Svetlin

So far it just brings up a quote to my mind: "... is a very mysterious and powerful device and it's mystery is exceeded only by it's power."

Very, very nice progress, Centurion-1. Do you plan to add fuel tanks under the wings (like on the 3-view drawing above) as part of the aircraft model?

There is something special about this camo, sad it did not go beyond tests only...

Cocas, you have a spelling mistake in the AllowedWeaponClass entry - you have SHAM in stead of SAHM. As for the ARM, what AR missiles do you want to load on the MiG-17? The weight limit could be an issue too - if it is too low, some missiles that are heavier than 250 will not load.

Yep, so true. Back at the time I got into scale modelling, cause I was really fond of military aircraft (not because of their killing power, but because of the brilliance and ingenuity in each one) and that hobby was a way to get me closer to them - sort of enable me to touch the shape of the machine. Still scale modelling has its limits - you can build one or two configurations of the aircraft and you have to move to the next one and soon you realize because of your own endless curiosity you need a room the size of an exhibition hall to store all your models and you have to stop (or start throwing away, which is painful enough). And then I came accross TW games and this community and they gave me unlimited options to satisfy my curiosity for military aircraft. You want to see a Phantom with full bombs load - sure, no problem, just start the sim. You want to see it fully A2A loaded - same thing. OK, enough of Phantoms, how about a Fulcrum - no problem, the community has taken care of providing it. One day I realized I spend more time just fiddling with inis and seeing aircraft in game, rather then actually flying a full mission or campaign. Bottom line for me, as long as TW games remain the only lite-sim game allowing unlimited different aircraft with great quality of models and accurately represented weapons stores, allowing to see and test various combinations and as long as this great community continues to enlrage the variety of mods available for TW games, no way out of it. It all seems very simple - everyone came here and bought TW games for own selfish reasons, to satisfy a need. Once needs change or the product no longer satisfies the needs - time to look for alternatives and no one can be blamed, neither the buyer, nor the supplier.

Su-34 -> some shots - here: http://www.paralay.com/su34.html A drawing -> here: http://combatace.com/gallery/image/23967-su34cockpitfinalf/

Sure, no problem

Russo, I might be wrong with this, but won't it be easier to configure if the dual IRM rails are made a separate weapons rack 2IR type, dedicated to the Harrier by means of a RackSpecificStationCode? The belly stations of the stock MiG-23MLD are set up like that.

Great, thanks!!! Aren't those wing pylons a bit too many for that Harrier version? I thought Sea Harriers FRS1 and FA2 had the smaller wimg with just 2 pylons under... Should be off to read some more, I guess...

Here is a thought - if you have the time and wish to handle it while working on pylons, the FA2 model could benefit from AMRAAM pylons under the fuselage, in place of the gun pods. Just a thought...

Great job, Russo, hope I may point out a few issues with the landing gear. Hopefully, since you are at it, you might be able to fix these as well. I am referring to the Harrier FA2 model. - front and main gear animation - wheels stand right on the ground and then all of a sudden the shocks extend and wheels get submerged; a few moments later shocks retract and wheels get back to normal - wing-support gear - appear a bit too short; when the aircraft is on the ground, the wing support gear does not extend enough to touch the ground, so the aircraft does not sit steady on ground

It's great now, thanks a lot!!!

Just figured out that the F-16AM_NOR lod does not include the HARM adaptor... I wonder if the Release Animation entries, the one for delay more specificly, will have an effect over the firing secuence with rail launched option activated??? I have never fiddled with these settings before. Maybe a new set of dedicated middle pylons with incorporated adapter will be required just for the Penguin to show and drop properly and a SpecificStationCode entry to prevent other EOGR from being loaded on the AGM-119 specific pylon. Not sure how much work that means...

Great job on the missile, absolutely love your work. Pictures of the Penguin, loaded on F-16, show some kind of adaptor fitted to the pylon, similar to the one used for AGM-88. May be it is good to activate the "rail launched" option in the data.ini and assign the missile to the respective pylon with ARM rail fitted. Will test later tonight to see if the result looks good.

F/A-18B/D - WIP, there are pics of it in the screenshot topic. MiG-29UB - probably some time in future by Ravenclaw as he just started work on a MiG-29 pack. TS-11 - I think Veltro2K had one WIP

o L-15???

And your waiting should be over: https://store.thirdwire.com/store_dlc.htm

At the start: Rotating: Gear up: Going up: PC-9A as stand-in for Bulgarian Air Force PC-9M...

Copied straight from the FA-18E.ini from a freshely downloaded 2.2 pack: AvionicsDLL=AvionicsF14A.dll

That is probably because they are set up for SF2NA, i.e. set up to use F-14 avionics.dll and you are not playing SF2NA. Had the same issue in my SF2E patched up to the latest patch. So in the aircraft ini file, just replace the text for F-14 avionics dll with Avionics70.dll.

For part "B" try adding this in the aircraft's *_data.ini file: [AircraftData] .............. Component[008]=Doppler [Doppler] ParentComponentName=Fuselage ModelNodeName=Doppler_ok DestroyedNodeName=Doppler DetachWhenDestroyed=TRUE HasAeroCoefficients=FALSE For the antenna, I must look for the proper node name, I have no idea right now.

A Kfir with recce nose? Never seen this mod before...Cool! Hope to see it uploaded some day. And the required shot... Never seen a Starfighter with IRM on these pylons, but looks good to me

Perfect!!!