Vampyre

I'd love me some F-111 of any version please... with a preference for the ones that actually saw combat (A/E/F). The F-111's were capable of night time all weather low level penetration and strike with very heavy war loads. It was fast, with its speed only limited by airframe temperature. It had incredible range, with two F-111A's sent to its first Paris airshow flying across the Atlantic from the US in one flight without refueling and, get this, without drop tanks. They were used in combat in Vietnam, Libya, Iraq and stood ready in bases in the UK if a shooting war had started in central Europe during the Cold War.

I'm counting on having it by August 31st. That is the end of winter in the southern hemisphere (Australiasian Seasons). I like to manage my expectations and am rarely disappointed.:thumbup:

It's the Tailhook convention so they are specifically not talking about the USAF because it is a whole different organization. Tailhook is the annual Naval Aviation convention.

Looks like you got VX-9 and VX-23 mixed up. Vandy was originally used by VX-4 and it carried over when they merged with VX-5 to become VX-9. It continued in use at VX-9 Det Point Mugu. EDIT: Also when I was with VX-9 the F/A-18C's were 3xx series MODEX's. F/A-18E's were 1XX, F/A-18F's were 2xx, F/A-18D's were 4xx, EA-6B's were 5xx-53x, EA-18G's were 57x. AH-1W's were 74x, AV-8B's were 75x up until we transferred them to VX-31 then the 75x MODEX was used for the AH-1Z's and the UH-1Y used 76x MODEX's. The skin the Hornet has in game is only used by one F/A-18C and its MODEX is 333. The scheme is also on one D, MODEX 444 and one F/A-18F, MODEX 222. We normally used the Vampire callsign.

If you really want someone to ask you about your flight sim hobby just do as I did... walk around in public with a TrackIR clip attached to your ballcap. No T-shirt needed.

The Forrestal class had three JBD's. Cat 4 was the only one without a JBD. That incident was on the Independence.

I wouldn't call them worthless. They can kill infantry and trucks quite handily. Think about it, the M-60C firing the 7.62mm/51 round has a rate of fire (according to my quick search) of 500-650 rounds per minute. The Bronco was equipped with four which would put the rate of fire between 2000-2600 rounds per minute. A comparable weapon would be the M-134 Minigun. It fires the same 7.62/51 round at about twice (or three times) the rate of fire. You are not going to kill a T-80U or any other heavily armored beast but I'm willing to bet it would take down an Mi-8. It could also mount a SUU-11 Minigun pod as well to add to the 7.62/51 weight of fire. That is all in game though. For any larger, more heavily protected targets, the OV-10 has the capability to mount a Mark 4 20mm gun pod, Zuni Rockets, 2.75 in rockets and various iron bombs and CBU's. The OV-10 was originally built to be a light attack/Counter Insurgency aircraft... which oddly enough, the Navy was the only branch of the US armed forces to use it as such with the Air Farce and Marines instead using them primarily for FAC and ANGLICO support in Vietnam. Recommended reading for Bronco fans- https://www.amazon.com/Flying-Black-Ponies-Support-Squadron/dp/159114468X

This is correct.

Aircraft designs are compromises built on specific performances desired. The wings are the primary aerodynamic determining factor relating to the speed of the aircraft. The CRJ and E-jets are designed for long range fast cruise performance and have relatively thin wings compared to the S-3 and A-10. The S-3 Viking was designed for long range, long loiter times at low to medium altitudes to engage enemy surface and subsurface threats. It has a large, high lift wing with a mild leading edge sweep. The A-10 was designed for Close Air Support (CAS) where low speed and high maneuverability was desirable in order to maintain visual contact with targets on the ground. Having a large, straight, high lift (draggy) wing is perfect for the CAS mission.

Of course it's not entirely clear. That's the point. The Hype train is boarding now.:thumbup:

Exactly what I was going to post. :thumbup:

That is what we called the Nav Pole. It had a ladder to the top, an anemometer, wind vane and other aerials on it. Every carrier I have been on, Kitty Hawk, Enterprise, and most of the Nimitz class have all had them.

Yes it will, it will spit hot shards of metal at extremely high speeds at him.:thumbup:

While it is nice to have this information, I'm disappointed the Phantom got pushed to the back of the line. I've never really liked the F-16... and frankly, there are no aircraft currently in DCS that are on my personal favorites list. At least I should have the F-14 within the next year or so. It is nice to see the helicopters on there though. Looking forward to the Hind and the AH-1S (whatever version of it is chosen) will be a good match for the Army Huey currently in game. Is that a rough order of expected release (subject to change of course) or did you just toss the aircraft in there haphazardly?

Well, they will have to update the game engine for persistent cow pies and have various equipment fits for Bulls, Steers, Heifers and Cows... I mean, nobody wants to be caught in a situation where they need a Bull but only have a Steer. I wonder if cow chip tossing will be a thing?

Gouge is a slang term we use in military aviation speak (possibly others as well) for information, both written and verbal, that has been gathered from multiple sources and unofficially condensed into more easily digestible form for operational usage. Think of it as the Cliff Notes Version.

It would be nice to get a full fidelity version of the F-105G Wild Weasel III that they teases a model of a few years ago. I'd also like to see the F-105D Thunderchief. They did hire a new terrain builder recently as well.

Interesting, thanks for the clarification. It makes sense from a get the new players into DCS perspective. So we are talking F-5E, F-86F, MiG-15Bis, MiG-21Bis, Mirage 2000C and maybe a AJS-37 being of the four selected. Being that all of the platforms on my list are from Belsemtek, Magnitude 3 and Heatblur I wonder how something like that will impact those developers? I don't see this as something the current customers who own any of the full fidelity versions of the selected planes will purchase. I'm glad I didn't have the little bunnies in my head telling me things that turned out to be untrue.

Yeah, make it player controllable too where they have to actually know how to load it. :)

The S-75M2 Volkhov was from about 1972. These are post Vietnam missile systems.

They are both Volkhov's. The S-75M2 Volkhov introduced the V-759 5Ya23 missile which had better maneuverability than previous versions and also could still use the 20D missiles of previous versions. The S-75M3 Volkhov introduced a Angle Deception Jamming Canceller and the V-760V 5Y29 nuclear tipped missile based on the V-759 5Ya23 missile. They are either the SA-2d or SA-2e Guidelines depending on their missiles. They are very similar to each other.

Nice, I love me some big boom. Thanks for the conformation.

I think the RSN designation might be western in nature. As for citations, I don't see any listed in the book but the author does mention several sources in his authors notes which include Fakel and Almaz. Towards the end of the book he includes a list of books and articles for further reading(mostly in Russian) but includes an article by him in the Journal of Slavic Military studies and a book by him written for Janes. Odds are that he probably knows what he is writing about.

Here is my source: https://www.amazon.com/Red-SAM-Guideline-Anti-Aircraft-Vanguard/dp/1846030625

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/ru/downloads/screenshots/572/