tflash

Beautiful Mirage jets

Do they mount the HTS pod to be able to launch HARM missiles or can the HTS pod be used as such as a sophisticated Radar warning device?

The DLC is ticked, it has downloaded, there is however no Ka-50 icon in the main menu (so neither colored or not). The training missions do not appear, I cannot select the Ka-50 as player, On startup it doesn't ask for activation. All the other modules I bought as DLC for steam work perfectly!

I bought the Ka-50 2 DLC for steam, but when I start up the game it doesn't appear, I cannot chose it as player. I manually activated it succesfully, but that doesn't make a difference. Tried uninstall-reinstall twice but to no avail. ------------- Solved: I had to delete files from my Saved Games folder.

I find the dash 9 even more beautiful than the standard 787, it seems more balanced. Anyway an incredibly beautiful aircraft, would love to fly in it, I hope it will replace some 767's flying to Brussels.

Yes, local media in Belgium already report that Boeing has built a passenger plane that can take of vertically :=)

As it happens, the Typhoon's helmet is not that bad either: http://www.baesystems.com/enhancedarticle/BAES_157468/typhoon-helmet

The time that you just hang a payload under a pylon is long gone. Since the whole flight dynamics of an inherently unstable aircraft such as the Typhoon is managed by the computer software, every new payload requires software updates. Once you drop one of the bombs the software has to recalculate the trim of the aircraft. The Typhoon was first tested for Paveway 2 bombs, then for Paveway 4. It is that weapon that is focused on, since it has many deployment modes. Software development focused on integrating those. For heavier strike payloads Typhoon is testing the Storm Shadow missile, not GBU-10 bombs. GBU-31 has never been mentioned to my knowledge in connection with Typhoon.

F-104 backseat With nice footage of the cockpit 4:22 onwards

CAS the Phantom way

I like that bumpy nose ... how close can it get when you even get bruises on the nose of the jet? :thumbup:

Sikorsky flies S-97 http://aviationweek.com/defense/sikorsky-conducts-first-flight-s-97-helo

Debunking myths part two Did we have part two already in this forum?

A problem for interpreting the video is imho that it is a montage, there is a cesure at 00:11 onwards. I do not think this is one track. So making assumptions about number of hits and timing seems a bit tricky to me.

Some incredible BF-109 E-3 sounds

Maybe add this to the A-10C discussion thread StrongHarm instead of starting a new one?

V-22 compilation

F-16AM MLU isn't it? I guess F-16C Bock 30 and F-16A MLU are the real dogfighters, the Block 40-50 being more heavy? I can imagine the F-35 matches the latter when loaded, but would have difficulties against a clean Block 30 or MLU.

Ah, these are the better arguments! Keep them coming, Hummingbird!

^^ second that! Great stuff!

I follow you on Pierre Sprey, but where do you guys keep imagining this "modern environment" in which the A-10C would not be survivable? In fact, it has proven to be survivable in ANY real conflict zone today. Faster fighters have proven to be just as vulnerable (certainly when you would add the so-called "mechanical failures" to the tally, which I won't). No, really indeed the A-10C will not participate in a South-Asian sea battle. And no, it will not be tasked with suppressing the air defense network over Tehran nor Moskou. But while we all hope these conflicts will not materialise, unfortunately the 21st century has been populated with conflict all over. Sacrificing the protection of troops in real, present "danger close" in the realities of today to be better prepared for Armageddon is a false choice. You must be prepared for both types of conflict. Ditching a proven solution for a real problem doesn't seem smart to me.

If you can "see" lift than you have a sixth sense, I only see a vortex, imho a little bit high over the wing to really contribute to lift, but that's just an opinion. Fact is that the Lerx acts as a giant airbrake in these manoeuvres, weather this generates extra lift seems to me highly debatable, I would rather think the aircraft is vertically losing altitude in high AOA.

Super Hornet crashes in Persian Gulf http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/navy-super-hornet-crashes-in-arabian-gulf/article/2564371

That is an absolutely awesome video indeed!!!

Yes, but also take unto account the flatter, inward bulged, wide belly of the F-35. The F-16 has a round belly, not very optimal to generate lift. That is why it badly needs the Lerx imho, since its wings are not that big either. With current computers they can much better calculate the forces and flows that occurs in a multitude of flight attitudes then what they could in the 60ties, I guess. I'm not so sure, eg, that the Lerx is that effective when the aircraft is in a sideslip.