Bremspropeller

The US embassy in Seoul is a similarily ugly building. null

Technically yes, if you make the required wiring changes. Some of which were done by later users of a specific jet: Here's a RoCAF TF-104G (originally a german jet) with wing-station Sidewinders, which is 100% more wing-station Sidewinders than what german 104s could carry originally. http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Stars/wR195.htm

Could the first one have been taken here? Above Dermin, looking towards Ratzeburg across the Küchensee (just north of Mölln, Schleswig-Holstein) - as stone's throw from the border (in the fmr West)... See greater scale map - east of Hamburg, south of Lübeck...

The Manual Pitch Override switch is functional. Have a go and tell us what you found out

That's a good point! Maps doesn't show any lightpoles at this spot, though: null

+1! I can vouch for that. I took those on the way to Doha about 8 weeks ago: Looks pretty convincing in game: I'm not so convinced about this streetlight off the end of RWY 15 at Erbil, though:

I misread your statement, hence I deleted my post in the meantime. But then again, I could just as well recite the rest of my post: The wind model is flawed and needs fixing. It's not just the hard-tied windshear between GND ant 1600ft and the linked seastate. It's also the ILS logic and it's tie to the required wind to activate it. Right now, in order to activate the ILS during fog, there needs to be a wind in place that would dissipate that very fog.

C2 was always upward firing. C1 went down the (then bigger) bottom hatch. More info here: https://www.i-f-s.nl/ejection-seats/ https://www.ejectionsite.com/f104seat.htm

Yeah, right. And there are no over-g inspections carried out ever, because pilots never over-g their jets or stores. It's happenening frequently. Not on a daily basis, but way more often than you'd think. It's not disregarding limitations. It's about extrapolating exagerated consequences of a one time or two time event that's gonna bend the airframe, but not break it. There's a significant factor between a limitation and "things break". Most structural limitations go into a fatigue life considerations, rather than having direct structural consequences. In SEA, there were two (IIRC) F-100s throwing their wings during a standard 4g bombing-pullout - mostly because they'd reached their fatigue life earlier than expected. That trigegred a whole IRAN (Inspect And Repair As Necessary) project, as it turned out there were lots of cracks across the fleet. And because people didn't really give a second thought about over-g'ing the airframe in those days. Same with a german 104G - did a gunnery or bombing pass on the Gila Bend range and one wing came off during the pull. Turned out, Lockheed had completely miscalculated the fatigue life of the jet, assuming one 4g pull per sortie. Realistically, ou'd fly about a 4g turn in each corner of the range pattern, though. Note: the wing didn't come off because of an over-g. There was a 104 that survived a double-digit g pullout after a high speed spacial-d event. It didn't fly again afterwards, but it came home in one piece. Wings did come off jets way more in earlier days - not because of someone accidentally busting a limitation by 1g or two. It happenend because there was no regard for structure-life in the first place and people didn't think much of it. There were a couple of instances of F-8s pulling off their wing. Now the F-8 is nomnally rated for 6gs. But there's an RF-8 that evaded a SAM in SEA and pulled double-digits as well. Probably with some rolling mixed in. It came back to the boat to tell the story. Mind you that some rollig-g limitations (depending on the jet) are related to stability issues, rather than structure. There is no horror audio when you over-g the jet. You've got a helmet (possibly earplugs), oxygen flow and a 400kts windnoise which will make you hear no structural noises.

It's not a joystick thing, its more the lack of a proper q-feel system (see F1 and F-4) that makes the wings snap. The joystick is just a mitigation, not eliminating the root cause. The way the snaps are modelled is a bit overzeleaous, as has been mentioned by a couple of people a couple of times. I'd love to see the accident-reports of multiple F-5s shedding wings because of some rolling gs. If it was that easy, we'd have historical evidence of it.

Is the air hose (?) static or will it belong to the Barbie jet in the future?

Not all of them - the Italians and Germans for sure. The Danes also converted to MB. http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Stars/wD703.htm Some hand-me-down jets - e.g. HAF and TuAF jets formerly operated by ze Germans - did also have the MB seat (and J1K engine). See examples: http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Stars/wH153.htm HAF Jet http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Stars/wT164.htm TuAF Jet I'd have to check if all of the HAF and TuAF jets were converted to MB. The Dutch and Belgians, in contrast, never switched their C2 seats for the MB. Neither did the Canadians (mostly ops'ing in Germany) or the Norwegians. http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Stars/wK8273.htm RNLAF Jets (incl TF) http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Stars/wFX93.htm BAF http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Stars/wN785.htm RNoAF http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Stars/wN626.htm http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Stars/wC862C.htm RCAF Spain prolly also never switched, giving their jets away during the time when the switch most probably would have happened (early 70s). In Asia, Japan stayed with the C2, while RoCAF later swtched to MB. Probably because of the influx of hand-me-downs, but don't quote me on that.

Same.

There seems to be some weird state, where some changes made it - for example the new skin for the F1C-200 (also available on the EE). (Much appreciated!) While others, such as the double Belougas on the AUF 2 double-rack didn't - neither on the inner wing stations, nor on the fuselage station. There seem to be other mis matches as well (e.g. Barax light not working, Police Light on the BE not working).

BN, I think there's a misunderstanding - seems like Aerges thought those features were in (hence their changelog - see subforum) but aparantly the changes weren't in the patch file and hence those changes aren't featured in game right now.

Are the new LEX vapes featured already?

ItAF (R)F-104G during "Operation Ace Guard" with both, the CM dispensers and the ECM antennae.

Found another one: https://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Hot/Hotshot061.htm

The features we're seeing here would narrow down the variant: - J1K engine (ever so slightlly more thrust than the -11A and about twice the service life between overhauls, but no howling and less smoke) => started in the very early 70s - UHF repeater indication => roughly mid 70s - ALE CM installation => early-mid 80s (Navy only) My guess would be a mid 70s "naked" variant with the option of attaching late 70s and early 80s hardware (CMs and/ or possibly the ECM EL-70 and EL-73 with their distinctive ice-cream cone antenna). See here for some details (in German): http://www.flightschwein.de/html/sondereinbauten.html German variant(s) weapons options are discussed here: https://www.flightschwein.de/html/beladeschema.html

The video showed the J1K (long) nozzle.

Hey guys, seems like the BE's police-light isn't working. The logic of the light across all F1 variants was changed a couple of patches ago from a toggle (on/off) to "button needs to be held". Neither variant works in the BE. Yes, the switch on the right side of the panel is set to "on" Can you confirm? Cheers.

The ventrals were also used in the german Air Force and Navy. The tips were a lot more common in the air force, though.

Outboard pylon Sidewinders for the CG - maybe only available by country "Greece" for the CE and make it a mission builder checkmark, so people don't get overly carried away and the realism police is going crazy... Maybe it could be used as a mutually exclusive replacement for the R530/ S530, when using above mentioned checkmark. Could be implemented by the workaround of radar missile buttons activate outboard wing station sidewinders instead. Rapid Gun IIRC didn't activate the Sidewinders in the greek jets, but since one can bind any button on any HOTAS control, we're splitting hairs at this point - might as well just activate them through Rapid Gun then... This would make a lot of people happy. Not just me

Right now, the area looks like this: General vicinity. Looking north-south at roundabout the position of the photos above, showing the northern runway threshold. Looking south-north - somewhat similar to the position of the very first picture, but at a higher angle. I think building the roadbase could generally be feasible and it would be cool and quirky. What do you guys think?

Do you guys see a way to create an "official" road airfield in the city of Halat, based on the historical one (abandonned in the early 90s)? nullNote the Falcon 50 parked next to the Aeronavale Etendard IVP (16F, Aircraft no. 117) that landed on this road airfield in November 1983.