Tirak

This is false. Chuck accidentally deleted the public guides, but still has backups. Unfortunately because where he is working, he does not have access to his account to fix the error for a few weeks. Several others have come forward to host the guides until Chuck can get home and fix the mistake.

That's the reason why we're getting the AV-8B instead of the GR.7. it has been explicitly stated multiple times that they cannot do the + until ED releases their ground radar code.

This question has been asked and answered many times. Upgrade your searching. Long story short, RAZBAM is waiting on ED's ground radar code.

Investigating if the Maverick can be used on the scope is paperwork and minor coding changes to hook up the functionality. Adding a refueling probe is to modify the cockpit, change the external model, textures, coding, damage model, lighting, ect. ect. ect. That is the difference between the two, and why a refueling probe will likely never come to the F-5E3 we have.

Original to the E-3 version of the aircraft is what is obviously being referenced when talking about the original. The discussion on the Maverick is a capability one. They have no knowledge of how the Maverick interfaces with the systems. It is possible that the display has the capability to display Maverick information, even if it doctrinally never used, because the US E3s were aggressor trainers and not ground attack aircraft. However, they lack the specific information to be able to make that call. If someone has definite information saying that the display could operate in conjunction with the Maverick, then that capability will be added. A refueling probe on the other hand is a full add on. it's new hardware attached to the aircraft, it's a panel on the cockpit dedicated to that, and it's a whole new model and damage model, lighting ect. One is simply "Could it do it?", the other is changing the model and adding additional cockpit pieces.

We're using an F-5E-3 for our specific model of F-5E, and as far as I know, they were never fitted with a refueling probe. Even if we find evidence to the contrary, I doubt the model will be changed to include it as that would require a lot of extra work to model, code and damage model it. The Maverick on the other hand would require much less work to model on, and really if anyone knows about the AA/APG 159v2 please come forth with the information. If you know anybody who might know, friend of friends, that dude across the street, a guy wearing an F-5 baseball cap, ANYBODY, please let BST know. The capability expansion that would bring to the module would be fantastic and make it frankly the best 'starter' module of all the bunch.

Chuck was doing some sorting of his Google Drive ahead of a business trip and accidentally deleted the active folder we can all see that had all the guides. He meant to delete the backups, so he's still got those, unfortunately he won't be back for a few weeks to fix the issue, in the mean time, a few folks have helpfully hosted the old guides until Chuck gets home and fixes it. :thumbup:

So I did a little test flight to resort my controls then went on the server when it wasn't busy so I wouldn't screw anyone over. Took one of the ground attack tasked Sabres (After getting startled a bit by the 'Welcome to Korea' dialogue) and went hunting for trouble. Got to the target area, switched to channel 5 and called in looking for tasking. The radio response was not at all what I was expecting. I was guessing I'd get a Morse code sound and a text box in the corner. Nope, Boston channel called in and gave me the target grid with actual audio, which was fantastic for immersion. Checked my F-10 map, and after quickly converting old NATO Phonetic Alphabet, I headed to the target area. I flew in pretty high and looked for tracers, not a great method I know, but with me so out of practice hunting ground targets without an F-16s TGP and Ground Radar, it was the best I could come up with on short notice. Tracers off the nose, so i followed the line down and saw a group of buildings and some anti aircraft around them. I flowed out, came around, lined up for a rocket run, and took a shell to the face and died :P. I've become too reliant on targeting aids like CCIP systems so i didn't loose my rockets early or high enough, instead wanting to get close for guaranteed hits, bad plan. Still, an interesting experience. I'll probably spend a few days rocketing dirt to practice how to do it, but Korea's definitely an interesting and fun experience. Now I just need to sort Simple Radio out so it works and I'll be golden. Thanks SeaQuark.

You can build the greatest airframe in the world, but if the brass insist on putting leftover engines from a low altitude penetration bomber in it, you're going to run into some pretty big hurdles when you ask those engines to pretend to be fighter engines.

Hey Gos, I was doing some looking back at the progress made from the original HoggitDev A-4E up until now and I came across this little gem: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2984141&postcount=162 So I did some digging and came up with these: http://navyaviation.tpub.com/14024/css/An-Ale-29A-Countermeasures-Chaff-Dispensing-Set-296.htm http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/mju-8.htm http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/rr-129.htm You said you were making a gamey concession by allowing mixed loads of Chaff and Flare. From what limited checking I did, I don't think that's the case. In fact, it would appear that each dispenser can carry 30 chaff or flare each, and not limited to 15 flare and 30 chaff.

Gos... you... I mean... I don't know how many times I can say you're exceeding expectations, but you guys are. I am so incredibly excited for this module, keep up the amazing work. I may be sounding like a broken record at this point, but you mentioned a Sidewinder growl when the Shrike was mounted, can you share what you all have been up to with the Shrike? No progress on that front or still under wraps?

I may fire up my Sabre again to try this server, the mission looks really fun. By the way, since it's kind of sandboxy with ground targets, including F-51s makes perfect sense as that's the major role they filled during the war. Close air support and escorting the slower choppers seems tailor made for them.

Yeah Cobra said they're going to model it.

I've always been under the impression a defensive setup is line with the attacker on the defender's 6, so I can't imagine he's talking about any other position. However, something important to notice is that the F-14 in the example is an A, so high alpha plus low speed equals compressor stall, the F-15 pilot may be able to force the F-14 to bleed energy inefficiently because he can't make full use of his aerodynamic advantage. Also, A Cats can't work the throttle aggressively, so forcing him to play close to the edge of his operational envelope probably invites him to make a mistake. A break turn like that against a B Cat would probably end poorly.

Sure, real footage of F-35As :lol:

Maybe they'll go crazy with it and do an alternate Strangereal future, where Tom Cruise is a grizzled veteran of an F-14E SuperCat squadron dogfighting against the Belkins while his opponent spouts Nietzscheian philosophy to him.

Radium might make an F-4EJ Kai cockpit, but it's not clear if it's being worked on. For now it's just a new model for the AUP, Terminator and perhaps the Kurnass.

Just out of idle curiosity, do you see this as something that will hold up a potential campaign in the future?

The G offers no new experience from the current Huey. It is just a slimmer version. The W which BST is working on offers a comparable experience to the KA-50 and provides a useful gunship platform on a greater variety of maps. If you absolutely hate Hellfires and APKWS, you can still run a mission where the loadout of the Whiskey is restricted to the same that a Vietnam era helicopter would have. The reverse cannot be said.

Why? Why would you want a technologically gimped AH-1G when you could have the far more flexible and enjoyable AH-1W?

I love Strike Fighters II, for its easy to modness, the fact that nearly every military aircraft can be included, and for the simple but effective dynamic campaign that it has implemented. However, the lack of support for bombing without CCIP really makes it difficult to play as early strike fighters. The accuracy of bombing just isn't there.

It's pure American Muscle Car, and still astonishes me that no one has picked it up yet. In any event, the MiG-19 helps open up our viable fighter opponent years to a lot more diverse and interesting aircraft. For that alone RAZBAM deserves praise even if I didn't like the 19 on its own merits.

I don't think I will. This is a fairly large error, and if large errors like this are simply passed over, what else is? RAZBAM wants to be known as a serious developer in this realm, creating obvious physical inconsistencies with the real aircraft is not a good way to demonstrate that. Even if it requires delay, this is not a change that should be simply ignored.

This will be an excellent addition to the stable. Perfect to combat aircraft like the F-5 already released, as well as the Mirage IIICJ in development, while being passable against the MiG-21Bis in weapon restricted environments. I'm very much looking forward to this module moreso than most.