Zergburger

When flying mission 10, i opted to have the F16 use its remaining maverick to attack the BTR instead of having my hogs attack as it would be much faster....but the falcons split and the one with the mav just fucked off back to base, consequently, the power plant got blown up.

The form factor difference seems immense between pave spike and pave tack. Does pave tack bring an increase in visual fidelity or other feature that could redeem its substantial increase in weight and drag when compared to pave spike?

i was thinking of the "modernized" f4es, like turkey's terminator or whatever its called when i wrote that.

http://joebaugher.com/usaf_fighters/f4_11.html https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Department_of_Defense_Appropriations_for/L7gcAAAAMAAJ?gbpv=1&bsq=apq-120 A bit of googling and i learned a thing or two about f4e blocks, anyone have any other inf0z? PM me if its something that would anger the forum gods.

thats cuz its the best module....they know its value

i c wut u did thar

i was thinking F5, but i think karon hit the nail on the head. If you want to get even more F4 with it, you could only use the pulse radar modes; -E model F4s didnt get pulse doppler until very late, probably not going to be in our f4 if i were to hazard a guess.

pinky button should expand it just like pretty much every other sensor on the viper, it's implementation just didnt make patch day according to nineline in another thread

Maybe I am struggling to understand what this means in terms of the aircraft's characteristics.... But, shouldn't the nose stay parked where we put it with L/G gains and AoA < 10 ? I am further confused by the reports that with weight on wheels this 0-pitchrate behavior still applies, AKA when I am on takeoff roll and i park my nose 9 degrees high it should stay there, correct? same with landing rolls?

i reported a very similar bug a while back, was told it was already reported.

please send my regards to wags for the SAM-DTT vid. However, unless I am completely misunderstanding what I am seeing, the video does not demonstrate dynamic scan volume. I take it you are implying this is something still planned but not yet implemented @BIGNEWY?

IDM simulation would give me the warm fuzzies

with dual target track being implemented perhaps we can hope for the dynamic scan volume that SAM is supposed to carry

@BIGNEWY Hi im trying to report a bug, its aboiut aim-120s and barrel rolls. my thread is getting a bit side tracked, i think i need an adult.

thanks for the op-ed.... but this is a bug report.

amraam launched from 104th_ wiley at the flanker

do a barrel roll.txt.acmi https://www.mediafire.com/file/nyc58yx0tig9cuf/Server_1_Operation_Urban_Thunder_V6.2.1-20210722-213126.trk/file ED's "barrel roll patch" is.....questionable to say the least. see ACMI, Track on mediafire.

Takeaways from this thread: EF2K in 2 weeks, and true grit confirms tornado IDS for 2021 release.

all sarcasm aside, still waiting for word from ED

if we ever get more advanced radar simulation, where different programs actually matter, semi mode is a great idea, given the CMDS will choose the best program to counter a given threat.

ran the same mission with minor edits this past monday. here is the server track, similar harm behavior exhibited. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KBvV5mbKeb8kevJLNKnt41PitKY_r9i0/view?usp=sharing

never heard of decoy radars, i know one of the lesser talked about benefits of AESA is the small sidelobes and backlobes when compared to mechanical or even PESA systems. when you talk about sidelobe reflectors, are you talking about a physical device used to bounce sidelobes? wouldn't that mess with the automatic gain functions?

guess i'll just put this in here.... add to the list:

yeah i wasn't implying they were submodes of POS. I was asking about these other settings/features since they play a much bigger role when using POS modes with long range and long time-of-flight on inertial guidance. Also, with the upcoming HTS pod these features will play an even bigger role. All AGM-88Cs started on block IV software, with block V being fielded 1999 time frame. If this is a 2005 viper it stands a good chance we are using AGM-88C with blockk V software. so... stands to reason we could get these.

bump, still hopin ED might chime in and tell me if these are on the roadmap.