Svetlin

I am probably getting over-obsessed with the visual movement of the control surfaces. Having watched several videos of the actual aircraft (not DCS videos that one can find plenty of), I am getting to a few conclusions about the way the canards work on the Su-33. 1. I did not come across any video proving, that the canards are actually used for roll control. In fact, a video of the Su-33 during a pre-flight check shows the rear horizontal stabilizers moving in different directions to provide roll control, but the canards remain in a fixed position. So, for me it is no roll control action of the canards. 2. A video of an actual Su-33 performing a high-angle of attack manoeuvre after an aborted landing aboard the Kuznetsov shows the canards moving downward as if to prevent the nose of the aircraft going any higher, while at the same time the rear horizontal stibilizers remain in a neutral position. I am not sure, but that may be an automatic movement of the canards, related to the angle of attack of the aircraft. 3. I do not have acess to an actual flight manual for the Su-33, but the DCS one indicates canard deflection from +3.5 degrees to -51.5 degrees. Videos of the actual aircraft support that information, though it is not possile to measure the exact angles of deflection. So, for me MaxDeflection=35 and MinDeflection=-35 are not correct. I have not figured out yet how to replicate point 2 above, but for points 1 and 3 these entries work: [CanardL] SystemType=CONTROL_SURFACE InputName=PITCH_CONTROL MovingSurface=TRUE MaxDeflection=-5.5 MinDeflection=51.5 ControlRate=2.0 ModelNodeName=LeftCanard ReverseModelOrientation=FALSE SecondaryInputName= SecondaryInputFactor=-1.0 MaxControlSpeed=416.0 [CanardR] SystemType=CONTROL_SURFACE InputName=PITCH_CONTROL MovingSurface=TRUE MaxDeflection=-5.5 MinDeflection=51.5 ControlRate=2.0 ModelNodeName=RightCanard ReverseModelOrientation=FALSE SecondaryInputName= SecondaryInputFactor=1.0 MaxControlSpeed=416.0 I have deliberately entered MaxDeflection=-5.5 instead of -3.5 (as the DCS manual suggest). With MaxDeflection=-3.5 the movement of the canard is nearly invisible and MaxDeflection=-5.5 results in better visual replication of the actual aircraft. If anyone knows how to implement point 2 above, I would greatly appreciate sharing the required entries.

Big time thank you to the team, it's great to have a good looking and legit Su-33 finally. Could be just in my install, but I think the control surfaces visually move opposite to the controller input. The plane itself is flying correctly, so it is just a visual issue with the control surfaces. I was able to fix it for my install, so in case someone else is observing the same, here is the solution that worked for me: // Control surfaces: [LeftStabilizer] SystemType=CONTROL_SURFACE InputName=PITCH_CONTROL MovingSurface=TRUE MaxDeflection=20 MinDeflection=-35 ControlRate=2.0 ModelNodeName=ElevatorL ReverseModelOrientation=FALSE <--- Change that to TRUE SecondaryInputName=ROLL_CONTROL SecondaryInputFactor=0.41 MaxControlSpeed=416.0 [RightStabilizer] SystemType=CONTROL_SURFACE InputName=PITCH_CONTROL MovingSurface=TRUE MaxDeflection=20 MinDeflection=-35 ControlRate=2.0 ModelNodeName=ElevatorR ReverseModelOrientation=FALSE <--- Change that to TRUE SecondaryInputName=ROLL_CONTROL SecondaryInputFactor=-0.41 MaxControlSpeed=416.0 [LeftAileron] SystemType=CONTROL_SURFACE InputName=ROLL_CONTROL RotationAxis=X-AXIS MaxDeflection=25.0 MinDeflection=-17.5 CDdc=0.0191 Cldc=0.0495 Cndc=-0.0007 CldcAlphaTableNumData=8 CldcAlphaTableDeltaX=4.00 CldcAlphaTableStartX=-28.00 CldcAlphaTableData=0.120,0.877,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,0.877,0.120 CndcAlphaTableNumData=8 CndcAlphaTableDeltaX=4.00 CndcAlphaTableStartX=-28.00 CndcAlphaTableData=1.432,1.360,1.288,1.216,1.144,1.072,1.000,0.928,1.000,1.072,1.144,1.216,1.288,1.360,1.432 ControlRate=2.0 ModelNodeName=LeftAileron ReverseModelOrientation=FALSE <--- Change that to TRUE SecondaryInputName=ROLL_TRIM_CONTROL SecondaryInputFactor=0.4 MaxControlSpeed=205.8 [RightAileron] SystemType=CONTROL_SURFACE InputName=ROLL_CONTROL RotationAxis=X-AXIS MaxDeflection=25.0 MinDeflection=-17.5 CDdc=0.0191 Cldc=0.0495 Cndc=-0.0007 CldcAlphaTableNumData=8 CldcAlphaTableDeltaX=4.00 CldcAlphaTableStartX=-28.00 CldcAlphaTableData=0.120,0.877,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,1.000,0.877,0.120 CndcAlphaTableNumData=8 CndcAlphaTableDeltaX=4.00 CndcAlphaTableStartX=-28.00 CndcAlphaTableData=1.432,1.360,1.288,1.216,1.144,1.072,1.000,0.928,1.000,1.072,1.144,1.216,1.288,1.360,1.432 ControlRate=2.0 ModelNodeName=RightAileron ReverseModelOrientation=TRUE <--- Change that to FALSE SecondaryInputName=ROLL_TRIM_CONTROL SecondaryInputFactor=-0.4 MaxControlSpeed=205.8 [CanardL] SystemType=CONTROL_SURFACE InputName=ROLL_CONTROL MovingSurface=TRUE MaxDeflection=35 MinDeflection=-35 ControlRate=2.0 ModelNodeName=LeftCanard ReverseModelOrientation=FALSE <--- Change that to TRUE SecondaryInputName=PITCH_CONTROL SecondaryInputFactor=1.0 <--- Change that to -1.0 MaxControlSpeed=416.0 [CanardR] SystemType=CONTROL_SURFACE InputName=ROLL_CONTROL MovingSurface=TRUE MaxDeflection=35 MinDeflection=-35 ControlRate=2.0 ModelNodeName=RightCanard ReverseModelOrientation=TRUE <--- Change that to FALSE SecondaryInputName=PITCH_CONTROL SecondaryInputFactor=-1.0 <--- Change that to 1.0 MaxControlSpeed=416.0

Here is one with MiG-29s of the Bulgarian Air Force dating back some 10-15 years ago: The pilot talking and wearing an all-white helmet with sun shades lifted is the current President of Bulgaria, who used to be a MiG-21 and then a MiG-29 pilot. Sadly both the audio and the subtitles are in Bulgarian. Practically, the video represents a MiG-29 attack on an enemy aircraft, starting with a R-27 long-range missile, then a R-73 or a R-60 short-range missile and lastly an attack with the gun.

Probably because it is close to impossible to find a picture of the Corsair II with fully clean wings. I have come across pictures with 2 pylons removed, one on each wing, but not all at the same time. Here are a couple of pictures I consider to be popular with the middle pylons removed: Note, that in the second picture, the innermost pylon is still there despite being empty. May be a drop tank was hanging there and was dropped before the picture was taken, who knows... I would say that considering the lack of pictures of Corsairs II without pylons, TK decided to represent the aircraft with pylons on at all times.

EricJ, would it be possible to share a verison of files SHbody.jpg and SHWing.jpg from the USNTPS skin without the numbers 00 ot it? I would like to add these as decals and thus get all 4 aircraft represented - 00, 01, 02 and 03. Thank you in advance.

United States Naval Test Pilot School Thank you for the skin, EricJ

Hi EricJ, have you considered making the USNTPS skin for the F/A-18F? I have come across pictures of just 4 aircraft in that scheme, numbered 00, 01, 02, 03 (00 is in the picture above).

@ trimmermedal833 Which stock weapon models are you looking to improve? Chances are we may already have better models of these weapons from our great modders here at CA. Have you checked the various weapons packs and standalone weapons in the downloads section? I myself hardly ever use the stock weapons anymore, considering we have much higher quality replacements.

1949 - Su-15 (first fighter with that designation, not to be confused with the serial Su-15 from 1963) 2000 - X-32 If we ignored that fact that the Su-15 was designed and first flew in the Soviet Union in 1949, while the X-32 was designed and first flew in the USA in 2000, these look to me just like grand-grandpa and grand-grandson

Hm, that's an odd post. Frist, please make sure you are installing the mod correctly. I do not have any problem with it in my install. On a second note, did you see that the mod was released on January 30th, 2023? Considering the age of the game, this mod is still hot out of the oven. So, not sure what you have in mind when asking if it is still updated for SF2...

Perhaps because TK wanted to add some features at some point, but never got around to actually doing it...

One more suggestion, if I may - KAI T-50 (TA-50) (F/A-50)

I believe bazillius means that if we are to choose between trainers and prototype aircraft and X planes, then trainers should win the vote and I agree with him on that point. I also agree that in the end the winner should not be some obscure model with limited use, but one that will be interesting and usefull to most members here. Also I would vote for a model, that can be made accurate with minimum compromise within the available resources. Let's take the Su-34 as an example. I would love to have it in game, but first we have the cockpit issue - a Su-34 with F-111 or B-1B cockpit - no, thanks, I'd rather have something else. Then we also have the various pylon and rail taypes used on the Su-34 for A2A, A2G missiles, bombs, drop tanks, etc. I doubt many modders would be interested and would spend the time needed to model all correct pylons and rails for the Su-34 and having bombs loaded on missile rails or missiles on bomb pylons is a no-go for me. In other words, I would perefer something less complicated, but accurately modeled, than something very complicated, but inaccurate or highly compromised.

Hi, EricJ, yes, I am aware of the SFP1 MiG-23UB, however it has issues and is not on par even with the stock TW MiG-23s. Same with the SFP1 MiG-21UM.

I would love to see more 2-seater trainer aircraft. So, Hawker Hunter T7/T8 (finding a suitable cockpit from what is already available might be an issue with this one), Grumman F9F-8T, 2-seater EurofighterTyphoon, MiG-21U/US/UM, MiG-23U/UB, CASA C-101. I would be happy to see anyone of these.

There are several screenshots, published here on CA by yakarov79, indicating he has been working on a TAV-8B for a while already.

Peoples Republic of Bulgaria Air Force MiG-21M 1980s style heading to intercept

alexis99, I do not have this problem in my install and I have not modified the Rafale in any way. Could it be that you are using a different Damocles pod, not the one that came with the mod? The Damocles pod is built into the aircraft model, so for it to work properly, you need to use the weapon/pod from the file.

Ravenclaw is the best person to go to as usual. He has created the excellent 275-gal drop tank, built into the NF-5A model by Sophocles. Perhaps you could talk with Ravenclaw, he surely has the dimensions since he has already created a model of the drop tank. Having personally seen how generous Ravenclaw is, I would not be surprised if he decides to save you time and provides you the ready model of the tank to incorporate into the Mirage F1.

Nose gear is different too - single wheel on the Su-27UB and 2 wheels on the Su-30. The number of pylons under the wings is also different - Su-27UB does not have the innermost pylons (see the picture below, the innermost pylons in the Su-30 drawing are loaded with red Kh-29 missiles):

Well, these are definitely F-5 275 gal drop tanks: The fact that all pictures from various angles represent just 1 airframe (3-6403) supports the theory that this could be just an experiment. I was unable to find pictures of other airframes fitted with such tanks. On the other hand fitting F-5 drop tanks to Mirage F1 in Iran makes a lot of sense considering how much IRIAF is exploiting the F-5 models, even to the extent of making their own variants - Azarakhsh, Saeqeh and Saeqeh-2. I would vote to implement both types, so players could choose on their own what to fit during a mission. In my opinion that would not be what-if territory. Can't wait for the Mirage F-1CT though, I am so happy it is its turn now.

For the NAVY F-4s, you will not find a better drop tank than the one, which is built into the stock models. All other drop tanks, that come from one of the weapon packs are actually older and not much of an improvement. Same stands for the stock USAF F-4C/D. Now, for the F-4E variants we are lucky to have the Ravenclaw's models and these come with excellent built-in drop tanks (could it be otherwise with a Ravenclaw's model!?).

MiG-21MF with APU-13U launch rails for the R-3R missiles, oh I do like that! Nice touch there.

I would love to see and fly in SF2 a better MiG-21U/US/UM model than the one available.

I guess a very brief description of the differences would be that provided in Wikipedia for EQ-6 - new Sherloc digital RWR, new Cyrano IV-SP1 radar, and capable of carrying two Exocet missiles at once. 30 built Mirage F1EQ-5 is capable of carrying a single Exocet under the fuselage. Other sources indicate Cyrano IV-MR radar with terrain avoidance capability for the EQ-6. An interesting piece of information on the EQ-6, that I came across, is that back in 1989 those were equipped with rails to carry and launch Kh-29L soviet/russian laser guided A2G missiles. On a different note, I am happy to see new Mirage F1 variants with later cockpits and more recce, ECM, etc. pods included in the weapons list, so I hope we are close to the moment when it will be time for updated Mirage F1CT/CR versions.