Vampyre

I'm a little late with an actual response here but here is what I would like to see for Naval ops. Localized weather- the ability to sail into or avoid completely a multitude of weather and differing sea states on the same map. Currents and differing water temperatures at various depths are important. Sub-surface terrain- Captain, we just grounded the ship on a sandbar/reef/flat. Will also be useful for subsurface threats such as mines and submarines. Improved damage modeling- Hits on different parts of the ships affecting those particular areas of the ship vice the ship as a whole as it is now. Unit systems damage- Radars/weapons mounts/command and control/propulsion systems damaged, hull integrity breached, the effects of fire and flooding, plus the crews damage control efforts to keep the ship afloat and in the fight. Battle groups/Task Forces- Ability of a group of ships to operate efficiently and effectively as one cohesive unit with the ability to set formations and individual ship actions such as station keeping, steerage to dash ASW operations, and zig-zag patterns. Improved targeting for task forces/battle groups- The ability to properly use AEGIS/datalinks to prioritize targets for individual missiles/guns. Use of surface, subsurface, airborne and orbital sensors for observation and targeting. Enable the use of rivers, lakes, swamps, marshland and other littoral waters to be navigable by smaller combatant craft. Have the primary fighting positions of each ship crewable in multiplayer or manable in single player. AI will have to be good in either case. ... I'm sure I'll think of something else later. ***EDIT***- not even 5 minutes later.... Effects of differing water temperatures and currents on sonar operations.

Not really, It is a storage area for airplanes and airplane parts. The public is not usually allowed in the boneyard without being on a guided bus tour or a special event such as a base hosted 5k/10k run. The only people that regularly go in and out of the boneyard side are authorized to be there by the Air Force. There are seven Tomcats in open storage at AMARG. One of the two on celebrity row is 164341, the F-14D that had the back seat passenger eject himself while flying out of Fallon in 2002. I remember seeing this bird come back without the canopy and back seat. The other one on celebrity row is 161866 which was VF-154's CAG bird during my last year forward deployed in Japan. Also present at AMARG along with the other four birds not on celebrity row is 159437, one of the F-14A 1989 Libyan MiG-23 killers... the other, 159610 now a F-14D® is in the NASM (in the pic above).

I'm pretty sure the F-16 guys are posting in every thread to try to get it made sooner... meh. A-6E for the win though! I cant wait to drop a stick of Mk-82 Snakeyes across an airfield at night in the goo or loft a Harpoon at a patrolling Nanuchka Corvette. :joystick:

No, the ultimate troll move would be the F-16N... it wasn't even combat capable.

Yes and these days it would be MIL-PRF-81322.

F-14A/B Tomcats F4U-1D Corsair Mi-24P Hind F A-6E Intruder A-7E Corsair II AV-8B(NA) Harrier II Tu-22M-3 Backfire C Jaguar GR1/3 Mirage F1EE/BE I'll end up getting the F/A-18C as well but it is not really on my want list. LNS have indicated another fast jet after the Tomcat and I'm hoping for something eastern like a Su-17M3/4 Fitter H/K, MiG-23ML Flogger G or MiG-27K Flogger J2... or a third generation American jet like an F-4E/G/J Phantom II, F-105D/G Thunderchief or F-111E/F Aardvark.

There is also a mode called SAR and ISAR on some radars that can generate an image of the target they are looking at by focusing the radar beam on it and scanning it repeatedly. It is really handy for identifying targets like ships operating under a maritime layer or through haze at longer ranges than a targeting pod can achieve.

Beautiful Tiger II.:thumbup:

I never saw a tank build up of any sort in 2003. We went with our original complement of assets and received no spares even though aerial opposition was expected... it might be an Air Force thing because I know they stock war reserve tanks built specifically for dropping. These war reserve tanks are far less expensive than normal tanks because they do not contain a lot of the baffling and valves a standard tank contains.

Substantially correct except the engine was the -402 and it was physically the same size as the -400. The EPE just had improved parts which allowed for the better performance. Most pilots I have spoken with prefer the legacy Hornets over the Super Hornets for dogfighting as well, for the simple reason that they retain their energy better due to having cleaner aerodynamics.

Well, Switzerland is not the best country to use for comparison with other operators especially where drop tank use is concerned as it is only about 220 miles east/west and 140 miles north/south. Their bases being located within that area means the entire country is within the Hornets range without drop tanks. The defensive nature of the Swiss operations also helps with their view of dropping the tanks as, if it comes to them dropping the tank to fight, this means an enemy aircraft is engaging them within their airspace. They are not an expeditionary force that has to perform sustained operations over many years that includes daily use of their airframes so this affects their view on the expenditure of assets.

I don't really care about the reasoning... I'm just happy to have the module. A good pilot will find a way to be successful and that is the fun part for me. I'll probably get shot down a lot in the F-5E at first and that's ok while I am still learning from the experience. In most modern combat aircraft the aircraft does most of the work for you. That is not the case with the F-5E, you have be smart in its employment. MiG-21's, Su-27's, MiG-29's, F-15's... the opponent does not matter. Get in, hit the target and get out and if one of those other jets want to tangle then we'll dance. I care more about mission completion, solid tactical decision making and learning the airframe/systems operation than how my score stacks up in death match server so most of the arguments against this jet seem kind of silly to me. To each their own though. If you don't want a simple DCS ASM/EFM tactical fighter don't get it, it's that simple.

Spain does not use the F/A-18C... only EF-18A and F/A-18A+ Hornets. I'm looking forward to seeing what I can accomplish with this austere version of the F-5E. It's going to be good fun.:thumbup:

The centerline mounting can be used on the AV-8B(NA) post 2007 ish. Evidently it was tested at VX-9 while I was there but all I remember were the F/A-18C/D's doing the Litening testing. Heres a pic of a VMA-214 bird carrying one centerline. EDIT: The other pod is the ALQ-231 Intrepid Tiger pod

Personally, I am excited at the possibility to get a DCS Tu-22M-3 as are several others I fly with. I like the direction you are going to get there too. The only hang up I have right now that prevents me from donating is the fact that ED has not signed off on the development yet. Until that happens I cannot justify throwing funds at a project that has a very real possibility of being stillborn from the get go. If I were wealthy this would not be a problem but alas, I am not. I am heartened you have decided to stay the course for now and I wish you luck on the trip to Ukraine and Russia.

The person requesting the information is.

This, as described, is a comparative test in a specific area of the flight envelope which in and of itself is not indicative of overall turn performance of the Corsair. From what you have related we do not know altitude and airspeeds the tests were conducted at. All we do know is that the aircraft were pulling 3g's and exceeding their critical angle of attack (which will activate the stall strip on the Corsair).

It's not official but RAZBAM have indicated a desire to do the Jag.

What Hasler is referring to is a stall strip on the leading edge of the starboard wing that was installed to help nullify the vicious wing drop from low speed stalls. The strip initiates flow separation at the leading edge of the starboard wing just outboard of the guns/cannons so both wings will stall at roughly the same time vice the port wing first causing the aircraft to flip over. As to it destroying the Corsairs turning ability, that just didn't happen because at the speed the strip takes effect the port wing would be stalling anyway causing a departure if the strip was not installed. The stall strip did make the plane safer to fly low and slow with. I'm not sure of his sources for the statement. The strip is located just outboard of the two 20mm cannons in this pic of a F4U-5NL. The Corsair is a great all around fighter for both turning and energy fighting in the air to air arena plus it could carry truly amazing loads of bombs and rockets which is why it was kept in production until 1953.

That's what it looked like in the movie too...

57th FW, 422nd TES is a weapons test unit. I'd be more inclined to believe the -9X was in regular squadron use if there was a picture of a combat coded squadron F-15E flying with it.

It was being worked on. This is the ACIMD, one of two inert shapes built for the project. It was designed in China Lake... the same place that designed the Sidewinder. It is one of three different designs for a Phoenix replacement. The other two designs never made it off the drawing board. These missiles would have eventually been known as the AIM-152A had the cold war not ended. I first saw this missile shape when I was stationed at China Lake... I used to volunteer at the Armament Museum on the weekends which usually involved servicing tires and moving jets around. They have some really interesting subjects there.

Same here... 1986.

Mi-24P Hind F Second runner up is the F2G Corsair.

My suspicion is that they are variants of the CATM-120C. They may be a mix of CATM-120C, C-5 or C-7's... possibly D's as well. I don't really know enough about the different subtypes yet to make an informed judgement but the one on top definitely has a shorter, blunter radome, and slightly lengthened airframe than the others and I have seen CATM's with those features referred to as 120C's before.