Wonder

What part of it looks like a Flanker to you?

Yeah it does, but they're called swing wings, or variable geometry wings. SU-15: SU-5: Sukhoi SU-13 was a jet prototype in the late 40's which never flew. SU-22:

I say why not create a totally new and fictional army with the world's current weapons systems available to export market?

The radar is IN the nose... not under it ;)

You'll loose anyway  I didn't say what I bet on

BTW Hardrock... Me and my friend are having a bet which will happen sooner: the release of your Eurofighter or the operational deployment of the real thing. ;)

OH NO! Diesel ...is down!

Yeah! I'm having trouble moving the aircraft around on the carrier too!

Good F-14 model indeed... tho the fins on the back look a bit too large

For what? so you can shoot down enemy planes flying over Kolgujev all the way from Malden?

That doesn't make sense. Above earth's atmosphere means that there is no air to create lift on the wings let alone to keep the engines running. And the SR-71 is the fastest air-breathing aircraft in the world. I'm sure you meant above Troposphere: the lowest layer of the earth's atmosphere, where all weather takes places. SR-71's ceiling: 25km (well in the stratosphere) Even the lowest satellites orbit at an altitude of about 150-1000km

How about an A-9: http://www.edwards.af.mil/gallery/html_pgs/images/attack/a9a-1_072.jpg I want a YF-12 - the fastest fighter aircraft in the world!!!1one

Unlike the F-16s, Hornets cannot carry AMRAAMs on wingtip stations, so the sidewinders have the wingtips all to themselves. Here's what a maximum possible loadout would look like:      \   / 1----dÔb----9  23 456 78 1 wingtip:   1xAIM-9 2 underwing: 2xAIM-120 3 underwing: 2xAIM-120 4 fuselage:  1xAIM-120 5 centerline: fuel tank 6 fuselage:  1xAIM-120 7 underwing: 2XAIM-120 8 underwing: 2xAIM-120 9 wingtip:   1xAIM-9 The E/F version has two additional underwing stations both of which can carry one AMRAAM each. Whether or not this loadout is normal is irrelevant. The point is that if the hornet can carry and shoot this amount of amraams if the situation requires it.

Ahem.. the F/A-18E/F can carry as many as twelve AIM-120 AMRAAMs. The C/D can carry ten. BTW Footmunch, do you use blueprints for modeling or do you just draw them by heart?

Falcon 4:s good quality sounds could be used in this addon. Anyway... I think the model should be checked to see if it matches the diagrams I posted.

Are they fuel tanks? I always thought they were just lumps that house the landing gear. I guess you're gonna have to ask the Fairchild corporation that question

Dômô arigatô gozaimasu!

Here are some documents that can help get the model right down to scale.

As I said...

Yeah, I know what you meant silly! I mean how are you going to make an airshow mission, and how can you make the mission outcome depend on wether the loop/low speed pass/segmented roll/formation flying was purely made or not... and how are you going to make the other AI in the formation perform all that? Who's gonna play this mission? A Thunderbird viper is just as useful as the Kegetys' drill. Nobody is gonna take it to combat! sure it's fun and nice to have around, but too much work for little use. Sure, you can texture one yourself if you really need one.

Sure! Who's gonna make a mission with thunderbirds vipers?! :P Never mind him... Just concentrate on perfecting the model. The others may retexture them as they wish (with your permission of course)

The canopy looks too small when compared to the nose, doesn't it? I hope you're familiar with the Falcon 4!

Hey Hardrock! Can you make the Eurofighter's horizon ball real big, so that the pitch lines actually coincide with the sky? - Just like in OpFr Jaguar!

Some Fighters  can do that IRL too Thats called positive thrust to weight ratio. Its when the engine(s) Produce more pounds of thrust then the aircraft weighs. Altho I know an empty F/A-18 and a lightly armed SU-27 can do that, I hardly think a fully armed and fueled F2 has a thrust-to power ratio of over 1 Anyway I'd like to apologize for the following off-topic, but I feel it's important to make a statement: I think there should be a scale-shift when it comes to fighters in OFP. A fighter's maximum speed in OFP should be about 0.6 of what it is in real life: If a fighter's maximum speed is the speed of sound ~700kts then it should be ~700kph in the game. I'm against using absolute values with fighters, simply because of the size of the islands and viewdistances. Also, short-range air-to-air missiles should have the same speed as with these fighters, and thus would take longer for it to reach the target. This has the following effects: -The missile has more time to correct its flight and track the target, thus creating a more realistic envelope. The missile will track best when fired at 0 degrees angle-off-target (directly behind) and will be most likely to miss when fired at 135 degrees AOT (front&side). -The aircraft being fired upon actually has time for evasive actions (provided it has RWR or the pilot has detected the launch) -Long-range radar-guided and short-range Heat-seeking missiles can differ from each other. Until now, It hasn't mattered if you used a Sparrow or a Sidewinder. They've both reached the target even though it may be out of visual range. With the introduction of these aircraft the target actually has to be in visual range, otherwise it will take too long for a Sidewinder to reach it and it will run out of fuel.