MigBuster

oh wow check out those new grafix!

What by some miracle he has decided to use the tool and future patches / games will have more than 1 ground object?

Supposedly from South Korea last week - I can only think that the flight leads F-16 broke down before take off and he had to borrow a B-2

Main headline news on the BBC as well - it still aint gonna happen surely.........

Any DLCs that need a new pit you probably wont see. Not to worry though because you wont need a cockpit for the mobile SF2 game when its ported to Win 8...............

I wasn't going to suggest that in case you got the sack :) Does the place have a WiFi Guest network? - might be less restrictive - but you would need to use your phone or a tablet instead.

Unbelievable - what amazing work - even TK would kill for this capability I bet!

Is at the app store........downloading to see if there's anything new

I'm interested to know where this comes from - currently the F-22A doesn't have AIM-9X and HMCS - this would put it at a disadvantage up close compared to something that had sure - but a lot of the time the legacy jets don't get a chance to use the HMCS because the Raptor is entering the fight wherever it likes. The F-22A is supposed to be getting HMCS/ AIM-9X with subsequent upgrades. Then there is this comment from a Structures Engineer for GD in the 1970s for the F-16 (John Will): In comparing the Raptor and Viper, instantaneous turn capability at higher airspeeds is limited by load factor (g). If both airplanes are 9g, then their instantaneous turn capability is the same. With its higher thrust to weight and lower wing loading, the Raptor has higher sustained turn capability at most conditions. At lower airspeeds, the Raptor wins due to its higher angle of attack capability and TV. Remember, instantaneous turn means speed may drop during the turn and sustained turn means constant speed during the turn, with both turns at constant altitude. And this: I'm a Viper driver and I've had the opportunity to fight one (well, a couple really.) Without going where I can't go, I have to say that the Raptor beat up on me, my formation, the Eagles, and the other red air without me ever seeing him until he rolled in on my 6 and gunned the tar out of me. Wasn't much I could do about it! I have fought many other jets in the world - Eagles, Hornets, Hogs (for what that's worth), MiGs, Mirages (2000 & F1), and several other types & nationalities I'm forgetting about I'm sure - I have lost some, but won most fights. The Raptor changed the way I thought about fighting - I have never felt so defenseless before, I'm just glad I am on their side. The earlier posts about it not being about the Raptor's maneuverability are right on -between how high, fast, and how amazing his technology was we (the many red air) were dead about as fast as the controller could pass the words. I am used to a rhythm in air-air engagements and they just destroyed the tempo - their tune was over before we had really even started. The bottom line: I was a skeptic and thought it should be done away and replaced with new Bl #60 Vipers - now . . . well, to repeat myself, I'm just glad I'm on their side. Now can I have one too? If not, then I'd be happy to jump on the second line in a new Bl60 or F-35. Oh yeah, it is a hell of a lot more maneuverable than a Viper. Based on this analysis you have to say it aint bad at traditional nose pointing either. Although - it not the end of the story for sure - back the 80s F-16As shot down 80+ aircraft at a single competition in Lossiemouth and bombed ground targets - and im sure Busdriver posted a story of his F-16 Aggressors getting wiped out by F-15s. Modern warfare seems to be about networked systems all sharing information and working as a team to form absolute battlespace dominance (in concept) - the F-22 is just a single node. Anyone basing their air force on individual kinematic capabilities might as well bury the jets in the sand.

Some great points JM Even when people are getting the games / add on's for free they are picky and want this / that / the other. honestly give a flight simmer a gun he'd shoot himself in the foot!

Are you copying over an old options.ini or versions .ini into the new install - might be the cause

Typical - no wonder shes laughing!

WW1 and WW2/Korea guns only sims have always sold well - the concept of blasting away guns only in a massive slow furball has always appealed. So where is the F-4K with fully clickable pit and all the switches and avionics simulated....................considering that would probably take as long to dev as the entire War Thunder game did - how many millions would be waiting to snap that up with the 1000 page PDF.....................

Well the Taliban, Iraq (2003) etc have not had any air power to throw up - but there are air forces with such threat aircraft (and many other types) in existence - its not a hypothetical threat If you read the thread its totally irrelevant what is being faced now - its whats required in the future that matters. The Battleship was rendered obsolete by the aircraft carrier (even more technically advanced) - the last being built in the 40s then the concept was scrapped When something comes along and renders stealth obsolete then you can that analogy - but I don't see how you can use it here.

Same here - some weather front is bringing in arctic winds from northern Europe - bloody freezing with snow everywhere nice pics

Hows about a Falcon 1 (1987) player? Been talked about a lot this - at the end of the day people will only invest time into something they can make money from - logical really Even TK at Thirdwire - despite being an avid aviation historian is well aware that if he wants to afford to eat that realistic flight sims are not where the cash is at - in fact it seems even lite sims like this that sit somewhere between hardcore (Falcon 4 etc) and Arcade (AC etc) are not guaranteed. SF Android / iOS are cut down arcade versions of SF2 - and provide the masses with what they want - a few minutes dogfighting in a vast array of jets and a bit of fast fun - and as such has had more downloads in a few months of this than 10 years of the SF1 and SF2 series. He even made a comment that a future First Eagles patch could be likely - which tells you how well they are doing now they have gone full on Arcade. Actual hardcore combat Flight sims are for the niche only - DCS is the only dev supported one I know of - F4 BMS is done as a hobby etc - both are based on existing engines - thats the way it is........

Unfortunately its completely irrelevant and tells us nothing in regards to an actual dynamic war situation Also irrelevant - but anyway the F-16C B52 is classified as a 4th Gen jet, the other Jet rumoured to have won in an exercise was an EA-18G which is a 4.5 Gen jet

...........and that what - makes the score about 400 for 2 for the F-22 in exercises

Okay - no such thing as overkill in war - the objective is to wipe them out with minimum casualties to yourself - especially in today's political climate where casualties are not tolerated as much by the populous. The F-22A is in service - so the point of whether its needed is mute So what service did the F-106A see exactly - was that not required? Deterrent is also a useful tool. The technology developed has been built upon to go into the F-35 - it is in the US interests to keep a lead in the field for many reasons The program was capped at ~187 which is a tiny number (note 554 x F-16s written off since 1978) - it s silver bullet force - why risk one getting shot down over NK or Libya where they are not really required. The F-22A replaced the F-117A also - why do people get hung up on the notion of air combat without realising that the F-22 can get past modern double digit defences far easier than any 4th gen crap. Russia - no longer the USSR (Soviet empire) - is a lot poorer sure - but potentially the PAK-FA gives them a superior fighter than any legacy F-15s given the right avionics and engine. China are not exactly poor - see the flying prototypes for the J-20 and J-31 The USAF develops systems with the future in mind - you cant just develop something that advanced if its suddenly required in a few weeks - and you cant just assume NK will be the next war.

In the aircrafts data.ini you might be able to change: AircraftCapability=DAY_ONLY whether that works - cant remember The Migs used to just dogfight like it was day time - one reason I never bothered - but you can make the night darker and practice instrument flying at low level

Well done for sorting it. The DIANE substitute comes with its own A-6A_cockpit.ini for the 2009 stock A-6A - you should see that there is a comment at the top of the file //only [GunsightFront] section is changed So any issues - you would just want to alter that section only in your existing cockpit.ini file.

Having a quick browse - the USSR bombers have Deception jammers - its possible that HOJ might not work as well on them - as in rumours ive seen that gate stealers dont present a target for HOJ. anyway - test it against a noise jammer and see if it makes any difference.

F-16Cs can carry LAU-117s with the BRU-57/A on stations 3 and 7 The BRU-57 allows twin 1000lbs ordnance - so 2 x AGM-154s for example So its not really space, drag, or weight that is stopping this from happening - probably more of - 'whats the point'. Although ive seen photos - I doubt the BRU-57 would be used that much because it is still really draggy

Had 688 on the Amiga - no idea what was going on at the time though - remember sending out pings and getting destroyed about 10 seconds later Had all 3 - Setting First Eagles 2 to start near the target gives a bit of a Wings 3D experience - but don't get the story line sadly Didn't realise back then the F-29 was pretty much an F-5A with forward swept wings