monotwix

Oh Mr Cali I believe Speed does have the knowledge. Let’s make an average assessment from LOMAC to FC, CF2, FC3: hooray for all the skills,.. And years of experience.

A little bit more borg will shine.

Daily express duty.

Yeah

With the slight modification this VID checklist could be fit for a manual.

What place on earth exports nice crabs and imports useless pigs? A) UK B) France C) Australia

Ignorance?

In the National Geographic TV program?

ATC on 108.2 Mhz says your plane has been delivered to a museum in pieces, 50% of rivets have been destroyed by shells, the left section of the wing has got a piece of genetic intellectual property.

That’s an interesting observation, however I would think that there’re various reasons why seasoned pilots leave the red coalition when confronted with overwhelming number of F-15C, yes the main reason is that no one wants to be constantly blown out of the sky, another reason could be that many missions had been flown as a pointless sequence of disorganised engagements and more experienced tend to fly with squadrons, surely there are plenty of good Mid-29 and SU-27 pilots who would be capable to play red vs blue missions. I do like 104th server and at the same time I support the idea of realistic arrangements for military hardware between coalitions, as it goes, from a tactical point of view I would not ask for a pair of SU-27 to go and maintain air superiority against a pair of F-15C over an area which has no SAM coverage. In RL we can assume that with the support of AWACS, Electronic Countermeasures, Data Link, COMs, Mig-31, SU-27 etc could carryout an offensive engagement but the reality of multiplayer is not like that. Perhaps from the tactical point of view it would make sense to structure the red side based on defensive scene such as SAM installations, for example: in order to extend the air superiority coverage the SAMs have to be destroyed> in order to destroy medium range SAMs the SEAD has to be within range, SU-27 and AI SU-30 on 25min intervals deny that range with the advantage of short altitude SAMs which means that the offensive force has to operate above certain altitude with limitations on vertical manoeuvres. I’m only having my ideas with the hope that the culture of balancing based on the mixing of hardware will be phased out one day, IMO the advantage of clarity outweighs the chaos especially in MP, I must mention that it’s very nice to have 104th as public server thank you. Public also can be described as people with uncertain skills and intentions, it is also reasonable to think that designing a mission based on the idea of getting a full server can create a conveyor belt effect where the pilots with the experience gained will simply drop off at the end.

I like hornet because of it’s a hornet, the capacity and types of weapons…? If the weapons are more interesting than F/A-18.> Blks

Perhaps you could try an deactivate the hox tail jeans.

Genetically engineered MILF with plastic surgery.

Make as many robots as you can with functions and ideas,..

Caucasian chicken with tail:

Keep an eye open for the neighbours that look like you.

Nice pixels in your real life text.

At least it’s wireless.

I couldn’t resist using my HD laser pointer.

What’s your overview in terms of Air to Air tactics? Considering the infrared and radio technology being in place.:P

I flew the span in FSX, that was civilian, fly F-15 into or across, hmm not at all. Prepare for flight, takeoff, do a mission, land, that’s 1.5 hours easily which is enough. Boeing 737, 747, B52 etc serve the air forces very nicely

So I understand that too in terms of goodies. If a mission is limited to 16 players it shouldn’t necessarily be as such that you fly out there and bash it to the point of extremes to achieve an objective. It’s the mission designers that could make a room for supporting aircraft.

I enjoyed the session and what Wags said about the development, that was good indeed, then towards the end the guys asked some questions and that was sort of OK, or they had run out of questions,.. As it was mentioned the DCSW is a constantly evolving platform and I can see it is deeply immersed in the development of systems and environment and the purpose of not only to satisfy the interests of a particular top gun group but also the new pilots or some other interests. Let’s review some other interests for a sec, since we’d like to see the aviation community growth. I haven’t clocked any physical numbers in terms of statistics that would show the popularity of heavy jets or props, but the youtube and avsim sort of shows it, yet the heavy jet flights in DCSW weren’t even mentioned. I have many hours in FSX and LOCKON and subsequently DCS, my collection of heavy jets looks like this: PMDG-373, PMDG-j-4100, Level-D767, CS-757,CS-767,CS-C130,CS-b727,MD-80-PRO, IRIS-Vulcan. There is definitely a market for heavy jets and what’s the prospect for these flyers, little jets, come on,.. I’ve squeezed the trigger and flew plenty of times but I can’t come to terms with the canopies and wracks on a runway or left and right sides of runways for take off’s. I did gunzo and that was good, being at sea I’m a happy swine, so maps. How much map does one need to make a naval fleet, I’ll tell you: a 20km island and a very good sea, a bobbing carrier. Oh, thank you very much ED for the CA, some people thought it was inappropriate to have such thing a couple of years ago and even the ideas of having an older aircraft was dismissed in many ways. And of course thanks for all the other works.

Place your uniforms and pilot licenses into this box: [:spam_laser: ]

HELLO, Wild animals… not farmed animals. Farmed animals: