Vampyre

I'm not sure why you would think that. The variable incidence wing would be much simpler to implement than a variable geometry wing or even a rotor and both of those are either in DCS (rotors) or coming to DCS (VG for the Tomcat).

Pave Low is definitely not a E. The Pave Low modifications were made to the twin engine CH-53B's and C's the Air Force was using for CSAR. The modifications were enough to change the designation to MH-53H. These Helicopters have been further upgraded over time to MH-53J Pave Low III and MH-53M Pave Low IV standard. The Air Force has owned not a single H-53E helicopter. The CH-53E is a three engine version with seven main rotor blades (vice six of the twin engine models) and has a canted tail. It is a far more capable heavy lift helo than the standard twin engined H-53's. Then there is the MH-53E whose primary purpose is airborne MCM... Mine countermeasures. The MH-53E is also good at transporting lots of cargo to the ship.

...and when operating in non combat environments radar reflectors attached to the airframe were standard equipment.

The tailhook shank actually takes the majority of the force when the hook point grabs a wire. There is a lip that the point slides on to that creates contact between the hook shank and hook point all around the center of the hook point. The bolt mainly just holds the hook point to the shank.

Software without the hardware is still vaporware. :smilewink:

...and the GR7/GR9 never had guns. There was a proposal to arm them with the GR3's 30mm Aden guns but, just like the stillborn project to have new guns for them it, that too fell by the wayside because of poor project management and lack of money. It did look good with the empty pods on there though.

The GAU-12 uses one of the belly pods for the rotary cannon and the other for ammunition storage with a crossover belt and aerodynamic fairing aft of the centerline pylon.

The Tomcat only flew for two years without the AIM-54 in its quiver... 2004 I think it was. By that time the plans had already been made to toss the Tomcats in the trash which is probably why the Navy decided to get rid of the Phoenix early.

It's an AN/ASB-19 Angle Rate Bombing Sensor. It has both optical and laser spotting capability to determine release points for dumb bombs.

This thread, page 7, post 61. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3015080&postcount=61

This. Squadrons are the units one is assigned to. That being said, wearing the patches is not so much an earned thing but an identifier of where one has been. Additionally, squadrons will actually sell squadron patches and other items such as t-shirts, jackets, coins, et cetera, to civilians at airshows and other events so no, there is not any sort of taboo against the wearing of squadron patches. If you are lucky, you will spark up a conversation with someone who was actually in the squadron and maybe learn a little more from their anecdotes.

Makes sense. Actually, a single giant turbine engine might be more accurate... Ram air doesn't normally play a factor with a rotor unless something has gone horribly wrong. :thumbup:

Thanks. That explains a lot. My experience lies with jets and the generators are usually either directly attached to the engine through the accessory gearbox or are attached to a airframe mounted accessory drive that has a torque shaft that connects to the engine accessory gearbox. I find it interesting that both generators are attached to the main gearbox for the rotor. Usually, the purpose of having two separate systems is to lessen the likelihood of complete system failure but I suppose if the main gearbox fails then you are pretty much screwed anyway.

Thank you for the correction. How and where is the SGS-40PU connected to the rotor system? My assumption was that it was an engine driven generator powered through an accessory gearbox.

I'd be happy with some Mariachi music or even a nice polka. DISCLAIMER: Music is the first thing I turn off in all of my games. :music_whistling:

The manual states that with the anti-ice/air particle separator operating your takeoff weights need to be reduced. I assume you are not using these systems during warmer weather. Also the PSS has a negative effect on fuel consumption as well. Check out section 7.4.7 of Belsemtec's English Mi-8 manual. It has hyperlinks to the required charts. The PSS saps quite a bit of power from the engines when in operation. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/downloads/documentation/magnificent_eight_flight_manual/ * You are letting your engine RPM get to low to sustain your generator operation.

Well, from what I have seen, both entities will support air wing workups for deployment in Fallon and I have seen both with detachments out to other bases to support fleet workups at sea. I'm not sure if VFC-13 does any work reciprocally for the NSAWC with their schoolhouse lesson plans. Theoretically they could but I can't say if they do or not as that is beyond my current scope of knowledge.

The Navy Fighter Weapons School was a separate entity to VF-126 that operated their own aircraft even though they were both based at NAS Miramar. The setup is similar to how NSAWC is separate to VFC-13 at NAS Fallon. VF-126 and VFC-13 are stand alone Adversary squadrons.

The F-5E's and F-5F's for the film were assigned to the NFWS.

It's going to be a MiG-23MLA Flogger G.

Actually no. I never stated that. Nice try though. I guess reading comprehension is not your strong suit. My statement was in a response to another post and you assumed... Perhaps you should have responded to the guy who actually did speculate that the next LNS aircraft was going to be an F-4. Again. :doh:

...and where exactly did I state that Leatherneck wanted to do or were working on a F-4 Phantom?:doh: The words "if anyone" meaning any developer who chooses to do a Phantom. LNS are on the short list of developers that I know would be able to do the double ugly justice but that doesn't mean they have to be the ones to do it. The others are RAZBAM, ED themselves, and possibly BST but BST seem to gravitate to simpler aircraft where their jet fighter modules are concerned. We do have a indication that they want to do a Gripen as well which means fast jets are not out of the question. As for the Zero, it will be easy meat for the Corsair even in its A6M5 version. A Ki-84 or N1K2 would be better suited for Detachment, Iceberg or Olympic/Ketsu-Go operations even though they are also at a disadvantage to the Corsair. I am not yet convinced they are actually working on a Zero to "counter" the Corsair.

If anyone does the F-4E I would hope for an Early F-4E and a late F-4E modified with ARN-101... and an F-4G Wild Weasel V to go with that too for some hunter/killer SEAD action:thumbup:.

A1-AV8BB-NFM-000 dated 15 Mar 2008 Page 2-14 2.3.7.7 Water Tank The water tank is located in the engine bay, just aft of the engine. It contains approximately 500pounds of distilled or demineralized water with flow duration of approximately 90 seconds. The tank is replenished by gravity filling via a filler cap on the top surface of the fuselage. A water quantity probe extends down into the tank. This signals a quantity gauge transmitter, operates an H2O (approximately 15 seconds of water remaining) caution light on the priority caution light panel and also ensures, by deenergizing a low level switch, that the system cannot produce delivery pressure if initially there is less than approximately 25 pounds of water in the tank. The H2O caution light also illuminates and the water pump shuts down during normal operation if the water pressure drops below acceptable limits or the quantity is less than approximately 25 pounds. Repeated use of water other than distilled or demineralized will cause engine performance to deteriorate.

Neither.