Snailman

Oh... sorry I should have been more specific. it's not about the plane, but the payload objects itself. Weapons... Missiles. So what would be the drag of a missile with spherical head or conical or pointed.. or a flat cylinder like bomb... and retarded/para bombs use the drag value multiplied by the drag multiplier. But it can be as high as 100 if the base value is nothing

Yea I remember him! Great pilot

I'n not sure about the Il-102. its more like a mock up project. About cannon, see GSh-6-30 (Similar of AK-630 system mounted on soviet warships from 1968) It was developed from the GSh-6-23 23mm Gatling gun which had a ROF of 10000 (!!!). Another note, soviet multi barreled guns were not electric but gas blow-back type. This means they had much faster spin-up time and were usable without electricity Edit. thx Centurion)) http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/vokinburt/13300152/644377/644377_original.jpg https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/425335_465535930197958_546719148_n.jpg 1. ГШ-7.62 - Ка-29 2. ГШ-6-23 - МиГ-31 и Су-24 3. ГШ-6-30 - МиГ-27 4. ГШ-6-30K - АК-630 5. 2A7 - Шилка 6. 2A42 - БМП-2 и Ка-50 7. 2A38M - Тунгуска, Панцирь 8. 2A72 - БМП-3 и БТР-80А 9. ГШ-30-1 - Су-27 и МиГ-29

Sure I also has such, a truck portable helipad. It even moves. I plan to release it soon.

How true. We must resist being fanatized... serving the homeland does not mean we have to be blind, deaf or fool... patriotism means you have to be faithful to your nation at the first place, even against the government if it betrays you.

Of course the GAU-8 is superior, but I'm sure the GSh-2-30 (or the 6-30 on MiG-27) can do a similar job. Add to that starting with Su-25T there is the Vikhr ATGMs + other AGMs with day and night vision. The design concept however was in fact different thats true. Edit GAU-8 has a penetration of 69 at 500m, 38 at 1000... I guess with uranium shells. The GSh series bullets has very few AP data available... When fired from a different gun, penetration may vary. What I found is an AP of 25mm/1000m with regular AP tracer and 32mm with tungsten core. About ROF, 3900 vs 3000 (or 4600+ in case of Gsh-6-30) also not a big difference. The A-10's big advantage is the high ammo capacity for it's gun

Yes!! )))) I thought about linking that myself... This is my favourite)) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dnfm35sUrfk

Su-25 or the Su-25T ... You can find a Su-25 it in the excellent "NATO Fighters" large mod.

Yep I know the team doing the MiG-21 DCS... hungarians))) They gave me info on the ASP-PFD gunsight)

That's exactly what needs to be done, but first we have to come up with a reasonable concept and plan. Can't just call him without concrete offer...

http://io.ua/10185547u Ершы шы This is what you need. 300+ photoes from museum in Poltava. My friend sent the link http://spotters.net.ua/file/?id=5764&size=large http://spotters.net.ua/file/?id=5765&size=large http://www.airforce.ru/aircraft/miscellaneous/ejectionseats/index.htm

I have three full books on the Tu-22, I can give them all, but not sure if they are good enough for you...

I though it is all about to convince him to continue development on community funding. Because most of us suppose that he abandoned it because of financial reasons. It is not about asking him (completely pointless and hopeless to ask him anything), but to pay him to continue and make new features. Maybe even SF3. "Money speaks, dogs bark." Point 1, about bugfixes and DLC is not serious enough as an offer... why to pay him to fix bugs and make us new DLC planes - you can see most people already started DLC asking instead of the original topic about community funding.. Point 2, completely without any chance TK will never give out his code, unless we may want to buy the whole game all together with rights and so. And what we would get in this case anyway? A source code and maybe some development progs... Then we have to hire a team ourselves to discover the entire code... and try to rewrite and add.. Horribly hard work. Ask a coder, how easy is to fiddle into, understand and modify an entire game code which was written by someone else... Believe me I was in a freeware game development team in an exactly same situation. Even if you have the source code it is a real pain in the a$$ to modify someone else's work. You fix a bug and create three. Because you dont know why the original programmer did things way he did. Almost better to write a new one from scratch. So that is why better to fund (hire) TK to improve his own game than to beg for code (pointless) or to buy him out (and hire others to do it) or to come up with with little modications and fixes not serious enough for TK to listen Edit: And, with all respect, please, separate the topic of wishes into game development ideas and DLC planes wishes. Both are important as it is also a good idea to poll for DLC planes and handle it as a separate offer. Or I can think about modding tools like FM Editor as DLC. But please make it separate from the things mentioned above because it's a different viewpoint and people can get confused.

Exactly that was the original initiative of this topic...

Most mods support July 2012... When I asked a similar question they answered May 2013.. So I could recommend that. But as Migbuster said check each addon in their readme if they require a specific version.

Then read back... This thread was NOT about to pay TK to fix this/that, a new patch or to give us yet another payable DLC plane. It was about getting SF into a community funded future development with features we would like to see. SF3 even. From our money. I proposed the collection of thoughts and the poll on that in post #3. All is said. About ASW... before you call me an idiot look into DLLs and inis, ASW mission type already exist in the game, that points out an intended development path. And in another topic we were already discussed ASW not long ago. This is not without a prelude. I wrote down everything that came to my mind or other mentioned to me during the time. Mostly modder related, problematic stuff we encountered. EDIT We are the ones who create the DLC... We already have 1200+ "DLC planes". And DLC effects... Stary's stuff. Map's. Full battlefields... What we need the code support, modding support, and the continued development of the main game. Why to ask for stuff we can do (better)?

OK... so my shortened new features list. Ready the pills.... Game Features - ASW code. Sonar (like) detection support. - Negative "altitude". Submarines and ships set to run "at depth". - Torpedo weapon type (set to run in "negative altitude" - under water) - Draught. Ship object type attribute. Eg. Draught=-10.0 (in meters) default depth for ship object in "negative alt". It could be decreased for damage effect, or in case its a submarine it set minimum depth. - Extra mission types - OR edittable ones. (FAC, ASW, Naval_search, Interdiction, whatever else) - Rescue mission type (this one includes pick-up target at waypoint, and must return base for success) - Fixed ballistics for artillery and naval guns. - Improved ground combat features and AI - New object type to separate naval and land vehicles (that would fix multi weapon platforms) - Ground object lights. (such as carrier landing lights...) - Directional (spot) type light source support (searchlights, headlights, landing lights) - Ground object animation support (gear shock, rotating radar, moving legs or stances for inf) - Floatplane support. Landing gear, IsFloat=TRUE - New Formation types - OR editable ones. - Mixed Formation types - (eg Tank company and attached SPAA) - Helicopter Flight Model with AI support - VTOL AI support (may be as part of the Heli FM) - Ground search and attack capable radar. Lock and guidance on ground contacts. - Target linking via usable network (radar sonar radio) - built in or external pod. Eg, fire control helicopter can fire ASM from ship or observation plane can fire artillery, infantry can mark target for CAS. - Player usable turret gun. Not too difficult, i mean selectability like other weapons. Like I select a turret gun from weapon list and fire it (if within arc) on the locked target. - Switchable turret gunner (auxiliary function to turn AI gunner on/off when player wants to handle. Heli chin guns etc) - Red side avionics support. - Re introduce multiplayer - Improved AI behavior and controls over team mates. Includes non leader positions. - Carrier parking space parameters (Plane type, skin, probability) for each separate places - Ground units placement on carrier deck (on surface of deck area deck.lod) similar fashion to planes - Weapon type CGR rack - MER up to 12 weapon places, - Passive radar guidance type - Weapon attribute: Terrain following (like sea skimming, but radar altitude, not barometric... lol) for cruise missiles) - Gun pods supporting multiple guns (multiple muzzle flash effect etc) - Guided missile pods. (AA, AT) Supporting discarding tube covers (like rocket pods) - Secondary control surface attribute to engines (vectored thrust) - Parachuting pilot (+seat) - view stays with ejected pilot, not with empty plane - Neutral side (purple or light blue) for civilian activity. Passenger planes, ships, etc. - Interactive radio - new menu item - Target. Radio message/order to the selected target (friendly-neutral-enemy alike). Request ID, Force land, Cease fire etc. It can be used together with target link feature (see above) Modder support - FM Editor

I'm going to post my list again in the other topic. Ummm maybe the topic name does not really fit... Not DLC but new game features instead, we are more like asking for a new game version than plug in content. It seems to me

"Always those negative rays... have a faith, baby" - Oddball, Kelly's Heroes Like I said, if he's reasons are monetary - then a serious offer would make him talk. If not because he's offended or something, then he won't talk at all - but at least we tried.

Not really DLC flyable we need.... we have all planes we want. Or we can do those ourselves. What we need is code support. Modder background! Features added... we can use. ASW... (he thought about it, the mission type is there) FAC, Ship combat working, ground combat improved... ground radars, player usable turret gun, helicopter FM, soviet side avionics support... etc etc. not to mention multiplayer. OR to unlock new fields to mod, like AI behavior, Formations, Mission types (!), Flight model (!) whatever we cannot really mod or with great difficulty.

Woww.... that's really fantastic!!!

I remember from my childhood such things... KP model kits from Chechslovakia... and bagged kits from USSR.. dirt cheap.. Now? Full extra kits cost a fortune... Plus EU customs tax.. I stopped ebaying them years ago (( Model shops all got broke.. maybe one or two in the city or 2.5 million

Between 80 and 95... Ships cannot be the cause.. Maybe a plane (or the lack of?)... but which... and why. On the red side, when I set the mission parameters, and I want to enter the QMB with mission type Intercept set, the game crashes. Most interesting because I don't have blue side plane addons in this era (just the Skyraider for Nam) but I do have red side planes which show up even if red side has no carrier generated. On blue side, no such "phantom" planes... if there is no USN carrier, the air is empty, I dont have targets... Edit: I tried with a completely empty addon folder with only the flyable Yak38... Red side intercept still crashes [Fault Module Name: SingleMission.DLL]. Game still adds stock MiG-23MLDs and Mig-21bis to red side. And nothing to the blue side. About 80% of the cases there are no blue side aircraft at all. Maybe you have a file or something I do not have and it's not in the stock game either?

Stock is proper enough? All carriers are stock (except my Kiev (82)) All US Navy planes are stock. I have my Yak-38 and 41M modded. You yourself recommend them in the desription. So which are improper ships and planes that cause crash?

Yes, regarding the fleet random generation it was the water map... I made a new one myself, and it is working so so. But now there are other problems. - As red side each time I want to create an Intercept mission, the game crashes to desktop. - The mission builder does generate Red side land based planes starting and ending in the air... It has to otherwise the mission would be pointless without enemy planes when the generator places no enemy carrier... and it happens quite often. - When no Blue side carrier exists, then there is no Blue aircraft at all, so the above "feature" may be one sided only... - There has to be Naval_search plane allowed even if land based as it is somehow a requirement to cruise_missile type mission the game generates ... - And yes, sometimes a blue amphib group is generated next to the Red CVBG... But it happened in IcelandNA also if I remember.