Svetlin

The AGM-84E has Walleye optical guidance system and a Maverick data-link, that's why it should be EOGR, not CGR.

ianh755, the pylon came with this mod: http://combatace.com/files/file/6012-mig-21pfm-modifications/ I cannot promise you perfect fit, but if you are looking for a relatively simple shape, than that's an option for you.

ianh755, there is a single pylon mod made to be centerline pylon for the MiG-21PF/PFM. While not an exact match for the real thing shape-wise, I trust it will be good enough in size and will not look bad at all after proper skinning. Unfortunately I cannot remember exactly which mod that pylon came with. All I remember now is it came first for the SF1 series. I definitely have it in my weapons folder though.

Very nice, thanks!

A new model is needed to correctly represent the JAS-39E/F. Besides the additional pylons, the main landing gear is also rather different with the gear wells removed from the fuselage and placed in the section where the wing flows into the fuselage, reconstructed to allow more fuel on board and free space for those additional pylons under the fuselage.

It's got to be another model of the Mk77 napalm tank, cause the one in the weapons pack does not have a skin and I could not find the LOD calling for any image file for a skin.

ravenclaw, I realize getting the single piece windscreen model finished could be a very low priority if any at all for you, but I trust many CA members will enjoy it. Therefore, could you please direct me what kind of information you would need to select a proper F-4E model? So far I know the serial numbers of the aircraft, so the year of production is there as well (1968 - 4 of these and 1969 -1), I have the range of production batches/series and I know that the single piece windscreen F-4E were converted from F-4E with standard windscreen round 1985. Below is also a screenshot I found in another forum.

ravenclaw, another greatly appreciated masterpiece. Do you remember the F-4E model with the single piece windscreen that you did after my enquiry in the German forum? Will it be released in a separate pack? P.S. I will not be able to install and fly this pack for several hours or even a day, so I do apologize if the model is already included, I just did not see it listed.

Veltro, could you raise the instrument panel a bit higher, may be to the level of the nose where the cockpit windscreen starts, so it is visible when looking at the aircraft from the side? Now it seems a bit too low in the cockpit, as if the pilot need to kneel down to look at it or as if there is no instrument panel at all.

In the late 1950s there were experiments in USA with wing-clipping (but mostly if not entirely on triangular/delta wings) as scientists were looking to reduce drag and therefore increase speed and/or range of the object. I wonder if by clipping the wings of the Bullpup, the producer might have been looking to achieve aerodynamic benefit?

F-2A is WIP by Dels F-2B - so far no one has mentioned to be working on one Enough off-topic from me, I am sorry about that, DoctorWho Excellent job on the JASDF F/A-16FJ Block 65.

Thanks, EricJ

OK, I think I found the problem - file EA-18G_Avionics.ini is missing. I copied FA-18F_Avionics.ini, did the necessary edit to EA-18G.ini and no game crash. Brain32, thank you for the attention, if you could post here the file EA-18G_Avionics.ini, I would appreciate it. I am not sure if I am getting to see the full beauty of your work on the Growler pit using the F avionics.ini.

I am having a problem with the Growler. When I try to fly it in both SF2E and SF2NA (both patched ot the latest level), the game loads to 100%, then I am getting a black screen and the game crashes. I am not having this problem with the E and F. I also did not have this problem with the Growler from previous versions of the pack. So I wonder if this is cockpit-related issue, afterall the cockpit is the only major novelty in the latest version of the Growler? I did look for clues in the read-me files, but alas.

Good work overall and thanks for sharing with the community, just the model seems to be too big in scale.

Yep, F3 templates are posted here: http://combatace.com/files/file/8304-tornado-f3-layered-templates/

FM for the MiG-23PD might be tricky. Copy/paste from Harrier or F-35B, or Yak-38 might not work as they were meant to hover for vertical landing and use trust to turn in the air when the normal control surfaces have no effect at low speed. The MiG-23PD was just a STOL aircraft test-bed, i.e. vertical take-off and landing were not possible. I am thinking of FM from MiG-21 with additional lift engine/s. I have not read detailed comments on the flight characteristics of the MiG-23PD and have not compared wing area, weight and trust with the MiG-21 to get an idea which one was more maneuverable though. I wonder if it would be possible to control the trust of the lift engines with the trust-vector-control input and not with the throttle control input and keep the trust direction always downwards? Theoretically, this way if no trust-vector control is applied, the aircraft will have normal take-off and landing characteristics (i.e. just flaps-assisted). If trust-vector control is applied, the aircraft will get extra lift, while keeping the forward speed independently increasing or decreasing as per the current throttle setting. If the lift engines intake cover is animated to work together with the flaps and the STOL characteristics are represented by increased "flaps-down" effect, then we will not have the possibility for standard take-off (i.e. without the use of lift engines).

2-seater Harrier would be great

This one is slightly longer than necessary, missing 1 (for the AJ-37) or 2 (for the JA-37) tail fins, but that is the closest match in general looks I was able to find among existing models. It is the J-10 wing tank, that came with Erwin_Hans's J-10 here at CA. If I am not mistaken, it is still in the downloads section.

How about this:

Pictures/computer graphics of the JAGM show these loaded on aircraft on triple launchers instead of quadruple. May be quadruple launchers are not strong enough to sustain high speed and G-forces. Just a note, I know we are in the what-if forum