MigBuster

Flippin A-10 experts! Don't worry - its the same solid state tech that has kept everything from the A-10 to the F-16 in the air all these years.

Doesn't appear to be defined in the files - may be a case of measuring the object relative to scale?

Think it needs more work - I'm sure the PAK-FA had a big hole in the right engine intake and flames coming out of it

JHCMS A-10 - check out the speed of slow

I'm sure many here are familiar with Bernie Fisher - respect

Nicknamed Delta Dagger, the Convair F-102, which was referred to as “The Deuce” by its aircrew, entered service in 1954. The F-102A spent most of its career operating out of Alaska, Greenland, Iceland and in other NATO and SEATO (South East Asia Treaty Organization) countries to defend their airspace from possible raids conducted by the heavily armed Tu-16 Badger, Tu-95 Bear or Myasishchev M-4 Bison aircraft, three types of Soviet bombers introduced between 1954 and 1956 . Several accounts of the pilots involved in this kind of QRA (Quick Reaction Alert) service, are reported in Ted Spitzmiller’s book Century Series The USAF Quest for air supremacy 1950-1960. As the one in which George Andre, a former F-102 pilot, explains a typical alert base: “Most featured an alert hangar at the end of the longest runway with high-speed taxiways leading on to the runway for immediate scramble. […] Generally a pilot stood alert for 8, 12 or sometimes 24 hour period. We slept with our boots on, and always could make a less than 5 minute airborne time from the sound of the scramble horn.” Even if the interceptors were guided to the target by SAGE (Semi-Automatic Ground Environment, the system that coordinated the NORAD response to a Soviet air attack by providing command guidance for ground controlled interception by air defense aircraft) or by GCI (Ground Control Intercept) Radars, obviously the pilots remained responsible for flying the aircraft and for the weapon launch, as said by Roger Pile, another former Deuce driver: “On-board radar searched for the target, but it was up to the pilot to locate it, select the appropriate armament, lock on to it and fly the plane to the release point […] The pilot was also responsible to retain the attack in spite of radar jamming, dispensing chaff and to switch to alternative modes should it be necessary.” One of these “alternatives modes” was the installation on The Deuce of a passive infrared search and track (IRST) equipment, that could be selected by the pilot to avoid the enemy bombers counter-measures. Moreover the IRST could also be used to fire the Falcon missiles against the target as explained again by Pile: “It was a softball sized sensor-head located immediately in front of the center of the windshield. […] The pilot could select IR dominant with the radar in standby, search or slaved to the IR tracker after lock-on to the target. If the radar was in standby, the target might never know you were locked on to him as the IRST was a passive receptor only and did not emit any signals. If in “search mode”, he might think you were still searching for him. If the radar was slaved to the IR head, you might get “burn-through” (pick him up on the radar) to give you an accurate distance from him and lock on to him with the radar. This would also allow the radar-guided (AIM-4A) missiles to also lock on to him and be guided to the target as well as the heat seekers (AIM-4Ds).” But even if the Delta Dagger was basically a bomber interceptor, pilots discovered that, thanks to F-102’s lower wing loading, The Deuce had an advantage (in certain parts of its flight envelope) in dogfight against its opponents. “I flew the F-102 transitioning into the F-106. I was very impressed with its turning ability. Many pilots claim their aircraft turns better than other. Of course, aerial combat will prove this, but short of that, I found another way to measure the turning capability of different aircraft and used that for comparison. That is to take the aircraft to 10,000’ at initial approach airspeed and perform a split-S as tight as possible. The F-102 would do it under 2,500’. The T-33 about 3,300’. The F-106 at 3,100’ and the F-4 at about 7,000’. I repeat the F-4 at 7,000,” pilot Bill Jowett recalled. http://theaviationist.com/2014/08/17/pilots-explain-how-the-convair-f-102-delta-dagger-intercepted-soviet-bombers-in-the-1950s/

That's just the end of support for new features. Security Patches etc will go onto at least 2020

Pain the bringing

Should be light years difference just going from low end to mid/high and 770 is pretty much an upgraded 680.

From rather simplistic comparisons and based on what TK has put into SF2 I would definitely agree - something like: MiG-17 = Hunter F.4 MiG-17F = Hunter F.6 The F-100 is a challenge in game - even without the real life limitations it had - seems to have TW comparable to the MiG-17F/ Hunter F.6 but has much higher wingloading. I actually prefer flying the F-100 in SF2 - makes you work!

So it was fine before you added the mod? Was your version of WOE at the correct patch level for the mod? Did you back up the entire folder structure before installing the Mod in case it went like this?

Israel obtained and flew a few MiG-17s and a MiG-21F-13 in the 60s - not aware they had any 19s - so they perhaps assumed the MiG-19 was a combination of the 2 regarding performance. In Ospreys Mirage and Nesher Aces, Amos Amir states the MiG-19 as being an inferior aircraft and a bad fighter - though maybe just his opinion.

I think Wrench might be joking a tad

Where I am they have just rolled out Win 7 32 after about a 6 year upgrade project - the amount of corporate apps that needed reprogramming etc - big money! I was hoping to skip 8 and go onto 9 - if its not a cloud based SAS nightmare. 8 just seems like a beta to me - Apple dont feel the need to turn OSX into a mobile OS - they realize that a desktop PC is used differently. Win 8 just says to me that Microsoft are panicking and have had no direction - just embarrassing to watch really. that being said I need a tablet for reading while I'm on the PC - so might end up with 8 yet.

Best you can do is restrict the flight surfaces in the FM at certain speeds e.g. MaxControlSpeed=230.0 LockoutSpeed=257.0 The MiG-17F has these restrictions by default - although not sure they apply to AI considering the speeds they still appear roll at. These controls don't account for any changes due to altitude. Gail Peck mentioned the flight column got very stiff between 400-450kts on the MiG-17F with powered flight surfaces - it also snap rolled due to adverse yaw. TK probably assumed most players don't have rudders so adverse yaw is not apparent in any of the stock FMs. Comparing MiG-21F-13 to MiG-19S - on paper the MiG-21 has more fuel /less thrust, is lighter, lower wingloaded, has a bigger radar and a similar static TW. The North Viets seem to suggest they preferred either the MiG-21 or MiG-17 over the MiG-19S (J-6) - the Soviets were sure quick to get rid of it.

RIP - really enjoyed his work!

Former fighter pilot Scotty Wilson gives you the low-down on flying the magnificent ‘Hun’. 1. What were you were first impressions of the F-100? I transitioned to the Hun right out of UPT after flying the T-38. The T-38 was small, sleek, white and sexy. The Hun was, by comparison, huge, camouflaged, grimy and a workhorse. Best of all -it only had one engine and one seat. It was the most beautiful thing I had ever seen! 2. When did you fly it? With which units? I flew the Hun (C/D/F) from 1973 to 1979 for about 1500 hours, mostly with the 178 TFG (Ohio) and 131 TFW (Missouri) Air Guard units. 3. What was the best thing about it? It was an “honest” airplane with excellent control harmony and good visibility. It was simple and reliable. 4. What was the worst thing about flying it? Pilots like to say the Hun invented adverse yaw, and one did have to be careful with lateral stick input at high AOA. Final approach speeds were relatively high (166 KIAS + fuel in the D; higher in the C). It was underpowered – like a lot of the early Century-Series airplanes – and we had two power settings: “not enough” (military power); and “just okay” (afterburner). It was hard to fly really well. 5. Was it an effective weapon system? I never flew the Hun in combat, so I’m not the best one to ask. I have several friends who flew as “Misty FACs” (Forward Air Controller, a very dangerous mission) in South East Asia; I never heard them say a bad thing about the plane. In training missions, it was a stable bomb and gun platform. 6. Did you ever fly mock dogfights against any other types, what was this like and which types were the most challenging? We were commonly called-upon to do duty as MiG-15/17/19 simulators and as training partners in DACT with more advanced fighters such as the F-4, F-14 and F-15. We often flew “canned” scenarios or profiles specific to another unit’s training requirements. “Huge, camouflaged and grimy…the most beautiful thing I had ever seen!” Occasionally, we’d get an opportunity to do anything we wanted. A “clean” Hun – even the heavier D model – could climb to above 45,000 and get up to Mach 1.3 in a shallow dive. No one looked for us up that high, and we could usually engage from above unseen – the first time. We could generally win a 1-vs-1 guns-only or rear-aspect missile fight against a hard-winged F-4 and break even against a slatted E, unless the Phantom pilot was very good (Ron Keys comes to mind) and didn’t fight our fight. Same with the F-14. Best tactic was to go single-circle, co-plane. We’d give up knots for angles and out-rate the other guy, who would honor your nose position and become defensive immediately. (I have 2000 hours in F-4C/D/E and know those airplanes pretty well.) The F-15 was a superior airplane in every respect and it was rare you got the advantage on one unless the pilot was a doofus (and there were a few). 7. What three words best describe the F-100? Honest, reliable, predictable. 8. What was your most memorable flight in a F-100? 14 hours in the cockpit / 12 hours flight time during a winter-time redeployment from Ramstein AB Germany to Richards-Gebaur AFB, Missouri. We strapped in and started-up, then shut-down and waited in the cockpit while our tankers at RAF Mildenhall fixed a problem. After we got airborne and mid-way across the Atlantic both tankers lost their drogues (equipment, not pilot error). We found another tanker – this one scrambled out of Canada – using UHF-ADF and Air-to-Air TACAN while IMC in 1 NM visibility conditions. When we finally joined with two more tankers we flew…and flew…and continued flying westward because the weather at every AFB east of the Mississippi was below landing minimums. (The F-100D didn’t have ILS at the time.) I don’t think we ever saw groundspeeds in excess of 360 knots the entire route. Only if you have worn the old-style poopy suit* can you appreciate how enjoyable the last four hours of that flight was like. http://hushkit.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/f-100-super-sabre-a-fighter-pilots-perspective/

If you’re in the market for a Harrier jet, look no further; a Red Deer man is selling one for a cool $1.5 million. But the way he’s chosen to sell the jet is somewhat less-than-traditional. He’s taken out an ad on Kijiji. http://globalnews.ca/news/1501830/weve-heard-from-some-dodgy-characters-red-deer-man-selling-1-5-million-jet-on-kijiji/

Long story short - we have put a lot of money into F-35 so that's what will be going on them basically.

You would need to create the same mod folder structure and move the files over. Because that is WOV 2008?? - you would have to account for the many changes in SF2 - so if you wanted it to work properly in SF2 you might have to replace a lot of the old ini files and add missing statements. I think one reason they had to stay with 2008 was because of the things removed in SF2 that some missions depend on - so you might have to alter missions to account for this.

Nice take off - could have gone either way

Sounds about right!