Jayhawk1971

Soooo.....Top Gun Maverick campaign when?

Told ya Just got the order of events wrong (who gets shot down and who comes to the rescue).

(unfortunately, the original video isn't available on YouTube)

Yes, I am aware of those as well. From what those sources say and hint at, there indeed may be a discrepancy between the Phoenix performance currently in game and the one stated in anecdotes of those you've mentioned, so I can relate to your point. The problem HB and ED are facing, however, is that they require hard numbers and stats to implement their missile simulation. It's hard - if not impossible - to implement anecdotal evidence, that also is 20+ years old (and might be a little biased ) . And on top of that, even if they could somehow get additional, not yet tabbed resources, those may either be classified and/or fall under ITAR restrictions. Sure, they could guess, and err in favor of gameplay, but that would go against their standards. And would lead to a very slippery slope. Either way, I have no way of knowing how the real deal worked, so I have to (and do!) trust in HB to give us the best representation of the AIM-54 as circumstances allow.

127.5 is the freq for the AI wingman ...as has been mentioned in this thread already

When dealing with (fighter) pilots in anecdote mode, remember the "10 percent true" rule.

Doesn't seem to be necessary, as it hardly seems to move, at least not in the Greek models.

--ATTENTION MISSION SPOILERS-- Ok, so far my results are: Burst height set to 1500: not a scratch on those TELs Burst height set to 300: got 2 destroyed and one damaged (maybe?); debriefing page said three hit, but one had "bda" next to it. Mission keeps telling me that the target was not destroyed, Poodle asks if I can re-engage. As my burning remains rained down on the airbase, I paused and panned around with the F2 view: I saw 2 of the TEL burning (the two next to each other), whereas the single one seemed to be intact. I double-checked the target coordinates while punching them in. I do release well within range, about one-third within the "in range ring" displayed on the HSI. Maybe one of the JSOWs is being shot down by the dense air defense around the base? If anybody managed to destroy the SCUDs, please let me know what your settings were.

In case you haven't heard/ seen this already (the 41:08 timecode is pretty funny)

Great, thanks for the reply! I'll fiddle with the JSOW settings somewhat (maybe a quick training missions to determine the best release height), then go kill some SCUDs.!

Hi @ChillNG Just tried mission 10 (the second part) and was shot down by an SA-10. Before I try again, I'd like to find out if it was me making a mess, or deliberate mission scripting. Going to spoiler tags: Otherwise, still having a blast with the campaign! Oh, BTW, a nice addition for your next campaign (Viper Wild Weasle?) would be some post-touchdown comms like taxi to parking position (via *route*), and maybe crew chief welcoming us back.

Exactly this! An indicated airspeed is useful when forming up with the tanker initially (to manage closure rate), to get you in the ballpark. Once you're in a stable formation, the numbers become irrelevant as it's all about relative position within the formation. AAR is basically just formation flying, trying to maintain a very specific point in the formation. Edit: the only part of the HUD that I use is the pitch ladder's right 30 degree mark in AA mode, as a visual reference to align the probe with the hose.

Of all the modules I own, I find the Tomcat the easiest to AAR in. I can manage in the Hornet, but it's weird and feels unnatural (hyper sensitive and "jumpy" pitch axis, for starters). Once the Tomcat is trimmed correctly, it's generally really stable which makes it relatively easy to connect and stay connected. I rarely get a disconnect, even if the tanker is turning mid-refuel. As others have mentioned, manually sweeping the wings back somewhat (bomb mode for example) keeps the center of gravity stable by preventing the wing geometry to change all the time. Remember that the extended probe causes drag which needs to be compensated by adding rudder. My advice would be to forget AAR for the moment and really learn to "fly" the Tomcat: practice precision flying by the numbers (VVI needle centered in level flight, maintain airspeed and heading), develop the necessary muscle memory to do so. Also practice formation flying. For example, after playing Reflected's "Zone 5" campaign, which has you fly in formation about half the time, I got much better at AAR. Oh, and going VR made all the difference in the world for me. Depth perception and a much better view out of the cockpit (less obstruction by the canopy frame) were a game changer.

I'm three missions in, and so far I'm blown away by the immersion and attention to detail. Mission 3 came with a nice, unexpected twist. The documentation is excellent, albeit a little overwhelming at first (when all you want to do is hop in the cockpit). But well worth the read! My only minor gripes so far are: Some of the voice actors are hard to understand due to the amount of "echo" in the recording. So far in my playthrough, only flight lead/ wingman were affected. ATC, AWACS and "player" are fine. Should you ever want to fine tune some of it, maybe a dampening effect or filter could be applied? I've noticed the barometric pressure remains at 29.92. It would be a nice touch if that would change with the weather conditions, but I suppose that may break the custom ATC you've designed? Sometimes changing the comms channel doesn't "take" (F10 option doesn't appear), despite smashing the enter button, switching back and forth again, manually entering the frequency. Not sure if the triggers don't fire, or maybe I'm outside of the trigger zone (despite trying my best to stick to the flight plan). Other than that, I greatly enjoy this campaign. For those on the fence, a fun example of the level of detail in this campaign: I always perform overhead breaks, since we're flying fighters, not airliners. But maybe I should have read the SPINS more carefully instead of winging it: Of course on my downwind leg I descended below 2000 over Adana, and after touchdown I was informed by Tower that the base commander wanted to discuss my ignoring of the noise abatement procedure. It's those "little things" that create immersion.

Clearly this campaign is unrealistic, because the F-14E depicted in the campaign doesn't have inverted titanium glove vanes simulated. Hard pass!

Best historically accurate documentary The Operations Room ever made.

The one I posted is a brand new one from March 26, so the answer would be "yes", I guess.

SC has "CATCC Sue" (seen in the PBS docu-series Carrier) as the voice actor for Marshall, and "Jello" as LSO . The voice of "George" is actually provided by Casmo, not Wags.