Stealth_HR

I remember reepo's skins from when they were first made available. I still say that 7501is one of the most beautiful paintjobs I've ever seen.

I knew something wasn't right with my altimeter. :doh:

Static, yes, and it's been done without much trouble. Dynamic, I haven't been able to do it. Shame, too, I had a mission for us 385ers in mind with trains as well. "Special cargo" and all that.

Wouldn't that depend on the radar type and datalink cover? :huh: Besides, seeing the amount of electronics, I'd count on everything from AA-10s to AA-12s. It would stand a chance - and I'm not saying slim ones, either. Comparisons would be very simple if it weren't for the fact air battles aren't won singlehandedly without support. :smilewink:

The closest one I could pick with a Mk1 Eyeball would be the Windows Moldy Green - #008080.

Well, last time I've seen him, his hair did look a bit more gray. :music_whistling: And I'd say grass would get affected by radiation, especially since it's a continuous source. Doesn't have to kill it so much as change its genetics.

I was about to suggest ED contact either Switzerland, Canada or Australia about the Hornets, hands-on experience and test flight data probably can be made publicly available like that. But then again... nah.

Oh, crap, someone brought out the Hoff.

That's exactly why I suggested ED allows themselves to release a later HiDef pack, if those models aren't already included. Or, at the very least, allow us the same level of model replacing we already have, such as what we have with StrikeMax's Su-27 and Walmis's F-15.

IK, I remember you posting about that some time ago, had to do something with frying the radio (among other things) in case of a voltage spike. ..right? :music_whistling:

Really impressive model, fitting for a warhorse (warcat?) the F-14 is. Maybe ED should release BS with a HiDef pack consisting of remodels like these...

Quote from http://www.sci.fi/~fta/MiG-29-1.htm : Note that it says it "enabled the new missiles". We're talking about advanced versions of standard R-27 missiles, so it only stands to common sense that R-27R/T capability was already available for the MiG-29B Fulcrum-A - after all, the Fulcrum-A could do with the regular N-019 Slot-Back and fire an R-27R, and it definitely had the same IRST - something which should by just common sense mean it should be able to use an R-27T. Furthermore: http://www.military.cz/russia/air/weapons/rockets/aam/r27/r27.htm Verze R-27R R-27T R-27RE R-27TE R-27AE R-27EM Rok zavedení do služby 1986 1986 1990 1990 Both the R-27R and R-27T were formally introduced into service at the same time - even with a difference of several months it would be something the plane'd very likely be prepared for.

Quote from http://www.sci.fi/~fta/MiG-29-1.htm : Note that it says it "enabled the new missiles". We're talking about advanced versions of standard R-27 missiles, so it only stands to common sense that R-27R/T capability was already available for the MiG-29B Fulcrum-A - after all, the Fulcrum-A could do with the regular N-019 Slot-Back and fire an R-27R, and it definitely had the same IRST - something which should by just common sense mean it should be able to use an R-27T. Furthermore: http://www.military.cz/russia/air/weapons/rockets/aam/r27/r27.htm Verze R-27R R-27T R-27RE R-27TE R-27AE R-27EM Rok zavedení do služby 1986 1986 1990 1990 Both the R-27R and R-27T were formally introduced into service at the same time - even with a difference of several months it would be something that'd be prepared for.

Hate to break it, but the Tomcat would've been a very sorry show jet. Guess why most display teams use(d) Skyhawks, Falcons, Fulcrums and Flankers... if it's maneuverable, it's flashy. :smilewink: Then again, there's always cases like demo teams made of Phantoms and Frogfoots... :music_whistling:

Er, no, the point of the thread from the very first post was that the LO simulated MiG-29 (erroneously titled MiG-29A) should carry R-27Ts, but can't, while the MiG-29G shouldn't carry R-27T's, yet they do. Along with that, the MiG-29_ Fulcrum-A used by Russia and Ukraine in LO should have a simulated datalink (of the same variety as the MiG-29S Fulcrum-C), yet they don't. The single thing that is right is the MiG-29G's lack of datalink.

Before addressing anything else, another bug, to be exact, a typo. The original MiG-29 isn't a MiG-29A - the A was a prototype. To add to the confusion, the production MiG-29 is the Fulcrum-A, NOT the MiG-29A as intuition would imply. People who have a bit of self-control, don't rely on ECM spamming and can appreciate less weight on a plane do fly it. I'm pretty sure Vekkinho and myself aren't the only ones (and I can speak for him as well since we're squadmates, and only one S is operational at the same time). Vekkinho, if you still have photos of that MiG-29UB cockpit from Pleso AB, now would be a time to compare it with the screencaps. GG, the cockpit in LO is an even older version than the solitary UB Fulcrum stationed in Croatia, as it has no visible buttons surrounding the MFD (which to the best of my knowledge all production versions do have), along with a very unusual (and misplaced, maybe?) panel between the HUD and the alpha gauge. Um. Don't you have other, F-15 related threads for that? Let's keep it on-topic, shall we?

This is amazing work, Valery! Rep inbound as soon as I can give you some, the system won't let me do it again. :huh:

In case anyone ever wondered what the heck tailcodes were for and which one stand for what, you might want to check this link. It contains an exhaustive list of airbases featured on tailcodes. http://www.af.mil/news/airman/0106/tail.shtml

Great work, Ice, now the F-15I will have every right to be called the IAF Ra'am (Thunder). :thumbup:

Black_Hawk's official =9A= camos for the MiG-29. Can't go without them.

Err, I think you've got your terminology mixed up. The reflective top layer (which has the LOFC label on the exposed side) is the data side, the plastic bottom side is there for refraction purposes (as a light path for the laser). If the reflective/label side does indeed have a scratch, you're out of luck - you'll need a new disc.

I wonder what the difference between an Su-25TM and SM really are.

A lite idea would be fun if it was optimized only to load a certain airplane, weapons and its textures, and the surrounding terrain - it'd load faster and have much less traffic to worry about. Still, would I play it? No. After having experienced a Frogfoot-vs-Frogfoot duel, no.

Cheers, Alfa. Cleared up a lot. Looks like we'll have to do with a replacement texture until BS comes along.

Quoted for truth. For the unbelievers, Walmis' F-15. No more explanations needed.