mjmorrow

Both of your suggestions are very sensible things to do. Thank you for bringing this to our attention, Azrayen. :thumbup: MJ

Razbam team, May we have a cold start instruction video with all of the steps for starting the Mirage, programming the INS, etc, please? Thank you for your consideration of my request. :thumbup: MJ

Wow! Interesting figures, Corleone. I don't have reliable figures, myself and I really appreciate all the effort that went into this chart. It sure is a fantastic thing to come up with all of this information. Thank you and much appreciated! I am sure that ED takes getting this stuff right very seriously and that they are intent upon modeling these missiles in such a way as to best represent their actual performance, given the information they have available. In any event, whatever the ultimate performance of the Super 530D and Magic II, we are going to have a fantastic time sim flying the Mirage 2000c, no doubt. :thumbup: MJ

That is really great that you know how to get the kills at that distance. I am not even too sure if I have ever had a kill in multiplayer with the Mig-21. I once had a A-10 lined up and someone dove in in front of me and finished the A-10 off. I barely know what is going on around me, when I use the Mig-21. I am there one minute, then, Poof! I am hanging in a parachutte.:megalol: I don't have your skills, Corleone. Till I can consistently refuel the Mirage 2000c in the air, I know what is going on with the radar, how to use notching, and all of that, I am probably better off taking the wing tanks, in place of the Super 530D. I can let my more experienced 4TH Gen fellow sim pilots handle the medium range dance. I will try to learn how to work my way inside and behind my opposition, so I can get within shouting distance, for a Magic II shot. :thumbup: MJ

Thank you very much for the tips. The way the radar works seems really neat. I like the limitations, a whole lot. That will really make using the radar and learning how to interpret the radar very exciting. The radar reminds me of how humans see things. We don't necessarily see what is there, right before our eyes, we see our mind's interpretation of what is there. The radar has analogous limitations and in its flawed conception mirrors, in a way, our own everyday experience of the limitations of visual perception. This makes the radar, something I am not very familiar with, somewhat relatable. :thumbup: MJ

Yep. I ought to get off this topic, but I will share this. I have been an offender in the past. I was abusive to persons over the Internet and all. I have no excuse for that behavior. I was outright wrong. Then I saw all of the cases of teens committing suicide and stuff. I realized that criticizing persons over the Internet is weak, pathetic, unmanly, and down right harmful to persons and their self image. Even unintentionally making persons feel badly about themselves, for absolutely no good reason, especially young persons, is something that I don't want to be a part of and do. I am not a politically correct person, but I don't feel entitled to walk all over humanity, as I please, either. So now, I only say the things I would say to someone in person. I would never talk down to a teen or anyone in person. I have convicted murderers in my family. I grew up in a tough neighborhood. No one would walk up to a stranger in an area with a high murder rate, in the places I grew up, and talk down to someone, like I used to do over the Internet, not unless they were hiding behind a gun. I have known persons willing to cut my heart out for far less. I am not saying violence is right, just that persons say stuff from behind a computer screen that they aren't going to likely say and do in person. One of my grandfathers worked for a mob organization and he would have ended up in a ditch, had he said a fraction of what I said over the Internet in the past. That isn't right either, but, if I wouldn't say something to a mob guy or a cop on the beat, I should't say that thing to a fourteen year old, either. If someone wants to abuse me, I ask that they do it to me in person. People tend to be a lot more polite under those circumstances and people ought to be polite, unless they have a good reason. That I don't agree with the position of another person is no reason at all for me to attempt to belittle someone. ....and yes, I could definitely see your interest in that Strike Eagle. The F-15E is a beautiful plane, Sweep. Thank you for being a gent. I appreciate it. :thumbup: MJ P.S. As I wrote in this thread, to Jason, I hold out to the entire community:

As far as the cyber bullying, as I clearly stated before, this is a flight sim forum, about planes, the thread is on the F-15E, not me. If you want to insult me personally, do so in person. I have addressed positions, but not initiated one attack on anyone, personally. Where have I discussed the childishness of a position, described a position as a tirade, or employed any of this YOU, EQUAL, fair, business? You are clearly attacking me, not simply my position. Just because I disagree with Winter, Kayos, Sweep, and others, on some issues, does not make any of them bad persons or deserving of personal attack from me. That is all I have to say about this matter.

Funny you should mention that, Sweep. I was just getting to my guns only argument. :megalol:

I think that is a beautiful aspect of the SARH BVR show. The medium range missiles were generally intended for taking out bombers flying straight and level. Fighters are not the easiest targets. If my Mirage 2000c's Super 530D missiles hit a maneuvering fighter one out of four times or one out of ten times, I will be satisfied with the performance of the Super 530D. My primary interest in firing the Super 530D is to get the other guy to dance, so I can close in and have a WVR fight, otherwise the Super 530D is just what I put on my wings when I don't have those crazy big fuel tanks there. :lol: I consider my 30 mm cannons and the Magic II missile my primary killing weapons. I assume that my superiors would not authorize me to fire a BVR missile except under highly controlled conditions, where it was certain that what I am firing on is an enemy fighter. Most times, I would be expected to close within visual range, clearly identify what the target is in point of fact, and then not authorized to fire unless given express permission to do so or in a situation where the other guy gave me a clear justification to fire, such as maneuvering in a way that indicated that he intended to engage me and fire on me, at which point I would be depending on the dogfighting prowess of the Mirage 2000c and employing the Magic II, and/ or my 30mm's. :thumbup: MJ

Yep! Chuck is my favorite show. :) :thumbup: MJ

You edited my quote and misinterpreted my remarks. I neither explicitly wrote nor intended to suggest that scenario designers could easily put the AIM-120 on a SARH only F-15E. I was suggesting that if a scenario designer could easily remove the AIM-120 from a F-15E capable of employing that missile, than the scenario designer could just as easily add the AIM-120 to a F-15E capable of carrying the AIM-120. For the record and to be clear, my position is simply that if a DCS F-15E is introduced into DCS, it is best if that F-15E is a SARH only variant, because a SARH only variant will most likely be the one with the highest fidelity ASM, will best complement and fit in with the current and future DCS 4TH Generation DCS modules, such as the Mirage 2000c & F-14, will best contribute to ensuring the consistency of optimal competitive multiplayer game play and will best contribute to an overall enjoyable multiplayer experience, for everyone. I appreciate that you do not share my views and conclusions on the matter. While I value your opinion, I hold to my own conclusions on this matter.

I have considered what you have written so far, Winter. I respect your opinion. My conclusions are different. I didn't respond to what you wrote. It is not that I don't consider your perspective important, I do. You stated your position and point of view on the issue. I personally think that the community ought to weigh in your perspective and consider it. I am not here to pick the positions and perspectives of other persons. I am not making a formal argument, where I address all sides and then attempt to dismantle the other perspectives, because I am not interested in an argument. You wrote what you believe, I value your opinion. I stated my own opinions. I wasn't ignoring your position, I was respecting the fact that those are your sincere beliefs on the matter. You disagree with my position and I didn't see anything to react to, because those are your sincere well reasoned beliefs and I respect you and your beliefs. I didn't think that your simply disagreeing with my position required a debate between us. I didn't take your having an alternative point of view personally or think that it was a bad thing. Our differing views are out there, persons ought to consider all sides, come up with their own perspectives, come to their own conclusions. :thumbup: MJ

Was it childish to model a Razbam Mirage 2000 that does not have active radar homing missiles? I am not suggesting hobbling the game. I am suggesting modelling an F-15E with the actual weapons that it carried during the time it was serving during the First Gulf War. I would want a SARH only F-15E model, as I believe that this would enhance gameplay, since a SARH only F15E would better fit a multiplayer environment filled with SARH only Mirage fighters and SARH only F-14 fighters. F-15 sim pilots aren't going to be the only ones playing in multiplayer, so figuring out a way for the F-15 to fit within the big picture is a great good. Even the dev team making the F-15 would presumably make other add-ons and how the F-15 fits within the bigger add-on picture is important for players, and I would argue for all the dev teams. A F-15E with SARH only is a better opponent for an F14A with SARH only. That has potential significant implications that ought to be considered. When you introduce one add-on that is perceived as the best of the best, the most dominant, it will tend to affect player behaviors and ride choices, the add-ons they will use or think they need to have in DCS and it all matters, dude. What is the counter for a AIM-120 carrying F15E? Another AIM-120 carrying F15E? With a SARH only F-15E, the F-14 has a much better relative match up. I think players would be more likely to choice the F-14 as a rival for the F-15E, if the F-15E isn't capable of shooting back with an AIM-120. There will be many add-ons over the years, many dev teams, and all of their efforts are contributing to a greater whole, DCS World. The F-15E is a part of that whole, not everything on a cracker. This is why, despite my affection for the Mirage 2000, I am glad that we have the version we are getting in DCS World and not the most advanced version of the Mirage 2000. This version is perfect. This version will fit better in the overall DCS World big picture, at least that is how I see it. That is my opinion, agree or disagree. You disagree with me? Ok. I don;t need a binky, I can handle a World where persons disagree and I don't have to make personal attacks. i am just sticking to my perspective. You don't share my perspective? Oh, well. See, the sky didn't fall... What does maturity have to do with wanting a highly competitive multiplayer environment where all the 4th Gen rides best complement one another and allow for optimal competition? In my opinion, nada. :music_whistling: If you want to personally insult me, do so in person, cyber bullying on flight sim forums is super lame. So could you stay on planes and not me? My opinion is childish? This isn't about whether or not you think my opinion is childish, right? You want the AIM-120, as simple as that, right? There is nothing wrong with that. There is no politically correct version of the F-15E. I am not personally attacking you or anyone else for an interest in the AIM-120. I have an issue with the introduction of the AIM-120 on a F-15E add-on, I don;t have a problem with you or the other supporters of the missile, the dev teams, etc. This is a flight sim forum, not a place for your personal attacks and cheap shots. You don't like my ideas and perspective. There is nothing wrong with that, but I am not your pin cushion. If you want to bully me, do so in person, pal. :smilewink: Thanks.

You misinterpreted what I wrote. :music_whistling: If the F-15E module was one where the plane had the capacity to carry the AIM-120 and the AIM-7, mission builders could just as easily add in the AIM-120 as add in the AIM-7. Savvy?

Yes! The Mirage 2000c is too beautiful to down an opponent BVR, anyway. If I have to be shot down by a Mirage, I would want to see her beautiful lines and form, up close. If I have to hang in a parachutte, i think I deserve at least a peak. :smilewink: Thank goodness the PK is close to zero and not close to 100%. Personally, if I have to live with one or the other, I would rather be forced to get in close and take my chances in a knife fight, than get nailed by the other guy or gal from BVR 100% of the time. :D :thumbup: MJ

The F-15E did not always carry the AIM-120. Sure, some Mirage 2000s can carry the Exocet, some Mirage 2000's can carry active homing air medium range missiles, but not the Mirage 2000c modeled in DCS World. ecause a Mirage 2000 can carry any of the above does not mean that the one modeled in DCS should do so. We were not given the best Mirage, with the best weapons, the best of everything, we are getting a high fidelity simulation with ASM/ EFM, and SARH only capabilities. Even the Mirage 2000 modeled in game, though not nearly the newest version of the Mirage 2000, required the team to sometimes make educated guesses about the plane's systems. I think it is reasonable to assume that the newer the F-15E version modeled in DCS, the harder it will be to achieve a high fidelity simulation of systems in the F-15E. The SARH issue not withstanding, if we get a DCS F15E. What I would want, a high fidelity ASM/ EFM F-15E with the minimum of guesswork put into F-15E systems modelling, and SARH only capabilities, does not require stripping a DCS F-15E of any weapon that it actually did carry. As for the (you) stuff, please. If I was out for just me, all about team me, myself and I, I would ask for a Razbam F-22 Raptor, Kayos. :megalol: I am considering how the use of the AIM-120 impacts the big multiplayer picture. I am not looking at the F-15E as an isolated matter that exists in a vacuum and I am certainly not just out for me. Have you noticed DCS players, like Hadwell, asking for others to kindly leave the AIM-120 at home? He could use a AIM-120 capable machine and rack up crazy kills, but he takes a really hard plane, the Mig-21, and voluntarily disadvantages his own person. He might not agree with my conclusions, he may not agree with me on introducing a SARH only F-15E, but I did I consider his interests, I did consider his Mig-21. I come to my own conclusions. Rather than kindly ask future F-15E pilots to leave the AIM-120 at base, I support a SARH only F-15E. This is not necessarily what Hadwell would suggest doing, but I do my own thinking, just as he does his own thinking, and so on. I am thinking about me and I am thinking about other DCS players, though I ultimately speak only for myself and no other person, kayos. Agree or disagree with my conclusions on introducing a SARH only F-15E, but let us not get into this silly business about (you)... :smilewink: :thumbup: MJ

If the whole point is to just to get a F-15E into DCS, what is the difference? If we have a high fidelity ASM/ EFM F-15E that is SARH only, why is that a big issue or problem for players supporting the introduction of the F-15E? I wanted a Mirage 2000. We have one. it is not the most advanced version, but that is good, it will better complement and fit into the big picture, better fit in with other 4th generation rides being introduced into DCS World. We have a SARH only DCS F-14, a SARH only DCS Mirage, so why is it a big issue if we have a SARH only F-15E? Why would we need the AIM-120 to be on the DCS F-15E? :thumbup: MJ

...And the AIM-120 can just as easily be added by the scenario designer. I have seen the AIM-120 employed against an Mig-15, without provocation, on free flight server, where the server operator expressly forbade the use of weapons in writing. Express written bans on the employment of the AIM-120 does not prevent the use of the AIM-120. Show me the populated DCS multiplayer servers where the AIM-120 is consistently left out of missions. If the AIM-120 is available for the F-15E in a mission, you are going to guarantee me that F-15E players are going to stick to the AIM-7, so the mirage sim pilots and F-14 sim pilots can have a word in edgewise? They will part with an available advantage sanctioned in game, just to be nice guys and gals? if I don't carry my 520D, so players like Hadwell can have a better chance of getting in close and making a kill, the other players on my team are going to likely do the same, follow my lead, or are they going to tell me that they paid for their Mirage 2000c add-on and will do as they please, within what is permitted in the mission, including use the 530D on a parakeet, if they can do so? I can count on uniform sportsman like behavior, in an environment where that behavior is not required? As the saying goes, "Opportunity makes the thief and the thief without opportunity is resigned to a life of an honest person. " I like my mission planners and multiplayer players resigned to a life of SARH only DCS level ASM/ PFM and ASM/EFM add-ons. :smilewink:

Have you seen the videos where the team is testing the T-2 Buckeye? The videos aren't even that new, but the T-2 Buckeye really looks sharp. The T-2 Buckeye ought to be a really cool DCS add-on. I totally agree with you on the F-15E, too. I have to say though, I am encouraged by the fact that the Razbam team modeled the Mirage 2000 they could get the best information on, rather than modeling the best Mirage 2000. The version they modeled is SARH only in BVR. I am really thankful for that. I intend to sim fly the Mirage a lot and SARH requirements are going to make BVR kills much more challenging than launch, run away, repeat. I am also going to sim fly against the Mirage some times. If I am using the F-14, I don't want to be spamraamed. I am just not interested in being target practice for droves of players chucking dozens of AIM-120's to and fro with glee and reckless abandon. In a multiplayer environment, featuring out of date Mig-21's, A10c, and SARH only Mirage and F-14 fighters, fielding the AIM-120 is just not going to be that engaging, interesting, or sportsman like, from my point of view. SARH only makes planes, like the Mirage or the F-14, are more of a challenge, for me and for my opponents, when I am sim flying against the Mirage or F-14. SARH only also gives players taking on the unenviable challenge of sim flying planes like the A-10 or the Mig-21 a little more wiggle room. Their allies can defend them from SARH only fighters. If a SARH only fighter wants to down a A10 or a Mig-21 in BVR, that player will have to support that SARH missile. Escort fighters can force the attacking fighter to give up supporting that missile and save the A10 or Mig-21. With the AIM 120, the escorts might kill the attacker, but lose the A10 or Mig-21 all the same. I would be much more enthusiastic about a possible F-15E, if I knew for sure that the team was going to introduce a SARH only version of the F-15E and keep the AIM-120 off the table. :thumbup: MJ

Dudikoff, First of all, I am not the issue, so whatever you think about me personally, it doesn't belong on the forum where we discuss airplanes and not your opinion of me. Second, it may very well be the case that the AIM-7 was not carried by any F-16's used in the First Gulf War, but simply stating that it was not does not demonstrate that it was not used. Just as I do not rely upon the sources of information I have found suggesting that it was used, I am not simply gong to take someone's word for it. We are closing in on 2016, in the Twenty First Century. A lot of time has past between the First Gulf War and now. Misrepresentations of fact about what happened in the past, even the very recent past, are common enough. Misrepresentations told over and over can take on a life of their own, then be treated an indisputable truth. It may very well be a misrepresentation of fact that the AIM-7 was carried on F-16's during the Gulf War and it may very well be the case that sources indicating that it was used are in error, then again maybe the AIM-7 was used. I have to research the matter. I am not presently in a position to know one way or the other. I have come to the conclusion that I can not presently represent that the AIM-7 was or was not used on F-16's in the First Gulf War, without doing so in reckless disregard as to whether or not this is the case. I lack sufficient authoritative information and I am not in a position to know such matters, so I cannot currently come to a well reasoned determination on the matter. I will research the matter of the ANG F-16's and whether or not it was the actual case that the AIM-7 was not used on at least some F-16's used int he First Gulf War. Thank you for your assistance. I appreciate your contribution to my inquiry, Dudikoff. :thumbup: MJ

+1 We are getting the Hornet and two versions of the Tomcat. I am starting to suspect that many more Marines and Navy guys go into flight simulation development than Air Force guys. :megalol: :thumbup: MJ

During the First Persian Gulf War the AIM- 7 was not carried on any F-16s used in combat? Look, I am going to research this point, so if you don't know for sure, just say so. There is no shame in your lacking sufficient information to come to a well reasoned determination as to whether or not the AIM-7 was actually used on F-16's during the Persian Gulf War. I have sources claiming that it was, but I would not simply state that this must have been the case, because I am not confident in the sources I currently have Based on the information I do have, I would not claim to know for sure, one way or the other.

+1 Yes! That would be awesome. This Friday would be perfect.:thumbsup: :thumbup: MJ

+1 I am going to outfit my Mirage with the most advanced form of team speak I can find and enlist the help of my fellow DOW squad mates. I just hope they show up in M-2000c's and not P-51 Mustangs. It is a force of habit with us, you know. :megalol: