Svetlin

On this day back in 1989 the Bulgarian Air Force received its first and second MiG-29s, which both happened to be MiG-29UB (izd. 9-51A) and received board numbers 01 and 02 respectively. Later board 01 was re-numbered to 11 and was lost in 2011 due to a crash. It was a result of premature rotation and gear retraction on take-off, which caused damage to the centerline drop tank, leakage of fuel and fire. The pilots managed to gain altitude, point the aircraft into a safe direction, where it would not crash into inhabited places and successfully ejected. First touch-down on Bulgarian soil (or should I say tarmac):

A very sad day for the Bulgarian Air Force. At 00.45h LT today a MiG-29A (9-12) of the BuAF disappeared from radar over the Black Sea during a night training mission. The crash site has been located with oil/fuel spills on the surface of the sea and small debris indicating the crash. The pilot is still missing, just an empty life jacket was found floating and the search and rescue operation has been unsuccessful so far. The chance to find the pilot still alive is getting slimmer every minute. My prayers are with him and his family.

KA-6D would be nice too

I have been looking for detailed pics of the TARPS pod for the Tomcat for a long time and finally came across a good walk-around. Here is a link in case anyone else is interested: https://www.moose135photography.com/Other/F-14-TARPS-Pod/

So am I...

Thank you, Crusader, I will give it a try.

Hi guys, could anyone help confirm the way 2AR rack type is used? When looking at a 2AR type rack in the weapons editor, the rack type entry says 2AR (ARM). I know that 2AR racks are used on the Hornet/Super Hornet to load 2 AIM-120 on a single pylon, so I know 2AR is good for AHM weapon type, but the editor says ARM, not AHM. So I was hoping the 2AR racks could be used both for AHM and for ARM weapon type. So far I have been unable to make ARM appear on a 2AR rack and I wonder if I am doing something wrong, or just the entry in the weapons editor is misleading. Perhaps 2AR (ARM) stands for 2AR (Active Radar Missile) as opposed to 2AR (Anti Radiation Missile). Quite confusing if that is really the case, should have been 2AR (AHM) instead of 2AR (ARM). P.S. I cannot recall ever seeing ARM loaded on dual racks in real life (size, weight limitations I guess), but for my purposes that does not matter.

Thanks, but no, I was looking for something completely different.

Hi Veltro2K, I know about dual IRM rails - there are plenty examples, even the A-10 uses a dual rail for AIM-9. My question was about dual rail/adapter for ARM missiles, such as Shrike, HARM, etc. Now I already know the game does not support such a rack type. Thanks for the attention though.

Thanks a lot, guys. I did not look as far back as SFP1 days. Well that clarifies things and unfortunately I have to look for a different solution.

Oh, well, I might be wrong. I remember pappychksix posted some screenshots of Buckeyes back in 2016 and then in 2019 and I was left with the impression that they presented the Razbam model. Anyway I do not think that model is readily available either.

We do have Tu-16s as stock AI aircraft, so if you are to choose whether to dedicate time to a Tu-16 or to another aircraft, which is not available at all for the moment, then I would vote for the latter. I was quite excited seeing your T-2 Buckeye model as an example of an aircraft that is not readily available for SF2 (I know of the Razbam one, but it is not readily available).

No disrespect to yakarov79, but here is the Cyrillic spelling with just a couple of corrections: НАСТРОЙКА ПРЕСЕЛЕКТОРА ПЕРЕД ПУСКОМ ВОЗ- ДУХА В ИЗДЕЛИЕ- ВЫВЕРНУТЬ ПРОБКУ ВИДЕОКАБЕЛЯ,СНЯТЬ С ЭЛЕРОНОВ ЩИТКИ НЕ ТРОГАТЬ! ОПОРА ПРОВЕРКА ГЕРМЕТИЧНОСТИ НАПРЯЖЕНИЕ ДУ КАНАЛ

Lindr2 made that a long time ago for SFP1 series. The 6 and 8 tube versions along with the missiles are available here, but adjusting to SF2 standards and probably a slightly improved skin will be needed:

If the model was created by someone of the InSky group as I suspect, then it is not very likely to either find a better version or get access to the max file.

The PL-5B model you refer to seems to have been released far from finished, look at the tail fins - only half of them were brought to what could be a close to finished condition.

Well, that was quite logical actually, thanks yakarov79 Here it is:

The Chinese PL-8 is basically the Israeli Python 3. PL-8 - Python 3, provided by Israel PL-8A - Same as PL-8, but assembled in China with Israeli components PL-8B - Fully built in China with Chinese components That said, we are fortunate to have ravenclaw's excellent Python 3. So instead of looking for the creator of that PL-8 missile, who might be one of the InSky guys, I would suggest asking ravenclaw for a template of his Python 3 and repainting it as necessary. This way you would end up with a much better version on the PL-8. Here is a screenshot of ravenclaw's Python 3.

SAM hunting over Vietnam in the A-6B

Crusader, that's new to me and I find it quite interesting. Can you go a bit more into detail to explain how that works in game? May be give an example with an aircraft that already has this setup in place? Does the ForceRailLaunch=TRUE entry make the game apply a rail launch effect to a missile which is normally ejected or not carried on a missile rail? Or does the entry make the game ignore the fact that the missile is usually rail launched and ejects it from the hardpoint, despite the fact that the weapon data says "rail launched"? Thank you in advance!

Well, I'd be careful with that if I were you. Take the AIM-120 AMRAAM as an example. When fitted to the wing pylons on a F-15C, it uses a missile rail and the rocket engine is the one that propels the missile immediately at launch. When fitted to one of the stations on the CFTs, the missile is actually ejected, so it would separate enough from the aircraft before the engine starts and avoid damage to the aircraft. That is especially important when an aft hardpoint is used. If you want to have more realistic missiles such as the AMRAAM in SF2, I believe you need to have 2 versions of the same missile - one rail launched and a second with the "use missile rail" option unchecked. Then you would need to use also a specific station code entry to prevent the wrong version being loaded, such as a rail launched version loaded on a hardpoint on the CFTs.

Hi, any plans to add weapon pylons to the Buckeye? I came across a few pictures, showing Greek Buckeyes with a total of 4 pylons, apparently in a light attack aircraft role or as an early weapons training platform.

"...where to set the time for the missile to open the fins?" - right above the OK and CANCEL buttons in the lower right corner of the editor screen there is a section called Release animation. There you have the animation ID number, Time (sec) - which I believe controls how long the animation is performed in seconds and Delay (sec) - this is the delay in seconds after drop/launch when the animation starts.

Well, I was not aware that ODS.30 already had the job done and I have kept fiddling with this. I actually extended the ini-edits to Intruders as well. I have not shared publicly the ini edits, because I am not fully satisfied with the result yet. Also recently ravenclaw_007 was kind and helpful enough to provide me a modified LAU-118, which better suits the purpose, as the one shared in April 2020 was apparently for USAF aircraft and USN aircraft use a slightly different LAU-118. So now the work covers adding LAU-7 IRM rails to the Intruders (not that they often carried IRMs, but still), LAU-77 for AGM-78, LAU-34 for AGM-12, LAU-117 for single AGM-65 and LAU-118 for AGM-45 and AGM-88. I have also slightly modified ravenclaw_007's MER data ini to create new bomb racks for the Intruders, that allow certain interesting looking loadouts that I have come across when searching online. If there is any interest and if the modders, whose 3d work I am using allow it, I may share the end result as an upgrade pack.