ST0RM

The KC-135 was built in the 50s-60s. Formation strip lights were not and do not equip it. The later KC-10 has them. And yes, there are lights that help but arent done on the model. Underbody/underwing lights shine from the #1 & 3 engine nacelles illuminate the belly and from the belly outward to the wings. Nacelle Illumination lights shine outward from the fuselage toward the wings. Lastly, at the top of the tail, the Tail Mounted Flood Light shines straight down into the AR envelope. This is adjustable in brightness. As a receiver (KC-135RTs at McConnell were receiver capable), we would use the TMFL and Underbody lights to form a triangle with the black void of the boom pod at it's center to get into precontact, 50ft aft. Then use the PDLs (strip lights on the belly) to move in. On the wings, The Nacelle lights were dimmed for the receivers to use and not blind them, to keep formation on the wings. Sadly, ED will need some work there.

Yeah, thought of that as well. But the ground based JTAC lase, was the smoking gun. Its broke.

Yes. 1688 is the default and we left it at that. You obviously didnt read my entire post as I also said we tried it from a ground based JTAC, lasing the target as well. Each bomb was a separate drop, from within 3 miles and at an airspeed of approx 400kts. Long story short, the bombs arent guiding with the latest build. Combined with broken CBU-52s since release, we're running out of options.

Conducted a mission with a player flown A-10C, lasing a target for our F-5s to drop GBU-12s. Both bombs failed to track and fell way short. Tested on another mission with ground JTAC lasing static targets and again all bombs failed to guide.

445th FLTS

Flyable Osprey?

I would gladly pay for a MLU add-on, AFTER they fixed the basic module and completed the systems/weapons. The F-5 is a great aircraft and continues to be a solid asset to air forces.

While the multitude of requests for an updated F-5 have been posted, the existing module has several issues that remain unfixed since release.

Dont like the mod are happy with the trees, dont use it and move on. For several others, myself included, its inaccurately scaled. This mod helps us. Your remarks to stop complaining are out of line.

High Desert Arrival

Tried 90% and I'm sold. Flew the "moving trucks" mission in the Gazelle and noticed a huge change in the perception of speed across the ground. Then again, flew the Cold Start mission in the F-5 and kept it low level. 300+ kts and its very noticeable. Thank you for another great fix.

+1 Here as well

Thanks for the work Bananimal. I'll check it out tonight. As far as any loss in FPS, more trees at max range will cause some drop. Maybe decrease the draw from max (Mine is around 12000) to offset the extra trees.

Just gave it a shot. It's better, but maybe a 50% reduction? Flying past, the largest trees were way larger than even the smoke stacks.

Deleted. I had an older object pack. My mistake. Thanks

This was exactly my first impression, upon trying 2.5 yesterday. In the Gazelle, low level, it felt like I was walking. Harrier and F-5 at 400kts at 500ft through the mountains, again really slow. I understand the FOV aspect, but that is not realistic. And in the Rift, difficult. This needs more attention.

Great video!

Not exactly. The 707 and are not the same. Different engines as the most obvious, so the FM isnt even close. I've got 4000+ hours flying the KC-135. Its just not as simple as you'd like it to be.

"Sniper 10, merged..."

No, different airframes. The C/KC-135 was from the Boeing Model 367-80 (often referred by just Dash 80), as was the 707. However, from there they grow apart. The fuselage lengths (153ft for the 707 and 136 for the -135) and widths are different (707 is 12.5ft wide 14.7ft tall, -135 is only 12ft wide, 14ft tall). Wings, tails and rudders also, are different lengths with different leading and trailing flap systems. So it's not just the simple idea of making the existing KC-135 into a KC-707. You'd be better off making a new skin and using it as a RED tanker.

Wep Trials

He did not specify he was referring to the Air Force, despite the aggressor label. Truly, not many people would differentiate aside from a few of us. Additionally it was in present tense, so from a readers POV, he sounded like he was speaking in current terms. So back to the original question, why no CAP-9P? Why no AIM-9M? Or more accurately, the AIM-9L?

Those speeds are set to Ground Speed, not KIAS (Knots Indicated Air Speed). Use 336 for the KC-130 to achieve a proper airspeed.

Not exactly. I just spent a couple of days out with the real VMFT-401, photographing their ops. Pretty sure they are flying with CAP-9Ms. See the pic I took?

You've got the flares and non-maneuvering captured perfectly. Just missing the full blower...