The Beast

Hmmm ok so i got my triggers set. but the mission never loads once all conditions are met.... i even set up a message for each trigger so i could verify that each condition was happening. the messages appear when each condition is met but alas no misssion loads when it should. Maybe im missing something......anybody know anything about the mission load trigger?

If you set flag 1 to set at 100 knots you shouldn't have to set altitude. If i understand flags correct. Then flag 1 would set when you reach 100 knots and you could set the last part to be flag 1 true and units speed is 0 knots........

cool thanks man.

I want to create a trigger that loads a mission once i land my jet. Anybody now of anyway to do this? I thought about doing a trigger for airspeed at zero but that will just load the next mission at the start. I also thought of a trigger zone but when you take off you will hit the zone so thats out. Basicly all i want is a continous type of mission. You land and another mission loads and you contiue on. Thanks guys

So after a mission we are RTB and as we turn for the approach to final. I hear two things betty starts going nuts and my wingy informs me he is hit......well here are the pics....i got minor damage and hydro failure and he got a bit more....enjoy my plane My wingman... Both made it back with no issues....

Just a few shots for now, enjoy!

g limits depend on current loadouts. When i got my ride we pull 7.8 Gs it was about all we could pull with tanks. Also another thing to remember is the human factor i think a human can only with stand 12 Gs at the extreme max. WE had a jet pull 11 to 12 gs twice and still flys!!!

2 mavs on the 88 is the only ways its done anymore.

Which part???

the reason there are only 2 ir mavs and there should only be 2 tv mavs on the 88 as well, but the reason for that is when you load the inboard most stationon the 88(closest to the wheels) You melt tge tires when it fires, therefore you can only put 2 mavs on an 88 bottom station and outboard station.

Awesome awesome model. But i do have one problem! They're not CFTs there just drop tanks thats all. But yeah anyway awesome job love it

Cool i completly forgot about that my bad!! As far as the 9l/m goes im pretty sure its a rear aspect missile where as the 9x is a all aspect missle. Anyway another quick one here what years does LOFC take place. I cant remember if its late 80s or early 90s. Once again thanks guys

Im sure this has been asked allready but here it goes if and when BS comes out are there an plans for addtions to current A/c armament inventory?? Which leads to my next question any chance you us getting an Aim-9x in game???

nah you dont land in that weather you eject:smilewink:

i guess the question would be how fast did you decend to angels 20??

I wouldnt say that they completly ignored western A/C. What i would say is they have focused more on russian A/C but go figure they are from russia so you stick with what you know right? However the A-10 and F-15 seem to be modeled fairly accurate. Yeah granted there have been times when i wonder if if been screwed but its normally with the -120s. Now its been awhile since ive flown the A-10 and i have never used the k model, whats wrong with it???

i have two comments to add to this conversation. 1. In your six vs 1 senario your right one raptor wont kill six -35's but six -35s cant kill what they cant see. How does splitting up help any if you have no clue where the -22 is. and normally there will be 2 -22s up working together the one firing the missles gets the info from the other guy. Just something to think about. 2. its all about the pilot.

heres a cool screenshot of a -15 firing a -9

in away yes it is active and tracking well before it leaves the rail however i was refering to the weight displacement all the weight is up front and all the vibrrations from flight make the rail wear extremly fast

well guns on fighters is back at the bah who needs them stage and in all honesty do we really need them??

here is some interesting reading on the AIM-132 (ASRAAM) http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-132.html did you know that the 120 and 132 were part of an agreement between the US and europe. The USA got to make the BVR missle (120) and europe got to make the dogfighting missle (132) but in the end the US decided not to buy the 132. well either way good info

ok so my guess is the AI uses chaff more than flare. it just seems as if the chaff is more effective i guess

i dont know i guess i fail to see the validiity of the missile. In the last 10 or even 15 years how many A/A kills where made and how many were with aim-9s. In this day and age the farther away you are the better therefore i see the -9x as a waste of maney and time.

actually its been in service for about two or three years now and the navy had it before the air force. Either way the air force after using it for about a year, we began noticing different rail wear problems and so on. So bottom line is when the heck are we gonna need to use an aim-9x let alone a -9l/m so rather than spend millions of dollars on the -9x. we pretty much stopped using it. Also another quick note the aim-7 is going away as well. The whole point i got from the air force is that why use a 9 hwn you can use a 120. Besides i a actuallity the current aim-9 model works just fine.

according the specs i read the ASRAAM is a MACH 3 missle while the AMRAAM is a mach 4 missle, either way we are comparing apples to oranges here. The ASRAAM was made to compete with the -9x. Also its a heat seeking missle. Where as the -120 is a radar guided medium range missle therefore you cant really compare these to and judge which ones better