SoaringEagle74

Its the IR sams that annoy me...not the radar variants. First you get no radar warning and even if you see them its usually too late to react.

Very good points...now I think you understand what I am talking about although I don't necessarily agree that their ai intelligence is low. Quite to the contrary I think they are lethal. Anway, its very tough doing everything solo and I definitely need more practice at it. Unfortunately, I don't get to play as often as I would like due to family responsibilities so what would take others a few weeks to learn would probably take me months. I would really like to fly online more but my damm(sorry bad english) laptop is slow as h e ll. 128 mb graphics card and 1GB ram. Also, I prefer using labels, external views, etc except auto re-arming and auto-refueling. It makes my training missions more easy since I can focus on gathering data without straining eyes and constantly guessing where the next missile come from. 1024x768 is not exactly eye friendly!:) Cheers

I hope your not suggesting that I profit from information because that would be silly. The only reason I ask for evidence is so I can judge for myself what to believe. If people don't wish to share information on a peer-to-peer basis or can't that is fine but I am not obligated to believe them especially if the said claims are a bit far fetched.

I agree 100%. I never claimed sams alone will do the job. Anyone who suggests that is ignorant! Sams are helpful in slowing down the enemy...giving defensive forces time to react...etc. I guess I am a bit biased with them but thats because I usually don't have much success evading them. I remember getting shot 40-50kms away and I was even flying low. After a while it gets to you! The reason is that if a mission is oversaturated with ground anti-air units it can be very tough to pick the right corridor or altitude. Hint: I go low to evade sam but get shot at by manpad or some other IR threat camoflagued in the woods waiting to rip me apart.

I don't have a problem being proved wrong and I have been proved wrong many times in the past about various theories I had. Its all part of the learning process. All I ask is some evidence to back up claims and all I have gotten is your "clueless", your sources are bad information, I don't have to prove anything to you, etc...etc What kind of a discussion is that? For all I know maybe the game really is screwed up beyond repair but so far there is nothing to suggest that other than "I say it is...deal with it." By the way, why do I have to use FOIA to get this data? Is the information classified? Help me understand!;) P.S. I agree air power is more important than sams but lets not get carried away saying they are only speed bumps...because clearly they are more than that.

Because I don't appreciate being labeled clueless after having read the manual, practiced all the tuturials, flown most of the off-line missions, reading lomac/fc encyclopedia and much more. I have spent plenty of time with this game and I enjoy every bit of it..and yes it probably does have some shortcommings but I don't get worked up over them as much as you do. In any case its just a game that costs 50 euro or less! Your right...I need a break. Later!

Oh. So now I am too lazy to look but you fail to provide any sources. Makes a lot of sense especially from a guy who always complains/whines about different aspects of the game not being right. You see I don't take this or any other game that seriously to dig up records just to make others look stupid. I just assume that which is given is accurate. GGTharos, if you really are an expert...then god bless you my master and sorry for questioning your rationale. How have ED replied to your complaints...will they address these issues in their next patch? Respectfully, SoaringEagle74

Some people like twisting words. ED and Wiki are my sources of information. I have no reason not to accept them as accurate. Just because some people disagree doesn't prove sh.t. Who are the "Everyone agrees"? What makes them more experts on the subject matter than ED or Wiki? I am no expert but it seems we have no shortage of them on this forumn. Go ahead...I am still waiting for the sources.

No. The burden of proof falls on the person making a counter-claim. I say LOMAC/FC and Wikipedia are reasonably accurate and I provided my sources. You and a few others that claim its wrong need to show me evidence otherwise its just another opinion!

I go with the information I have available to me! Who ever claims to have superior knowledge then go ahead and share it with us...I am all ears. Just make sure its reputable and not hear-say or speculation.;) Also, I don't take brochures at face value(as Mr. Skythe claims) but completly ignoring them is illogical.

Oh! So Wikipedia is not credible? Neither is LOMAC/FC? Whatever...I give up. Talk about people making up their own reality you guys are experts at it!

S-300 from Wikipedia Surveillance radar GRAU indexNATO reporting nameSpecialisationTarget detection rangeSimultaneously detected targetsNATO frequency bandFirst used withNotes36D6TIN SHIELD-180-360 km (112-224 mi)120E/FS-300PIndustrial designation: ST-68UM 350 kW to 1.23 MW signal strength76N6CLAM SHELLLow altitude detectionIS-300P76N6CLAM SHELLLow altitude detection120 km (75 mi)300IS-300PMU1.4 kW FM continuous wave64N6BIG BIRD-300 km (186 mi)CS-300PMU-196L6ECHEESE BOARDAll altitude detection300 km (186 mi)300S-300PMU-19S15BILL BOARD-250 km (155 mi)200S-300V9S19HIGH SCREENSector tracking16S-300VMR-75[25]TOP STEERNaval300 km (186 mi)D/ES-300FMR-800 Voskhod[25]TOP PAIRNaval200 km (124 mi)C/D/E/FS-300F Target tracking/missile guidanceGRAU indexNATO reporting nameNATO frequency bandTarget detection rangeSimultaneously tracked targetsSimultaneously engaged targetsFirst used withNotes30N6FLAP LID AI/J44S-300P30N6E(1)FLAP LID BH-J200 km (124 mi)126S-300PMUPhased array30N6E2FLAP LID BI/J200 km (124 mi)10036S-300PMU-29S32-1GRILL PANMulti-band140-150 km (90 mi)126S-300V3R41 VolnaTOP DOMEI/J100 km (62 mi)S-300F Missile specificationsGRAU indexYearRangeMaximum velocityLengthDiameterWeightWarheadGuidanceFirst used with5V55K/KD197847 km (29 mi)1700 m/s (3800 mph)7 m (23 ft)450 mm1450 kg (3200 lb)100 kg (220 lb)Command5V55R/RM198490 km (56 mi)1700 m/s (3800 mph)7 m (23 ft)450 mm1450 kg (3200 lb)133 kg (293 lb)SARH5V55U1992150 km (93 mi)2000 m/s (4470 mph)7 m (23 ft)450 mm1470 kg (3240 lb)133 kg (293 lb)SARH48N6/E1992150 km (93 mi)2000 m/s (4470 mph)7.5 m (25 ft)500 mm1780 kg (3920 lb)~150 kg (~330 lb)TVM48N6E21992195 km (121 mi)2000 m/s (4470 mph)7.5 m (25 ft)500 mm1800 kg (3970 lb)150 kg (330 lb)TVM9M82198440 km (25 mi)2500 m/s150 kg (330 lb)SARH by TELARS-300V9M831984100 km (60 mi)1800 m/s420 kg (926 lb)150 kg (330 lb)SARH by TELARS-300V9M83ME1990200 km (120 mi)SARH by TELARS-300VM9M96E1199940 km (25 mi)900m/s[26]330 kg (728 lb)24 kg (53 lb)Active Radar HomingS-4009M96E21999120 km (75 mi)1000m/s[26]420 kg (926 lb)24 kg (53 lb)Active Radar HomingS-40040N6[26]2000400 km (250 mi)Active Radar HomingS-400 Just so you get a clue my friend. I won't bother pasting anything else...do your homework next time! Sorry...I can't get the table to appear properly despite taking screen shots and pasting them here as jpg but if anyone can help me I would appreciate it. Until then I am going to leave the data in this raw format.

It is you that needs to get a clue! Read about Patriot, S-300's, BUK's, KUBs, and all other air defense systems in LOMAC/FC encyclopedia before you tell me I am wrong! For example the 15-20 mile range you are preaching is only valid for short range SAM units. When you say something that is so wrong then clearly it becomes laughable. It is ok to be passionate about air supremacy and dogfighting but you are missing the big picture of war. You have been doing this in many posts and I feel obligated to point it out to you. Also try to keep your insults to a minimum next time. You may or may not know more than others but that doesn't mean you have a monopoly on the truth!

As far as I know, the SDI was only intended to intercept ICBMs. Its not for shooting down planes although rumors abound that they can shoot aircraft down, destroy ground targets, sea targets, cities, etc. I guess few people know the extent of SDI. I even remember reading they can shoot ufos and inbound meteors if need be. I don't think there will be a ww3 anytime soon, at least hopefully not. Its probably safe to assume people have matured to the point where they can see the danger in this. Mutually assurred destruction! This show of power is nothing more than bravado and intimidation towards inferior nations. Do what your told or else!:D Its also a way to keep the military industry going full speed in manufacturing new and old weapons. If they stop producing hardware thousands of employees will lose their jobs and companies will go out of business. No government can live with such consequences...jobs=votes and votes=power.

15-20 miles coverage? LMAO! The plane would probably have to fly below 10 meters agl to escape getting hit and even then it would probably crash into telephone or electrical cables if not get shot down by a manpad or shilka. How can they attrit it within a few hours? If the coverage is thorough enough it will be one hell of a challenge even for a super power. Why do you think the usa had to go to such extreme measures such as cruise missile strikes from offshore, stealth air attacks, low flying gunships, sabotaging radars through computer viruses, etc?? GGTharos, I am not saying ground radar is impenetrable nor that air power is trivial however air defense buys you time which in itself is very important. Please don't downplay its importance because that is wrong!