Brit_Radar_Dude

Myself, I find it better to do manual landings at about 300 - 330kph kph ie a little faster than recommended. I make sure I have a nice gentle descent rate of about 5 metres per sec. As I get over the runway threshold, I'll cut the throttles and as the speed drops off, I reduce the descent rate and set the wheels down gently. Practice first on a long runway so you are not in a panic to get her down quick, there are several long ones in the Crimea part of the map..... Oktyabrskoye 58° 3500m Krasnoyvardenskoye 50° 3500m Dzhankoy 50° 3500m Once you have the hang of it, try adding a little crosswind with the Mission Editor weather page. The try adding some turbulance. Then try other aircraft. Once you are confident about landing on pretty much any runway in Lockon and in any day / night, wind / weather conditions, then try landing the Su-33 on the carrier. You will feel like you are starting all over again. You will find you have to be much more accurate to do this, it is like trying to land on a postage stamp ;), but it will give you a real buzz once you can do it.

However did you find that? It's a laugh riot! Rep inbound....

That radar model is sweet! Looks a lot like one of mine. You gotta release that as a Mod.

I just finished reading a book by a FAC who flew OV-10's in 'Nam and how they would write up the info on their windscreen with a grease pencil. Nice to hear that the Devs are working in a way to add realism with trigger zones and the generation of 9-line radio calls. Does this mean BS will ship with a grease pencil for that added touch of realism? And I assume a screenwipe to clean my monitor afterwards? ;)

Since you talk about ARM's later on in your post, then I assume you are discussing a SAM radar. A typical SAM system has two types of radar. First - a search radar that does the initial detection of a target and forms a track of its course. Second - a tracking radar that handles the engagement tracking and target illumination. A typical engagement is as follows. The search radar detects the bandit and starts target tracking it as each revolution of the search radar detects it. A target track can be formed that shows the bandit course, speed. Once the bandit is in engagement range, then the tracking radar is moved to point at the bandit and switched on. Once it has locked onto the bandit, then a missile can be launched when the bandit is in range. A typical search radar actually spends most of its time "listening". It transmits a pulse, then listens for a reply reflected from a target. The time taken for the reply to be seen gives you the range to the target. The direction of the radar antenna (or the beam of an electronically steered beam) gives you the direction of the target. The radar will have electronics to suppress any spurious signal (ie noise) that could not be a genuine reply reflected from a target. If the radar was simply listening all the time without transmitting, then any received signal would be regarded as noise and suppressed. So what you are talking about isn't radar. If you are talking about an electronic device that detects an enemy aircraft's radar emissions, then you are talking about an ESM system (something similar to the RWR in an aircraft). As I believe your concept of listening state/passive mode is not realistic, then this question isn't pertinent. If you are talking about the ability of an ARM to guide onto a SAM radar that has been switched off, then yes it is technically possible. If the ARM has the position of the SAM radar fixed accurately enough, it is possible for it to continue on its flight path despite the SAM radar being switched off. Other missiles such as the British ALARM have the capability to zoom up to high altitude (40,000ft) and deploy a parachute when the signal dissapears, the missile then slowly descends on the parachute looking for a signal. When the radar is switched back on again, the missile ditches the parachute and re-engages the radar. You should also consider that when the radar is "switched off", it usually is not actually switched off, rather the radar output is diverted to a dummy load and most radar systems will still leak some signals, sometimes enough for an ARM to guide onto the radar. Countermeasures include decoys. Many years ago I worked on a radar system that included decoys that could accurately mimic the main radar. When under attack, the radar could be switched off and the decoys would transmit using the same frequency, PRF, power etc and be indistinguishable from the main radar. As the decoys were small, there was always a good chance they might survive the attack and remain usable for subsequent attacks.

Looks nice. Compatability? V1.02? V1.12b? All versions? Does the Mod place these lights at all runways?

Groove - sorry, shoulda thought to put here, I keep forgetting we have a chit-chat area. Condor11, Dmut - Yeah, I know it is not a true historical representation of what actually happened on Hill 3234, but after watching the movie I did do some InterNet research to check the real facts as the film had made me curious to find out. Most every other movie about real historical events is not very accurate either - don't get me started about U-571 !! Nevertheless, a) it was good to see a Russian language film on British TV, get bored with the same Hollywood rubbish all the time. b) it was good to see great shots of actual Russian equipment (vehicles, aircraft) that I'm familiar with from Lockon. c) after living through the Cold War, it was good for a change to see a film that didn't show Russians as the bad guys.

I've just finished watching this film on a UK TV channel (Film 4). Excellent Russian war film set in Afghanistan, I guess you could regard it as Russia's version of Platoon or Big Red One. Has no-one mentioned it on this Forum before? I certainly don't remember it. Loads of stuff in it that is also in Lockon:- T-72, BMP-2, BTR-60/70(?), Grad, BRDM, Mi-24, Mi-8, Su-25, An-12(?), An-26. As soon as it finished, just had to fire up Lockon and fly something Russian. :) http://www.9thcompany.com

Sweet movie, Mate. You have a nice touch.....

Heh, Heh....

Use static objects for the ships that you do not want to fight back and actual ship units for the others that will fight.

http://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/home/leisure/countryparks/sherwoodforestcp.htm Yes, there really is a Sherwood Forest. Sadly, it is not very big anymore. What remains is about 5 miles from where I was born and where my folks still live.

UK. Originally Sherwood Forest (Robin Hood country) but now in the South East.

I can remember a holiday I had when I was a student in the late 1970's. A buddy and I did a trip through Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Holland on bicycles staying in our tents on campsites or on farms. We were crossing North Germany during a NATO exercise - we saw UH-1's, A-10's, etc in the air, Chieftains, Leopard's and Marder's on big tank transporters on the roads. One morning we were camped somewhere South of Bremen, I was woken up at 7am by a noise like thunder. I looked out the tent and in the distance could see a flashing light getting closer, then WHOOSH!! This happened again and again at 20 second intervals as a bunch of F-104G's went over my tent at full blast and certainly lower than they should've. Dunno where they were from - maybe Jever?? It was awesome...... From that day, the Widowmaker always was kinda special as I'd got to see it close up and personal, so I guess my choice would be the Starfighter.

Cosmo is "long in the tooth" on the Lockon Forums like myself :music_whistling: I'm sure he knows how to resurrect his logbook pilot. Probably (like me) just can't be bothered to keep doing it. It does get tedious.....

I dont think this is really a valid point to use in this discussion. The service life and reliability of the engines in single engined aircraft in the USAF is much, much higher than comparable single engined Russian aircraft. I can quite understand that the Russian Air Force could have withdrawn single engined aircraft and kept dual engined aircraft for safety reasons. What is the MTBF (mean time between failures) for an engine in an F-16 compared to a typical Russian single engined aircraft? What is the service life in thousands of hours for an F-16 engine, a MiG-27 engine?

I'd never really been into the whole Internet thing or Forums before I bought Lockon, so I just assumed they were all as friendly and knowledgable as the Lockon Forums. You know what? They're not. There are some top class folks on the various Lockon Forums, it was cool to meet some of them in person (IguanaKing, 214th_Hitman, SkoPro, S77th_ReOrdain and IronHand) when I was last in the US on vacation. So keep flying the friendly Lockon skies...... .....and Forums.

I am assuming you have a copy of Lockon GOLD ? Some early versions did indeed have a borked FC CD the fault of the publishers - Evolved Games. The manufacturing fault manifests itself as a StarForce problem, in fact it is not. It is, as you said, a disk problem. I have no answer for you other than returning it to where you bought it and asking for a refund. As far as I know, http://www.lockon.co.uk still have single disk copies of FC for sale and also have the download verison of FC for sale, and also the original Lockon for sale. On both Ebay UK and Ebay US, I have seen many copies of original Lockon for sale very cheap Ј1 plus postage, $1 plus postage, etc. Search for Lock On in video games category. So if you do get your money back for your copy of GOLD, buy a bargain original Lockon, then either the single FC CD or download FC from http://www.lockon.co.uk.

Well I think that the reason many of us like the "useless" Su-25 is exactly because it is old school. When you complete your mission DESPITE the problems of navigating to the target with the guages instead of a HUD, spotting the target with the poor view out of the cockpit, hitting it with the rubbish weapon aiming system, then you know you have really accomplished something.... Having said that, I'd love a flyable Mig-27K or Su-17M4, they are my favorite AI jets, I use them in missions all the time. I never fly the F-15 it's rubbish. So you can replace the F-15 with a Su-17 and I'd be happy!

I think I remember this Mod when it came out. It was a very long time ago and I am reasonably sure it was in the days of v1.02, but I don't remember who made it.

If you don't know what type of missile has been fired at you, drop chaff and flares. If you do know for sure what missile has been fired at you, then only drop chaff for radar guided. Only drop flares if you know it is an IR missile. The default when you drop both at the same time is 2 flares and 1 chaff. That means that you run out of flares earlier than chaff.....and Murphy's Law says that will happen just at the worst time for you.

Cheers JEFX !! I hadn't noticed it myself. I've just nipped downstairs to get a wee dram of the decent Scotch (Glenlivet) and drinking right back at ya....

Nope, we've never got around to actually meeting. Whereas, whilst on a trip to the USA, I met IguanaKing, 214th_Hitman, SkoPro in Colorado, S77th-ReOrdain in Detroit plus the legendary IronHand in New Hampshire.

I'd always wondered why it seemed to work differently with overcast. Nice find Mustang. I still find it wierd that I am reading your post on an internet site hosted in Moscow and you're only a couple of miles away in real life - LOL

Nice....