RedTiger

Sorry about this suggestion, I don't mean to insult your intelligence. I only ask because I've done this myself since I also use '5' on the keypad. Is Num Lock on? It would seem that you probably do because you say it works ok outside of the game. I sat at my computer going nuts trying to figure out why it wouldn't re-center. Turns out I had Num Lock off. :idiot: <- Me. :megalol:

Isn't that the one that turns one of the ships into some clouds?

This is exactly right. If he did everything he could, he is not to blame. There are probably hundreds of details we are not aware of. Something like this weighing on my conscience would probably be punishment enough.

Too bad the people in that house it crashed into didn't get to eject. :(

This deserves a big fat BUMP. Its been a couple of weeks...any new info?

Bumping this one too. Any new news? :yay:

Why did they increase the size of the ski jump so much?

A better question is to ask why you would load this same weapon system on an aircraft, which the Russians did. If you take this into account, the tactics of the Ka-50 become easier to realize and understand. This is akin to the gent who said that you wouldn't use a hellfire on a Toyota truck. Well, yeah, you would if it meant life and death for you or the infantry you are supporting. You don't think about "wasting" weapons. They're there for a reason and you use them to get the job done. In the case of the Ka-50, you're launching 1-2 missiles per strafe, but those missiles will have a greater PK and accuracy than probably anything else. Instead of showering the area with rockets while strafing, you're choosing to kill one target, all the while retaining the benefits of a strafe. In the same way it isn't about wasting missiles, it isn't about employing them in a way that guarantees one shot, one kill at the risk of everything else. I would consider 12 Vikhrs for 3 kills to be a satisfactory result (think about how much more difficult it might be for infantry to get those kills without taking casualties vs. the difficulty for you). If you can take your 12 Vikhrs and get 6 kills, I would consider that a perfect result.

Models of fantasy aircraft made to look like fairly realistic and like they might actually exist is nothing new. As described in Tom Clancy's "Red Storm Rising": http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/portland/971/Inbox/d-f/f-19_48-i.htm Since everyone would probably shun a third-party F-22, some third party needs to make the F-19 "Frisbee" for DCS! :pilotfly:

Interesting question. I can't really answer that and give you a number but I can relate to you my experience. At some point while flying the aircraft, something "clicked". It stopped feeling like a dump truck and started feeling like a combat aircraft. Suddenly doing an oblique turn in the vertical after an attack run seemed as natural as flying in a straight line. I was able to whip the plane back around quickly for another pass where before I had to extend very far before feeling like I could haul that pig of an aircraft around. The REAL fun came when I switched to the regular Su-25. I lost my stand-off weapons but gained so much in return. It felt like taking leg weights off after running 10 miles with them! This feeling is something I've never felt before in any other flight sim, including the SFM planes in LOMAC -- even though I've flown those probably 20 times as much as the Su-25T. I'm sure someone can give you some figures (its not so much one number, it varies with altitude, weight, etc.), but the best thing to do is fly it, fly it again, and then fly it some more until such a number is meaningless and you can just "feel" where you need to be! :pilotfly:

From the "Trees" thread: This brings up a question I have for those who already have the sim. Can you target objects with the Shkval at higher altitudes? What about actually getting in parameters for a shot? I have trouble with the Shkval in Flaming Cliffs because it seems to be a low-altitude only sensor. I've tried flying the Su-25T from 6000 to 10,000 meters and at those altitudes its very difficult to see an object like a tank or house until you are almost right above it. In fact, I think all of LOMAC's TV images were fubar. I had trouble with mavericks as well. Does BS improve upon this?

^^^^ Hey everyone, please exercise some some self control and ignore the troll, lest we chase our tails for the next 6 pages. ;)

In Desert Storm the Army helos operated at night, when the Iraqi armor crews were sleeping...in their tanks. :eek: Seriously, it was something they adopted during their war with Iran to keep them safe from attack at night. Boy, did that ever backfire for them... BTW, if I could rep EvilBivol for his first post in this thread, I would. I wonder if we'll see people complaining in DCS: Hog and DCS: Viper about the dangers of flying low.

Bumped in the hopes that future readers will realize that this thread was dead, dead, dead. Aliester Crowley would be proud.

QFT. Who the hell wants to be a weasel? I'm waiting for the day we start calling mud mover aircraft nicknames like "the worm", or "the dung beatle". "Eagles may soar but worms and dung beatles...uh...nevermind." :megalol:

I thought I remember Wags saying that there was nothing certain about what would come after the A-10C. At any rate, my hope is that they do the F-15 and Su-27 next along with their WAFM, all simultaneously, or at least in quick succession. A tall order? Yep, but it might go a long way to retaining a lot of their LOMAC players. My "Plan B" hope is for an F-16C. It'd be really sweet and ironic if ED captures a portion of the Falcon crowd, although I think that crowd is more enamored with the dynamic campaign than the aircraft itself. :lol:

Nope, under Freedom of Information Act, you can request they release stuff but there's no guarantee. They can always say no. ;) Whomever created that page mentions that they are more willing to release documents than video. In fact, I've never heard of them releasing anything BUT documents. I don't know much about it though, I've never requested anything myself or known anyone who has.

Lots of good stuff there: MiG-25 Foxbat - SECRET Film Number PIN 47236, FLV 13-0013, videotape Broken Arrow Nuclear Accident - Date/Location Unknown Film Number USAF 50655 - SECRET A Day in the USSR - CLASSIFIED Film Number USAF 20844 Recognition Training - Sino Soviet Aircraft Film Number FS 3187 - CLASSIFIED Aircraft Recognition - Soviet Jet Aircraft Recognition Film Number PIN 1011004 DN, MN 06898-D - CONFIDENTIAL Aircraft Recognition - Soviet Jet Aircraft Recognition Film Number PIN 1011005 DN, MN 06898-E - CONFIDENTIAL Interview With Soviet Pilot - SECRET Film Number USAF 50791 Defector: A Soviet Pilot - SECRET Film Number PIN 51187 DF, Film AVR 239 Defector: A Chinese Pilot - CONFIDENTIAL Film Number PIN 51337 DF, Film TS 1471 OPSEC in Action - CONFIDENTIAL Film Number PIN 11273 DF, Film TF 6651 - videotape Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion Program: Manned Aircraft Film Number PIN 20619 DF, Film FR-3A - SECRET (lots and lots about this project) Davy Crockett; Weapons System - CONFIDENTIAL [the Atomic Bazooka] Film Number MF-9-9315 Laser Gun - Kirtland AFB, NM, 19 Sept. 1972 Film Number USAF 60403 - SECRET etc, etc, etc. Too many to continue...interesting stuff.

LOL! I was wondering if I was the only one reminded of Duke Nukem! "apparently provided 'near minigun' performance" Makes you wonder if 3D Realms saw a picture of that gun somewhere and decided to make their chaingun have three barrels rather than a gatling setup.

Yes, and ironically, the MiG-29 is a stable aircraft. In terms of pure aerodynamic advancement I'd think the order would be more like F-15 -> F-16 -> MiG-29 -> Su-27, since that's also more or less the order those planes were developed. Yeah, there was some dual developing going on, but thats the order they were put into service. :)

Ironically though, the USN had a good kill ratio in SEA after they wised up and started to train their guys how to fight the threat at hand. Guess how they did it? Surprise! Keep your energy up, don't get suckered into the turning fight, manuever out of plane, etc. etc. etc. Make NO mistake, I do not like the F-4...at all. I'm not shy about making that known. There are bad things about it that are not its fault but that are just a product of the technology at the time and there are short commings due to the rules of engagement in Vietnam, yadda yadda yadda...I still don't like it. :P

I thought I'd try to explain this another way. Something Teknetinium said in an earlier post made me thing of this: Lets just say for the moment that I agree with you, because I do. Here's my example: which would you rather have; the ability to get your nose on the bandit and kill him in 5 seconds but have a 10 second "cool-down" period where you can't evade and you can't switch targets OR would you rather have the ability to get your nose on him and kill him in 15 seconds with *no* "cool-down" period? Once you get your kill you can switch targets or evade immediately. There is no right or wrong answer to this. Its like me saying "you're building a house, which tool do you want, a hammer or a saw?". Well, you ideally want -both- because each situation may require a different tool. The difference between building a house and fighting in a fighter jet is that one is life or death, the other...no so much (I guess your shoddy carpentry could cause the house to collapse and kill you! :D). But what if you could only have one? If we talk in terms of having only one choice, you can't have both tools, then the answer becomes more concrete. In my relatively few years of life, everything has told me that efficiency, sustainability, and multitasking are, by far, the best things to shoot for. I want to kill as many birds with one stone as I can and then already have 10 more stones in my pocket ready to go to start killing more. If I have a grill ready to get a meal for my family from those birds I'm killing, all the better! If I can kill 5 birds with one stone but have to pause and and risk having those birds peck my eyeballs out, I'd rather kill just 2 if it means that I don't have to stop and risk harm. If I have to resort to killing only one bird with one stone, I'll get a friend to help or I'll bug out and come back with grenades tomorrow. ;) It terms of BFM/ACM, I think its clear what "efficiency, sustainability, and multitasking" translates to. I would take that any day over the alternative but all the while be figuring out how I can have both. ;)

*sigh* You know what I'm talking about, optimal conditions. No offense was intended.

Also...was this 1 v 1 or did either of you have a friend to help? Teknetinium, if you're willing to use LOMAC as a reliable indicator of reality you should refer to what Rhen said earlier. A real air force doesn't just send out one guy, the smallest group is a two ship.

*Disclaimer*: Rhen makes some excellent points about SA, the OODA loop, etc. We do often forget about this in the discussion and I appreciate him reminding us of this. Virtual pilots and aviation fans tend to have a hardon for hardware (:D) and forget the human element. We also forget that fighter pilots typically have to make whatever plane they fly work for them. They don't get to hop in a Flanker one day and then and Eagle the next. That being said, anything I say from this point onward is assuming the "human element" is equal for both pilots. And since I can't rep you again for a time Rhen, yes do as Goon says and post more often! :) *** Taking what Rhen described, energy vs. angles, I have always had the feeling that ultimately, if you had both but could only choose one for your life to depend upon, the smartest choice by far would be the tactics based on the energy fight and the fighter that allows you to do so. The reason I feel this way comes from reading about WWII fighters and how faster and more powerful fighters could be seemingly omnipotent as long as the pilot didn't get suckered into the other guy's fight. There was one particular P-47 ace...Gabreski, I think, I remember talking about how much of an advantage the power of the P-47 gave him -- fighting at altitude, the ability to simply pull up and away from his enemy, extend at will, re-enter at will, or just escape if he needed to. He could fight on HIS terms. Ok, yeah, so this is WWII and we're talking about modern fighters. If were talking guns or rear-aspect missiles only, I'd still bet money on the energy fighter over the angles one, any day, again assuming for the moment that you can't have both! And I'd do it for this very same reason. You can fight on your own terms -- if you're smart and skillful! I can understand where a less experienced pilot gets suckered into fighting low and slow against a plane that can keep nose authority at slow speeds, but I cannot see that being a situation that lasts very long. Either this is training and the pilot learns from his mistakes or washes out, or this is the real thing and he doesn't get a second chance because he's dead. But if the pilot survives and wises up...wtf is the angles fighter going to do about it? Take snap shots at him head on as he dives straight for him? Nothing says you can't do this, but isn't that a little too far away from "optimum" and pretty damn close to "desperate"? At that point you've lost the initiative and are now reacting, on the defensive. What if the energy guy flies to your six for a brief tracking shot before pulling away again to rinse and repeat? Please enlighten me, because I don't see how you're NOT screwed at that point! So, to sum that one up, I would guess the key is for the pilot to be able to remember this when it really counts, not forgetting this in all the adrenaline of the fight and finding himself suckered. Now, in terms of all aspect missiles...you've got me there. That's an area I'll admit I'm lacking a lot in understanding the dynamics. I'd almost say the the slow nose authority guy will have the upper hand here since parameters for the shot could be as simple as just pointing and shooting. Then again, I'm not sure. Couldn't you always say that it is better to be moving fast than slow when you have a missile shot at you? Isn't the slow guy still screwed since he's slow and may very well have a missile headed right for his nose? If I'm simplifying this, please tell me. Its not very common in many subjects and disciplines for the armchair quarterback to get to spout off his opinion with the experts and practitioners, let alone have them maybe listen and comment. :D