locales.. nothing matches its Real Life counterparts. Ive figured the .ini files on the targets and am actually along halfway on them. So Airfields and cities are showing up in their right locations where they should be approx in Real Life. Its the Height map and Texture that Ill need to burn some hours for. In any case, thanks for the point to Gepards tutorial.. hopefully Ill pick it up and fix this otherwise great piece of work . Cheers.