borchi_2b

well most people fuss about this is not realistic by book. nobody thought of a stealth helo for spec opss either. was also just an imagination ;-) we talked to a weapon technigian here in germany, and he said, it is no big deal to implement a missile to an airframe. esspecially when you have all data from that missile and all the access to the weaponcpu. you can tell the comp to fire that certain missile, which is basically just a few hours of programming. the only thing is, you do not know, what happens to the airframe, but for the r77 on su30, it is just the same frickin airframe like the other su27 have, so it is just a little bit programming, not more. airframe and missile stay the same, like the 30ies

but it was not planed that way for sure. 3 helos in 3 out, that was for 100% the initial task, also nobody counted a new, never announced new stealth helo as a planned loss. never expose too much, that makes you vounarable :-) sure take a truck and leave would be an option, but think about the tactical facts of the guarding and the military compounds around. that does not make it easier to blend in, or does it?

ok, first, this helo is secret and stealthy. do to the facts i read, i doupt that this helo is based on some black hawk. the black hawk is only able to carry 14 people. now we take into the equation the increased weight of stealth tech. we have 4 crew members, 2 pilots and 2 doorgunners. when we have some 500pounds+ for the stealth tech, then there are only 6 seats for a speacial forces team like delta or seals. this would make a total hit team size of 18 soldiers. in comparison to the task and the threat, it is not clear how many special forces operators are needed. maybe 18 would be enough, but one thing is for sure. do to the fact, that one helo crashed, only 2 teams out of 3 could have left the scene with a helo, now we take the 4 crew members of the downed helo into the equation, then it is clear that not even 2 teams could have left the scene, no, only 1 team could have left the scene, cause we also have to add the body of bin laden to the load, which makes +5 people when we add the crew too.so, there comes one question to my mind, how did the 2 left teams get away from the scene? so when we also look at the sice of the tail, i am really sceptical, that the new design is based on the blackhawk. in addition, when the fuelprob, how mentioned in a articel, could not be made stealthy, then you have to think about a new design platform, that you use as first stage, which has way more range then a blackhawk can have, cause any extra internal fueltank would reduce the capability of carrying personal, which is the maintask of such helo. my option for a development for a helo that would be capable for such missions would be the EH-101. when you improve this basic design, then you will end up with a helo that is bigger, but not the size of a hh-53. we all think about black hawks, cause they are popular, but in my opinion, the new stealth special ops helo is bigger, has more range and is capable of carrying more personal and armament then a black hawk can carry. just think about all the gear these operators have to carry, sometimes, cause these helos are not just built for the mission they were recently used for, no the missioncatalog is way more flexible and has a way bigger range then just kill bin laden. you need space for that gear, and the black hawk would not be my first choice at all. EH101 or the NH90 are more the tipe of helo i would use, plus look at the shape of the NH90, it looks a bit like a stealthy helo too, doesn´t it? my opinion is based more on a designer aspekt and the needs that define a design :-) cheers boom boom edit: just found this helo, when i looked up the data and range of the eh101. Sikorsky S-92, this is an american product, which would also fit to such demands even better then a black hawk ;-) but all tha i could figure is, that the helo must have been air refuel, cause external fueltanks do minimise the effectivness of the stealth tech and i checked on google maps the distances. even when they operated from afghanistan/kandahar for example, they had to cross the mountains, which does not optimises the fuel consumtion so much, the range of any helo mentioned would not be big enough to fly into the target area and also fly back with a complete internal fuel. when the flew in from the sea, the range would need to be even greater, cause there would not be any air refuel possible beside the air refueler would be stealthy too. one thing is definite, the assault brings up many questions, not only what happend on the ground, no, it gives me alot of input on fictional thoughts about technological things, that might be possible but not puplic

this sounds good. maybe i will get back to the eagle again so i do not need to think about the fps too much. i wish you all the best with the su27k project. when you need some help just write a message, maybe you have some nice ideas and we can talk through it how things can be achieved. i am really awaiting your model cheers borchi by the way, your model looks really nice :smilewink:

any fighter can operate from concrete roads, not just a gripen!

so what i can say is that in lomac we stayed air borne with our migs in our squad for more than 120min i would say it was about 125min iguess, we managed fuel wisely and did not exceed over 90% during flight, ionce in bvr we used 100 just for theturn, nvere used he ab. it is possible

my 2 cent

hmm, strange is that i do not see the K in the options area, anything else to it? it does not work either ingame although i removed the lines

thanks for the help.

i know, but it is just one littlepart of it. thats why i would like to knowhow to activate it again

hi guys, i used the search function but i could not find anything to it. aybe i wasto dump to tipe the right phrases, but can anybody help out here? anything ? i really would like to reactivate the cobra, cuse this is somehing i am missin in the su27 in bfm and aso in bvr, cause this might be something that could be used as tacics like soviets have suggested i would behappy when anybody could help out here thanks borchi

well then it is time to do so :-). i bet, that when you hang a 2000pound under the centerline and switch to a2g, that there will be a pickle in the hud. if it wil drop? could try it on nellistower what do you think? just joking. i think that there was some little a2g capability left in the a/b/c/d do to the fact that smart people think way into the future, and in europe there was the final war planed right, from both nato and the russian counterpart. so when the war would have lasted estimated 3 - 4 weeks, it was assumed that probably only a2a fighter would be left, so then it comes in handy when you got at least some a2g capability left :-) thats what some nato general told me once, but who knows, maybe he just made up a bunch of baloni :-)

great moonshield, hmm, sound nice, moonshield could be concidered our mother earth ;-)

hey guys, what about a mission that is more oriented into some flat areas? right now it is allways the same, people hide in the mountains, all the time, and some how this is getting very boring. have you thought of some fight at flat areas?

=RvE=Fusion :pilotfly:;) i think this man is right in many words. sorry, but we see more and more often people who complain, even in our own squad, people complain the way we fight in our su27 against others. i saw that very very often during all the hours in the hl, when it was still fc1.12 to many people complained about atoo weak f15 and way to weak weapons. ok, i know the charts of the eagle, and well it was toweak in some regards. now it is fixed. when i take yodas words right, only the drag issue will be fixed. ok, then there needs to be fixed the engine values of the su27, or at least the engine values of the eagles need to be fixed at low speeds, to bring both ack together at the same level of detail or not detail, does not matter which way you want to see it. to be honest, the su27 and the mig29 twrs are not correct then when we look at the fact that the f15c twr is supposed to be correct. in some way it sometimes looks like policy when i look at the product fc2.0. some of our squadmembers even went that far, that they said the new product is aimed for the u.s. market, and this can be seen in the final product of fc2.0. maybe they are right, but i do not want to bring up such things, cause thats none of my bussiness. people are not so happy here with the new fc2.0, and even some say, next modules will be well thou8ght if they buy any more products. and one thing is strange. people like ggtharos allways claim that they have real pilots to work with? so why do you come up with silly things like eccm wormup phases? when you have real pilots around they should be able to tell you that the wormup phase is about 10min on the ground, but airborne it can be activated at any time, bla bla bla. so once i have read that ED is temped to go as real as it can get. why you guys do that with the BS but do change policy with FC? people will thank you when you do not make itarcade, cause people want realism, not hawx. i think the attempt of ED to please the community is good, but when they try to please people who have not all the background of real systems, like 50% of our virtual squad does, cause we have real pilots and engeneers and GCi controller in our squad, then they aim for arcade, not for a sim, unfortunatly. to be honest, i thought of changing the sim allready, a couple times. like many others did i talked to in a german forum. well, i hope things will be fixed the right way and ED makes it good and solid. what i am looking for the most is to get the patch for the BS, so finallywe can plan bigg a2g missions in combination with su25t and a10 and ka50. cheers and viper, sorry for this, but it is a reflection of all the poor boys out there who think that the eagle is the best plane in the world, only because it was never shoot down, but who did they fight, that the other side of the medal. i can outrun a chicken by using a hawk, so easy it is, nothing else. but people do not realise that, that the poor part

forget about the r27et, it is tweaked, so the weapon cpu showsabout the right ranges, but the missile does not perform like that. after burnout it reduces with about 10g, about 200km/h per second, which is not like the real missile would behave

why he is opposed, cause his f15c, incognito f22, will get ist wings cut down to realism. so then he has only the super power aim120c-5 which is in service since 2000, to maybe get a kill, and not being able to fool good pilots in bfms. thats why he is opposed, like many others here. but here is one simple but good question in this threat. who were the tester for this fc2.0. have they tested anything. is there a team of tester, who actually is only there for testing the fm, or the fm of missiles, or weapons or is there any structure at all? how many tester are there by the way?

i hope that the r27et will be changed with the patch. we will have a plasmaphysics calculate the r27et data in the next fe days or weeks. he will get all the data from us that he needs. we will see what will turn out. i assume that it will not be the way it is simulated, cause the r27et has a speed reduction of nearly10g´s after burnout right now in the simulation which is not realistic at all andthe 10g´s are not depending on altitude, it has these 10g´s also at an altitude of 14ooom

well i would grill it :-)

you should not even hear the burner, cause it is in your rear and at supersonic, the sound would not reach the cockpit. only thing you would feel is the vibration, which we do not have

this decribes the super agility compared to the mig29 and su27, at lower speeds, which you reach in bfm very fast. i am looking forward to have that fixed, so then it might be possible to win against f15c in bfm again, right now, there is no real way, when you try to turn and turn and turn. but the flapsissue of the eagle will be fixed too? the issue of gaining speed by setting flaps ? edit: we figured that the aim120c has a greater gimble or search area then 55°, can you guys check on the again? i have to see if i can find some tackviews of certain instances again

ahh i see, thats werethere was made the mistake with the f15c, cause in the lua it has the max thrust of 212kn, which would be unrealistic to your words

hmm, well but the f1 engine hat at a speed of xxx kn, which sums up to about 244kn ata speed of mach0.0. so when your table says it is under full ab, for both engines 207kn, then where are all the other KN fone too? birdstrike or reduced thrust for survivablity during non combat?

hi folks. i was wondering about the TWR about the su27 and about some engine data. i just found this SFM_Engine.lua in the Eagle Dynamics\LockOn Flaming Cliffs 2\Scripts\Aircrafts\_Common folder these are the numbers gioven in there, ist there anybody of the defs team who can explain the values, and where you got them from? ------------------------------------------------------------- -- SFM Engine data. -- Copyright © 2004, Eagle Dynamics. -- the file is not intended for an end-user editing Su_27 = 3 Yak_40 = 57 f_15 = 6 A_10 = 17 -------------------------------------------------------- SFM_engine_table = {} SFM_engine_table[su_27] = { typeng = 1, dcx_eng = 0.0124, hMaxEng = 19.5, dpdh_f = 14500., dpdh_m = 7000., engtab1 = { -- M Pmax Pfor 0.0, 135000., 205000., 0.2, 124000., 175000., 0.4, 114000., 171000., 0.6, 110800., 180000., 0.7, 109900., 192000., 0.8, 109900., 210000., 0.9, 109900., 228000., 1.0, 110800., 240000., 1.1, 113400., 256000., 1.2, 119400., 265000., 1.3, 134100., 279000., 1.5, 155000., 300000., 1.8, 165000., 331000., 2.0, 165000., 356000., 2.2, 165000., 375000., 2.5, 165000., 386000., 3.9, 165000., 270476. } } -------------------------------------------------------- SFM_engine_table[f_15] = { typeng = 1, dcx_eng = 0.0124, hMaxEng = 19.5, dpdh_f = 14000., dpdh_m = 6000., engtab1 = { -- M Pmax Pfor 0.0, 115000., 212000., 0.2, 94000., 200000., 0.4, 92000., 205000., 0.6, 103000., 207000., 0.7, 105000., 210000., 0.8, 105000., 220000., 0.9, 105000., 235000., 1.0, 107000., 250000., 1.1, 103000., 258000., 1.2, 94000., 268000., 1.3, 84000., 285000., 1.4, 71000., 300000., 1.6, 34000., 318000., 1.8, 19000., 337000., 2.2, 17000., 370000., 2.5, 19000., 390000., 3.9, 82000., 310000. } so can you say specific what tabel area is what and which data format the falue s are, somethink like kN for example. plus are that the original datas of the su27? if i am suming right, what the table say, the table is not correct, unless there are mature diffrences to what the turbine factory for the su27 states. i am looking forward to get some informations how to understand this script lua

well i just posted the empty twr = max, but now put only 1,5tons to the weight an do the math again. it will not change that much though