Vampyre

Looks like the pilot forgot to switch out his map on his way down to the Black Sea.

I've seen many a would be virtual fighter pilot that can regularly make aerial kills without ever having a clue about the technical aspects of flying. You know, the basic things like being able to fly at a constant speed, altitude and bearing. Delivering ordnance on time and on target is an art in itself and gives a tremendous sense of accomplishment when executed to perfection. As for complexity, have you tried hitting targets by bombing from high altitude? It's damn hard. Also, it's very satisfying getting in to the target and back out again despite the best efforts of the yankers and bankers. Besides, fighter pilots make movies (cheap B rate homo-erotic movies), and bomber pilots make history. :smilewink:

I hope it is an F-111 but with everyone speculating that it would have to have Jester/swing wings/naval/ground radar this and that, wouldn't it be funny if it was a JA-37 Viggen?

F99th- Vampyre #14 - F-5E

Correction, the USAF uses it. You will never see a USN or USMC Hornet carry it.

One of my favorite aircraft since I first saw them in the mid-80's. When my dad was stationed at RAF Fairford, we used to go to RAF Upper Heyford fairly routinely and I loved to see the F-111E's taking off and landing. We were over there when El Dorado Canyon went down. I remember seeing the KC-10's and wondering why so many of them were on the ramp at Fairford. We found out the next day. We then moved to Holloman AFB in New Mexico and would see the F-111D's from Cannon doing low level runs on occasion... pretty exciting to see them suddenly appear and disappear just as quickly. As much as I think Heatblur would do a good job with it, I'd expect a DCS: F-111 to come from BST. Of course I really want multiple versions of the F-111, specifically the D, E, F and FB-111A (for delivering lollypops, puppy dogs and sunshine... without all of the lollypops and puppy dogs that is) and I think Heatblur are a better candidate for delivering multiple versions. With the exception of the FB-111A, the other three versions look the same externally but have major differences internally in avionics and capability. The D had the very complex and very capable (when it was working) Mark II avionics, The E was basically an F-111A with the Triple Plow II intakes, and the F had a mix of the Mark II avionics and the more reliable pieces of other versions of the F-111 cobbled into the avionics suite plus the more powerful TF-30-P-100 engines (of which the exhaust nozzle supplied the only real external difference from the D and E). The F was also Pave Tack and GBU-15 capable which means that it was the only US F-111 that was capable of self designating LGB's. The FB-111A had longer wings and the Mark IIB avionics specifically tailored for sunshine delivery as specified by SAC. It was also rated at a lower G limit than the TAC F-111's so when SAC was done with them and TAC was taking them over, they had to be beefed up structurally and the avionics modified to expand their conventional weapons delivery which changed their designation to F-111G.

Here you go- https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3189029&postcount=2

I'll see you're B-17G and raise you a B-36 Peacemaker with 15 Jesters. :thumbup:

That actually means nothing. Due to rather stringent environmental laws, the jets would only get a total repaint when they go in to a rework facility and that is dictated by flight hours. Other than that they would need a waver and access to a paint hangar, which not every base has. The squadrons corrosion shops are only authorized to do paint touch up and markings on a regular basis. Depending on where the jet was before VMA-311 had it for testing the APKWS and how much it was actually flown, it is very possible that that jet has not gone to a Naval Air Rework Facility since the new scheme hit the fleet.

The "tusks" are a part of the Zeus self protection jammer. Also, the UK Harriers had special outrigger doors fitted to protect them against the Sidewinder rocket plume.

Geez Air Force.... I suppose it's a good thing drones don't have aircrew in them. I knew they were accident prone but still, that is a lot of class A's.

The linked post says nothing about Iraq or Kuwait. Google translate for Chizh's post- Там Иран с другой стороны от пальмы. Множество пользователей со всего мира ждут эту карту. There's Iran on the other side of the palm tree. A lot of users from all over the world are waiting for this card. Perhaps you selected the wrong post to link? Or are you saying they will not be a part of the map?

They are left on to avoid maintenance issues with constantly cycling them on and off and avoid delays when they are needed. Things tend to break when they are constantly being moved. It also takes a significant amount of time to mount them and perform release and control checks to ensure they work. It's more efficient to just leave them mounted. Outboard Pylon- 96lbs Intermediate Pylon- 131lbs Inboard Pylon- 143lbs

I don't see why a Sea Harrier FRS1, the actual Falklands war UK carrier borne fighter, would be a tough sell. The only real complaints I foresee would be from the multiplayer dogfight guys who have to have their latest and greatest Sea Harrier FA2 with AIM-120A's so they can be competitive. A Sea Harrier FRS1 and Harrier GR3 would be great for simulating the operations in the South Atlantic. The Razbam Mirage III and Pucara (if they ever decide to resurrect it) would make for a fine start to a simulation of the conflict.:thumbup:

I wouldn't really get my hopes up for that to be the true size of the map. All of the airfields are concentrated in a small area right in the middle so I expect it to be similar to the NTTR map with higher detail in the middle and low to no detail past the outer airfields within a box shaped center area.

The pilots have to maintain currency. Almost every fly day you will see jets going off the pointy end with blue death to train for A/G. Same for A/A, they are constantly training. When deployed to the boat, the main reason for landing anywhere else other than the boat would be for weather or a broken jet that had to divert. When doing combat operations, the jets leave the boat, do their missions, and then come back to the boat. If they land anywhere else they will not have their squadrons maintenance support available for required inspections and servicing. Occasionally, if a squadron has assets that are in high demand such as Electronic Attack Prowlers/Growlers or VF-154's AFAC F-14A det in OIF a squadron will send a maintenance detachment to shore to support flight operations in country but that is more of an exception than a rule when they originally deploy to the AO on the boat. Even in these cases, the jets will return to wherever they launched from.

To be fair, the S-3 was a lot more than just an anti-submarine plane. It was an excellent patrol plane/anti-ship platform and had the ability to employ Mk-82/84 iron bombs, Mk-20 Rockeyes, Mavericks, Harpoons, Rockets, and an array of mines in various sizes in addition to the Mk46 and Mk50 torpedoes it used for ASW. It also was a good shipborne recovery tanker. After about 1999 the ASW equipment was removed anyway.

Read through the paper. I'm not a missile design engineer so a little clarification is needed here so I can better understand it. With the missile limited to seven g's, vice the 18 g's it is rated at IRL, the in game missile will be sacrificing maneuverability for correctish range numbers due to game engine limitations. Is that a correct conclusion or is there more to it than that?

The CFT's being on top of the LEX on the Super probably will negatively affect the AOA. It also covers over the LEX spoiler which will affect nose down pitching moments. The plus side is that it carries enough fuel to replace drop tanks carried under the wings and/or on the centerline. This maintains the fuel load in streamlined tanks and removes the need for draggy pylons and tanks under the wing. It will be a real boon for the electronic attack guys and will also be good for trucking bombs around the AO as it will free up additional pylons for weapons or allow the removal of unnecessary pylons for better fuel economy. You will lose a little bit of nose authority with the CFT's but that is not really that much of an issue in the super now is it.

I would put down good money that he is who he says he is. Navy pilots talk a certain way and he knows the language. If you know what to look for you can tell who is and is not who they say they are if they claim to be in the military.

Same here, the AI are just too predictable to make me feel like I accomplished anything by shooting them down. I like flying to accomplish missions by coordinating with other players while going against other players. Multi Coop can be fun against ground targets sometimes too.

I haven't been to an IAT since the 1987. Went to the show in 1985 as well. Lots of jets you just don't see much of anymore were there like Phantoms, Crusaders, F-104's, G-91's, Victor K2's, Vulcans, Buccaneer, F-111's, Super Etendard... I had tried to get over there for this show but life got in the way again... Maybe next year. Looked like a fun time.

That is the million dollar question right there. Many don't understand how much planning goes into something as seemingly simple as a daily flight schedule. Will they make a scripted deck with a highly limited limited number of set spawn points or will the spawns be more dynamic like in real life?

My post assumes they RTFM first. Yeah it will probably be- "C" "C" "C" "C" with notes that read- HNFIWHWD DNKUA.

Or, what I imagine will be many first attempts- "Wave-off" "Wave-off" "B" "Cut"