NRG-Vampire

Those 2 names brings up another question: to where are they going/flying ? Saigon or Hanoi ? ...▲ yeah, coz on the 2nd (towards: Sasa Bay) and on 3rd pics (towards: Pago Bay) they fly above Barrigada / Guam

Hey guys, didya notice ? ... there are: Jake Grafton & Virgil Cole

Oh, come on guys, I know about the AI. ...but...maybe... (except if it will be a full module announcement) BTW: that machine does not look like a KA-6

WHATA !!! ..is it coming ? ...REALLY ..an INTRUDER ? ....or ? ...OMG

OMG ! Yeah, hell a lot of work ! ...and a lot of adversary Hornet Nice job Santus ..and a few thoughts and suggestions to Santus (..and to the U.S. Navy scheme makers and painters too): IMHO on those aircrafts where the paint scheme colours and patterns on the tops and bottoms are very similar (and free from false engine/exhaust paint) a false canopy paint would be considered underneath: such as: Have Glass V, Ghost, Sierra, Cloud, Lizard TY

Would be more realistic with more dynamic/moving rainflows on the canopy but those static raindrops are also nice ! Anyway, good job ! This is one of the best with rainflows on windshield (coz of the nightlights) ▼

▲ Indeed: Too dark: Especially nozzles. However the 3 tone gray pattern should be lighter and coloured as well: Dark gray: as Razor said: should be lighter and a bit greeny. Middle gray: should be much more lighter and bluish. Light gray: should be closer to white but also needs some blue. - Regarding to your GettyImages pic. Anyway: nice job so far.

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a213030.pdf - come on guys, it's a 32 years old story. Even the oldest AH-64A variant is able to deploy the Stinger, however US Army did not ordered the A2A "package" for most of their gunships and did not train the crew too (most of them -again). Only a few "boxes" needed in the airframe and in the "dashboard", a few cable in the wings and some socket on the wingtips: and ready to go for A2A. BTW: what do you think, why the Nav-light/strobe luminaries were officially removed from the wingtips of the AH-64D ? (..and got brackets for the dual ATAS launcher/pod) Other addon(s) (tested) "package" were: sidewinders, sidearms and the "big punch" AGM-65 Mavericks but customers "threw" these weapons. ...The same goes by the US AirForce: F-15 Eagle CDIP (continuous(ly) displayed impact point) bombing capability. The only difference is: that's a 50 years old story.

FYI guys: moreover: "Very rarely do Apaches fly around" with no wings ! ...but I would rather say that: "without"

If the new updated/changed model uses the same old ingame Name: F-14A then it will not break any mission.

DCS is a visual experience. Therefore visual standardization is very important. At least it should be. And I mentioning again the old vehicle models too: The ships without underwater parts/keels, what is "spectacular" since the water got transparency.

It's not as easy as it looks like ? Yes, the problem is exactly like that: how it looks. IMHO it's starting to be awkward seeing very old (and ugly) 3D models (Vaz car, Ikarus bus, Trucks, Barge-ships etc.) while the "updated/facelifted" 3D models already in the game as landscape-reference-file but ED did not imported/converted into EDM (for using in the ME by clients). Those old F-14A and Mirage 2000-5 models came from Flanker2 what is 20 yeras old. In LOMAC (17 years ago) those models got some nozzle and afterburner 3D facelift and appeared the newer F-18A 3D model in LOM format. So it is easy: it's only a matter of determination (by ED) and an agreement: (if the proprietor of the 3D model is a 3rd party). I hope they will change/update all those old Flanker2 and LOMAC-era 3D models.

I meant the AI unit. They mentioned some units already in the newsletter. AFAIK M-2000-5 differ externally (for AI) only in the pitot tube/probe and some antennas/sensors on the tail and fuselage. So, it would be only a few 3D-parts-visibility-cosmetics on the current 3D model and should be easily used (the same 3D model) with changing parts in the liveries-description.lua by the custom_args = function/feature.

Bingo ! I meant the AI unit. They mentioned some units (see below) in the newsletter. The same should be true for the old F-14, F-16 and F-18 models. Those 3D models need facelift and replace: F-14A, F-16A, F-16MLU, F-16 bl.50, F-16 bl.52, F-18A - what are already in the game/sim as AI units. CF-18A/C and other two-seater 3D models also can be easily updated/adopted from current models: F-18B/D, F-16B/D, Mirage-2000D etc. as new AI units. AFAIK M-2000-5 differ externally (for AI) only in the pitot tube/probe and some antennas/sensors on the tail and fuselage. So, it would be only a few 3D-parts-visibility-cosmetics on the current 3D model and should be easily used (same3D model) with changing parts in the liveries-description.lua by the custom_args = function/feature. Same would be true for the F-15C model to get proper Japanese, Israeli, Saudi or older F-15A external model to use in the ME as AI units.

IRL the airframe is not shiny (except: shiny when wet) so... Looks so REAL Nice job

Gotcha, but it's not a problem to export into another game-3D format/extension a DCS-ready "Merged-with-visibility-parts-3D model". MAX can handle those arg-based-visibilities. It's only a hide/unhide/reveal thingy. (a 3D modeller can do it manually as well: without visibilities) So, He can export both: seperated F-104G and F-104S models to FSX, FSXX, SF2, XP etc. formats I am RDY 2 help

Mirage 2000-5 3D model should need minor changes/updates only on the current M-2000 3D model. Same post on Razbam sub-forum:

Mirage 2000-5 3D model should need minor changes/updates only on the current M-2000 3D model.

Well, I have some suggestions to those F-104G/S model(s). As I see there are differences only at the under fuselage twin pilons/launchers and the vental fin(s). So, you (Kobra?) should merge the two model into one where arg70 or other non-dedicated arg# (visibility) will be able to change/visualize those parts through the livery-decription.lua: custom_args = (number/value). Moreover you can build the TF-104G on the model too. Merge all models and add visibility to the different parts and you will save a lot of work and resources.

Yes madam but there is only one F-105 pic what I posted previously. https://www.lockonforum.de/community/thread/1850-eure-schönsten-shots/?postID=84951#post84951

Nice nose-art Jocko: I love that Snoopy Sniper ▲It's from VSN-nice-screenshots pages: (a week old shot) probably another VSN project/mod of CDP-Kobra

AIC: Thud(s) is coming as well, hopefully:

Nice job Jocko ! ...btw: there are a minor problem with the USAF 570914: on the pitot tube the red-white painting should be 4-4 stripes intead of spiral. ...and please make those early/Vietnam/Puerto Rico USAF camos with wavy demarcations as well Thank You

Look awesome

For turning off default markings you should use the official empty.dds (invisible) texture at : nomera, c130-fon+flag and USAF lines - with true "syntax" 4xmpl: {"texture USAF.tga f2 g0", DIFFUSE , "empty", true}; {"texture c130-fon+flag.bmp f2 g0", DIFFUSE , "empty", true}; {"texture nomera.tga f2 g0", DIFFUSE , "empty", true};