Tirak

With 3 tanks no less...

Considering that's the F-18s claim to fame when it comes to dogfighting...

While there might be some overlap for the "late eighties" F-14A, the "Mid nineties" F-14B we're getting should only be using the -54C ECCM(Sealed).

Is that what the nickname ended up being?

I love how the article seems to describe the USAF as a mustache twiddling Saturday morning cartoon villain.

It's going to be a rough few more years unfortunately until the F-35 comes out in large enough numbers to take up the slack. The Navy's even chipping in a portion of their F-35 buy for the next few years to the Marines.

When did they say this? I've seen ED claim they will not themselves produce FC3 level modules anymore, but I haven't seen them state they won't accept others' work.

xzpndHtdl9A That said, updates have probably broken the training mission so it doesn't complete properly.

I'm in the minority it seems, but I would steer away from heavy lift choppers for now. There really isn't a whole lot for them to do and they don't fit into any of the multiplayer scenarios we have. I'd rather see efforts be directed towards combat aircraft and wait until ED starts to support the sorts of things that heavy lift choppers do by having a working dynamic campaign and drastically improved ground interaction.

No they didn't, It's been flat out stated by people associated with ED. This was a rumor, it's not true, stop spreading it.

A bit? Blacklion, I could have jumped and gotten on the wing in a few of those passes.

Depends on his armament. Sure the Hornet turns sharply, but he won't even last 3 or 4 turns if he pulls his full controllable AoA. If he's got missiles, a snapshot is good enough, but guns, that's a much harder proposition.

Yes, the first ever example of terrain reading radar in moving video comes to us from the free community A-4E project. ED and LN need to step it up.

BST has seemed to have made it their business model to work on aircraft 'pairs'. The Mi8 and the UH-1. The F-86 and the MiG-15. The AH-1 and the Mi-24P. The F-5 was a cheap way of 'completing' a pair without having to have worked on half of the equation. I don't doubt that as more of the Western Cold War Warrior aircraft come into being, BST will fill in the other side of the equation, especially with relatively simple aircraft like the MiG-17 and MiG-19 being right in their technical wheelhouse, and working in line with pairs for others.

I see what you're trying to do, so before you can: Anyway, to sum up, Viggen be ugly, but not too ugly.

The Starfighter looks like a toilet paper roll with two chunks of cardboard stuck on by a second grader.

Or the Starfighter? Like, I don't think the Viggen's the prettiest cloud in the sky, but there has been waaay worse.

Two changes to the list need to be made. The AH-1W Cobra was stated several times a while back to be ahead of the Hind. As of this post: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2920898&postcount=281, the C101CC seems to be moving along further than we all believed.

AvioDev's C101, also in development hell. Think of it like the Hawk except with better textures.

I think you may be confusing things. RAZBAM put out a poll asking if we wanted an AV-8B or a GR.5/7/9. The poll came out in favor of the GR Harrier, however due to problems with documentation and systems modeling, it was determined the GR Harriers couldn't be done accurately enough, and so with an apology they stated they'd be instead doing the AV-8B(NA), with provisions of doing the AV-8B+ soon after ED's implementation of ground radar. I've heard absolutely nothing about the GRs being back in the mix.

Better to ensure a hit with overkill than to let an enemy through to hurt your friends, something more combat experienced Air Forces teach to their pilots. :music_whistling:

The missile was large and heavy and an absolute pain in the ass to move around on deck and mount to Tomcats. Since the Tomcat was the only thing in the inventory that used it, it also took up storage space (a considerable amount of it). Sparrow missiles were used on both the Tomcat and the Hornet, the Navy loves cross platform use because it lets them carry more. With the disappearance of the soviet bomber threat, there was no reason to keep a large, expensive missile that was only used on one platform, when looking forward at the sorts of conflicts the US was likely to fight the Sparrow could do the job more than adequately, while being cheaper, easier to mount and move, and take up less space on the carrier. The Phoenix has never been replaced. If you're referring to the AMRAAM, that was a replacement for the Sparrow, using quite a bit of technology learned from the Phoenix. F-14s were relagated to carrier defense during ODS, as was their originally intended role, giving way to the Eagles for work over country. Tomcats employed in this role traditionally did fly with two Phoenixs, however they were not deployed in a location to use them. This is part of the politics of the war, not because the Tomcat was perceived of as inferior. The Phoenix seeker head was used as the model for the AMRAAM, if you're talking about sheer size, it's because the threat of a large bomber force is no longer there. The AMRAAM and similar missiles has a sufficient range to handle the most common threat, a fighter sized target, furthermore AMRAAMs are deployable from every single platform, from Harriers to Eagles to Falcons and Hornets. If a similarly sized missile of the Phoenix were deployed, it'd be limited to two on Eagles and that'd be it. The military doesn't like super specialized weapons only available on a single airframe, especially not after the cold war where military budgets shrank considerably. Because of weight. Each Phoenix missile adds an additional 1000lbs to the aircraft, and each Phoenix rail adds another 400lbs. Adding that much weight, around 8000lbs to a Tomcat expected to get into a dogfight, would have significant effects on the performance of the aircraft, putting them at a disadvantage.

No it most certainly has not been mate. Do a little research. Phoenix's were tested against and hit hard manuvering targets, and even if you take Iranian claims with a grain of salt, you get some impressive results. Like the tomcat itself, people often glance at it and assume that because of size it must be bad at fighting smaller targets, these people are very very wrong.