Basher54321

This is a fantastic campaign - many congratulations

It is actually research from here https://ospreypublishing.com/iranian-f-14-tomcat-units-in-combat - generally a well respected source - however like any research I'm not saying it is 100% fact - but it is well researched and Tom does defend it quite rigorously. I have seen no credible sources back up the Syrian claims.

The AIM-54A got very good results against Iraqi jets according to the best sources to come out of its Iranian use - doesn't matter how agile a jet is if the pilot doesn't know a missile's coming.

the Red Eagles flew the first generation export MiG-23MS (Flogger E) - and there is information the Stab Aug system may have not been used. This version did out accelerate every (unknown) US jet flown against it in some conditions. Alex Mladenov analysed Soviet manuals on the MiG-23MLD export version - which believed this version may have had higher excess thrust (Ps) at some points over 500Kts over the F-16A. Pilots were told to avoid close in sustained turn flights against the F-15A/16A because they were considered far more maneuverable.

"If you don't know, it doesn't go" :)

Try reducing the in game DCS graphics settings. What version were you on? Do you have a profile in the NVIDIA card software for DCS?

Follow up to the original article: http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=25623&start=540 Copy all wrt my F-35 comments and I'll take the barbs if you're so inclined to chuck 'em my direction. Passing up the opportunity to keep one's mouth shut always invites an equal and opposite reaction and I should've taken the shut-up approach. That any of us offer opinions about jets that none of us has ever flown or only flown against is done quite often on websites such as these. Most times those opinions are lacking or just plain wrong. I've never flown the Mirage 2000, but wasn't too impressed by what I experienced. No, I'm not a reader of Foxtrot Alpha and the only article I'd ever seen from that website was one about a former squadron mate flying BFM against his son. Former squadron mate in a Viper, son in a Strike Eagle. Reading through the posts, Tyler Rogoway stated that the Viper was better in horizontal maneuvering and the (light gray) Eagle was better in the vertical. Hardly ever replying to web posts, I did reply that the Viper (GE-powered anyway) is better at both. He somehow knew of my flight history and asked if I'd respond to an internet interview. So I answered his questions on my experiences and offered my opinions on others. I'm not aware that he has any hidden F-35 agenda. I've not read anything else that he has written. Almost all the e-mails I've gotten regarding what I said about the F-35 have been positive, to include a former Lockheed/Martin executive that I've know for many years. But with the amount of response I garnered, I decided to take a closer look at what I'd said and research more about the F-35 than what I'd picked up in bar talk and internet reports (not Foxtrot Alpha). After spending a couple of days peeling back the onion skin I've amended my overall assessment of the F-35 and posted this on Foxtrot Alpha to revise my statement: Being an adherent to the saying that a wise man acknowledges his mistakes and a fool defends his; I was probably a little harsh on my assessment of the F-35. But those opinions were formed through my exposure to things going on at Nellis. Did I bite off on chaff? I will stand by my comment that the three variants and the required commonality between the three results in performance penalties, especially for the A and the C models. After discussions with an old engineer friend of mine, who was also one of John Boyd's guys, the F-35 actually has a higher fuel fraction than the F-22 and, therefore, potentially better range. I also talked to someone who recently checked out in the Lightning II and his description of fuel burn rips holes in my previous opinion. Scratch that off the list. The new F-35 pilot was also impressed with acceleration in a certain subsonic speed regime. So I'll concede that. The F-35 will probably never have the raw dogfighting potential of the F-16, but the different customers bought off on that. Not a requirement? I always figured it was better to have something and not need it than to need something and not have it. A former HH-60 pilot and coworker of mine always jests about fighters not really needing guns. The previous statement is my normal comeback. Regardless, the fighter pilots that fly and will fly the F-35 could take any airplane they get and figure how to be lethal with it and dominate any enemy. Of than I'm certain. So, in the end, the Lightning II is not such a pig after all. It has great avionics and will do fine. The program has still cost too much and has been poorly managed by the DoD and Lockheed/Martin. But that's another story. Would I still rather fly the Raptor? You bet. I guess in the end you got to dance with what brung ya. In my case, back to the beginning with two tails and two engines. The Raptors do mostly air-to-air (as far as I know); and for that mission, mission planning isn't much more than filling out a line-up card. At my age now, that's all the attention span I've got. I'd also build more Raptors and upgraded Vipers and Eagles. Heck, I want it all. Back to the Ronnie Reagan 40 fighter wings and a fighter jet in every garage!! Peace out, Spanky I'll also add I wish I were 20 years younger and get back out there. Unfortunately, if I ever got into a Raptor cockpit I'd probably be a 4-g max kind of guy.

Yes please - F-104C/G - a most fascinating aircraft series

The VPAF had MiG-15UTIs for training - they also had some IL-28s.

That is exactly the way it has been spun sure - that doesn't mean it has anything to do with what actually happened - or whether the comment has been taken out of context. How about they wait until some actual information on the outcome is released then tell me where it came from..............that would make a change.

That's no different to other non source. If information of a certain classification (currently unknown ) was given over when it should not have been then the alleged comments might actually be justified.

Forces personnel are not free to pass information (of a majority of classifications ) into the public domain on weapon systems. Note there is no mention of the information classification that was alleged to be being passed to people that likely have no right to have it. Please be aware that anything in this regards from a trashy news agency isn't worth the pixels or paper it is written on and is not a credible source for anything - it is purposely spun to get you to read it.

top one looks like a MiG-17 with 3 wing fences

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=129774&highlight=fixes+lantirn+positioning+F-16s

Dodgy RAM can also cause BSODs, and a strained PSU can also cause the PC to restart. Am also using a GTX 780 but with a 750W PSU, Is your GPU or CPU overclocked? The 780 will be drawing a relatively large amount of power (compared to your other games) if you are running on high settings - have you tried lowering the graphics settings at all? - or even in the NVIDIA control panel if you use that? In regards to temperatures you can check these with various programs when running games - however GPUs will automatically cut themselves back if they go over a temp threshold if you haven't changed the default curves.

Spot on :lol:

A 5-7 year gap? is there a defined retirement date yet for the A-10s? - they are fighting in Iraq at the moment and the USAF F-35 is supposed to go IOC end of 2016. Although the CPFH might be less comparing individual airframes you would also have to consider the offset of closing down multiple logistics chains and operating less overall airframes. Why cant the USAF have dedicated CAS squadrons that do 90% CAS? Pretty much the only thing the Marines do is specialize in CAS using AV-8s and FA-18s. Not one for speculating on a future no one can guess I suppose.

Sorry what? Before the A-10A hit IOC in the 70s it also wasn't ready (didn't even have Pave Penny) - a lot of the pilots brought CAS experience from the A-7D and A-37B - but they relearned how to do these missions on another platform - the world has never stopped because an airframe has been taken out of service. In fact the A-10C is finally the most ready A-10 ever - because in airspace denied by MANPADs at least it has the option of sitting at 15,000ft if need be and drop JDAM (instead of 12,000ft with binoculars like they had to in 1991!) Someone mention 25,000ft altitude? - well Su-25s were dropping unguided ordnance from 14Kft - 26Kft after the FIM-82 came into use over Astan in the 1980s - not by choice. Against insurgencies the A-10 is a very good platform but somehow trying to argue that it cant be replaced needs far better arguments. Some JTACs think the A-10 is great yes - others say they don't give a toss as long as the ordnance goes where they want it. There are examples of other jets performing show of force or firing canon or dropping bombs at low level and saving troops so this should be acknowledged. Regardless of what A/C drops a JDAM they will sometimes malfunction and go on the wrong target - likewise if the guy in the jet (or the Drone operating team) gets eyes on the wrong target its going to be hit - if you want to prevent this don't go to war.............

Sounds familiar: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9EvY9kSKTc#t=902 This is achieved using Data Links - so for example an AWACs picks up some enemy aircraft on Radar it can transmit that information to friendly fighters over a data link. There are various types of data links in operation today.

Re calibrate the joystick? Is it centered when you view the roll axis in the curves in the control options?

YAWN What next from FA - "dead bug cannot be cleaned from jet and compromises Stealth shock"

what sources and cost calculations have you looked at? Please list them. Not if more gives you the large tactical advantage you were aiming for. Who says it wont be reliable - most jets flying these days depend on solid state tech and software. The F-16 and F-117 have depended on it just to fly for over 30 years.

Maybe you just improved over the years? :music_whistling:

Tom Cooper did show up at f-16 net and got into a massive argument with someone calling out his research. Any way part of it included defending MiG-25 range and flight profiles. Calculate the range of a MiG-25RB from, say, Abu Ubayda Ibn al-Jarrah AB (al-Kut) and Esfahan or Tehran. You'll end with result that the plane can take only 2 or 4 FAB-500T bombs (can't recall exactly how many right now and I'm too lazy to search through my notes), and fly at Mach 2.0+ for only the last 300 kilometres to the target. That means: they had to penetrate the Iranian airspace through gaps within Iranian radar coverage, at low alt and Mach 0.9. That was no major problem: they've got the 'blueprints' from an Iranian defector before the war. And because the Iranian government was stupid enough not to care about improving early warning capabilities of the 'disloyal' air force (Project Seek Sentry - acquisition of Boeing E-3A Sentry AWACS - was one of first cancelled after the Shah was gone, and no new radars were acquired from 1978 until 2009), it was nearly always too late to detect them. Then they would start to climb and accelerate. So, once a MiG-25RB appared 'in the middle of Iran', climbing to 21,000m (approx 63,000ft) and accelerating to Mach 2.1-2.3, the IRIAF was left with only some 4-5 minutes to react, i.e. attempt an intercept. Actually, if no F-14 was somewhere directly in front of the MiG-25, and at least an altitude of 12,000m (approx 36,000ft) it had no chance to intercept at all. Of course, if this was the case, the RHAW-gear on the Foxbat would warn the pilot and the Iranians could only watch it running away in direction of Iraq.... Usually, it was so that the Foxbat could approach to within 45-50 or so kilometres from the target, release and then run away at Mach 2.1-2.3 before caught by Iranian interceptors. In that one (on 4 July 1986) case it didn't: it had to decelerate or risk running out of fuel before reaching the Iraqi border. And it had to descend. By accident, there were two F-5Es around: they were actually underway on a CAS sortie and had to jettison their bombs before engaging (a reason more why they run out of fuel 'early'). So, no 'complacent' Foxbat pilot or anything else: the guy did what he could. He even made a safe emergency landing back in Iraq, but the plane was simply too badly damaged for repairs. So, a write off. To make things more interesting, though: this loss was simply 'deleted' from official IrAF lists of losses presented to Saddam. For example, from such documents like 'An Analytical Study on the Causes of Iraqi Aircraft Attrition During the Iran-Iraq War', prepared in January-February 1992 (I've got a transcription of that document). So, it seems that whatever was left of official IrAF files (and that's not much), is next to useless. The same was the case with at least two other MiG-25s shot down over Iran, both shot down by IRIAF F-14s (one over the Khark Island, another over the City of Arak; the latter crashed in the centre of that city, and there are photos of its wreckage), plus some 3 others - wreckage of which I've found (and photographed) at Habbaniyah AB dump too. That's why the Iraqis usually cite only 3 MiG-25 losses during that war: the one shot down over Khark, one lost due to supposed 'engine damage', in 1986, and one shot down (supposedly by IRGC's HQ-2J SAMs) over Esfahan, in 1987. --- Actually, Zare-Nejad and Shabani have just launched for a ground attack when advised about Foxbat's appearance by the GCI. That's why they've had enough fuel for the pursuit. Secondly, if he would have any kind of clue about MiG-25RB-ops over Iran, or indeed understanding of flying, he would know that for most of such ops, they were operating so much on the verge of their endurance, that the reason they were returning to Iraq at medium altitudes and low speeds - i.e. 'gliding' - was that they were out of fuel. They lacked fuel to descend only after reaching the Iraqi airspace. So just get the calculators out.

Great stuff - thanks