MigBuster

Already in consideration - if it ever happens

The future is here (with lots of swearing and general weirdness) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsXqod7Ru-c http://steamcommunity.com/app/295810/reviews/?browsefilter=toprated

Where are you running it from? Are you running it as ADMIN?

Examples:

You would still need the specific Weapons editor exe for 2008 - are you using one that came with it? WeaponEditor_022008(SP5).zip

only £5.94 - assume Strategy First can still put it up legally ?

There is HUD symbology with either those or the firestreaks - been a while would need to check.

Heres how to launch a paper plane with laser guided precision

Deterrents don't do much in peace time either Its only a conventional deterrent though - In WW3 I expect it has the amazing capability to take off and fly away if not caught in the blast.

JAS-39 is a good aircraft and countries will obtain jets like that who cant afford or don't have access to the F-35. Aus/Canada feel the F-35 is the best for them and it will allow them to integrate easier with close allies such as the UK & US.

I just love public perception - remember a time when we sent a force to the South Atlantic that included slow, heavily outnumbered short legged SHARs that could only carry 2 x AIM-9s each. - not saying it was ideal - but that aerial combat includes a lot of factors. From Block 4 the F-35 is supposed to be able to carry 6 x AIM-120 internally - will see if that happens......

If you actually look and compare the shaping on the 35 to the 22 there is actually quite a bit there - even the cylinder nozzle has LO properties ( See F-16 LOAN) - so I would happily say its true Stealth Fighter - considering 80% of VLO is supposed to be shaping. You are way off - lets look at potential range shall we F-35A internal fuel = 18,250 lbs USL Thrust Mil = 25,000 lbs F-15E Internal fuel = 18,642 lbs (with CFTs) USL Thrust Mil = 35,600 lbs Now consider the 35 can be clean and still be useful - please tell us how you are coming to the conclusion of poor endurance!! If you had done any research into the F-35 you would see how ludicrous the above statement is - trust me its more than adequate for A-A. Potentially true on cost grounds - but debate-full as the costs are rarely clear or known. You could argue whats the point of wasting money on an air force if it retains obsolete aircraft with outdated tactics - for one thing the pilots would drop a legacy for F-35 without blinking. btw both of these countries have contributed to international conflicts recently (not air policing) - so you have no argument.

Its probably not best to assume total doom based on wild speculation of RCS figures. I would agree an F-35 might not be the first in on a DEAD mission - but thats not related to poor stealth - more to do with maybe using some tactics to negate the opposition for example. http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/mald/

Looking at the manuals - The A-D does have mechanical linkages that provide backup control yes. The E/F does not have mech links though - that relies on quad redundancy and distributed cabling & actuators to get by. Actually not too sure on the F-35 regarding mech back up - last I saw it was just using a triple redundant network based on a 2008 variant of Firewire

I wouldn't worry about how it flies - from what is publicly available the F-35 is very close to the FA-18 regarding flight performance. Like the FA-18 its only pitch unstable (not the case with the F-117) and is also dependent on computers to keep it flying. Getting hit by a bird - well it would do damage depending where it was hit - be no different to any other Jet - apart from damaging any coating. Could it survive damage - e.g. getting hit by a MANPAD? - sure depends where it hits not just the A-10 has made it back - but its also proven it only takes 1 to down any jet.

Last message I saw was they hadn't given up - even though LP don't exist anymore as of about 2010 - but they could have put about 4 years into what ever it was they were doing - wonders what happened to that...........

Nearly right - Lead Pursuit went the commercial route with Allied Force - although not sure if any of their work ever made it to BMS - ED-1 sometimes posts but that's about it. DCS A-10C was also off the back of an ANG contract AFAIK - which is why I am thinking FA-18C might not be to the same level unless another C operator has asked for a desktop sim.

People always want more and push and push - that's why you end up with Hardcore. Where do you draw the boundary?? well TK was happy where he was which was understandable - but for those who have been flying years they often want more of this and that. FC3 is exactly the level you need - about Falcon 4.0 1998 level The BMS Falcon F-16 and DCS A-10C are almost pure simulators regarding avionics and flight model and you can learn so much if you want - also its a great challenge having to deal with setting up avionics on top of everything else in combat scenarios personally.

Flying into combat with Nav lights on? - something I do rather well in DCS http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9v8mPGBpw1M

Interesting piece thanks for posting. And a Homage to public perception of WW1 I heard that it started when a bloke called Archie Duke shot an ostrich 'cause he was hungry.

BeachAV8R made them - hes the guy who's done a few AARs lately.

You could expect Boeing employees to try and save their jobs despite sounding a tad desperate - "ours has a HMS too" ! Australia has actually committed to 72 - probably because after seeing the far superior capability and relative combat performance over the SH you would never go back. http://https://airforce.gov.au/Technology/Future-Acquisitions/F-35A-Lightning-II/?RAAF-ZRnYQhJUh1u0e44uR32olOT1rt+Ym4K3 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-23/australia-commits-to-buying-58-more-f-35-joint-strike-fighters.html

CAT file ext: http://www.thirdwire.com/downloads_tools.htm

Baltic Police 2014 NATO Near Edwards AFB 2014 Lockheed Martin

If you mean add new avionics - well that should be simple once we get the source code and some programmers. What avionics would you want in SF? - DCS type ones?