Siearra hotel projects

[BFMF]

Andrew, the carrier and subs will be scenery APIs which will allow for movement of the fleet through scenery updates. The missiles however will be user-piloted, but the SA-8 launcher will be a scenery macro. The idea is to have a laucher placed in the scenery from where the user will "launch". The missiles will each have a fully accurate .air file ensuring that it has the same specifications as their real-world counterparts.

The carrier will be fully-landable and packed with features (night lighting, FS2002 effects, etc), I must stress that this carrier is still under-construction and will continue to be an on-going project even after intial release.

ok, I see. Still looks fun!

[Ivan]

oh yes, the 'Kuz' in FS2002!!

If you are building this one, why don't you guys also repaint it as the 'Varyag' which was sold to India (AFAIK)

[IAFpilot03]

isn't that lip on the carrier a bit...errr...prone to mishaps? I know that in other objects in FS2K2, like mountains and stuff, climbing them is almost impossible, u go through the mountain with your gear and stuff...

Iafpilot

[ATI_7500]

whow,the typhoon! looks really good so far!

[Chris L]

oh yes, the 'Kuz' in FS2002!!

If you are building this one, why don't you guys also repaint it as the 'Varyag' which was sold to India (AFAIK)

Ivan, the Ukrainians unsuccessfully attempted to sell it to numerous countries such as India and China but with no success. However it has been bought by a company who wish to turn the imcomplete carrier (missing engine and rudder) into an entertainment complex and casino. It was towed from the Black Sea to Macau where it is now anchored!

isn't that lip on the carrier a bit...errr...prone to mishaps? I know that in other objects in FS2K2, like mountains and stuff, climbing them is almost impossible, u go through the mountain with your gear and stuff...

Iafpilot

Correct iafpilot, FS won't currently allow for inclided surfaces however I was thinking could this be resolved by some sort of mesh? Have to look into it.

Oh and some more previews  ;)

Tu-22 - by Daniel Dunn
[center]

Best regards,


Chris larvin

[IAFpilot03]

well,I hope u get that fixed, btw, those "TU-22" shots you posted are actually TU-26 shots (some call it TU-22M, but that's just a common mistake ) The Tu-22, tho similiar in shape, had two engines in the aft part of the fuselage, by the tail, and did not have variable geometry wings, the -26 is basically a highly evolved -22

Boaz

[Chris L]

Thanks for the correction Iafpilot03...
heres some info on the Tu-22M -

Contrary to previously held beliefs the Backfire is not a derivative of the Tu-22 Blinder, although the Tupolev Bureau deliberately fostered the impression that it was in order to aviod having to obtain the approval of the Communist Part Central Committee to start a new aircraft development program. The original design (Backfire-A) underwent major modifications and re-emerged as the Tu-22M-2 Backfire-B. About 400 Tu-22Ms were produced, 240 of them being M-2s/3s. The latest version, the M-3 has a reduced defence armament and the flight refuelling probe has been deleted.

[IAFpilot03]

seems my info's a bit outdated...lol
well, I guess if it's a new aircraft altogether, they sould have kept the Tu-26 designation (at least outside the USSR)

Iafpilot

[d0mokun]

oooer i dont even know which one that tupolevski is... lol..
But ja as for the fitter, being as Jon commissioned it then it goes to his team first- then mine to play around with. It's an SH aircraft, y'see..  8)
Any questions about either of them, email me.

[IAFpilot03]

I've done somre reading on the matter.
turns out the designations thing wasn't really meant to trick the guys inside the USSR, but rather the folks over at NATO. Keeping the designation 'Tu-22' was meant to make the western world see it as an 'upgrade'  if you will, to the current design, when in fact, it far surpassed the Tu-22 when it comes to speed, versatility, payload, and range.

[stormy]

Neeto.lol