RedTiger

Wow...its been a while. Yet another thing I have bookmarked to read. :)

Looks great! Nice to have the ability to shoot some missiles and drop bombs.

If the fighting isn't 1 vs. 1, what do they do to avoid getting shot at in the process? Plan to have their wingman do something that forces the bandit wingman to focus his attention on him?

Wow, isn't that something?

I like your example! Well put! This is why I don't think as highly as some do of high AoA capability. You're putting all your eggs in the horizontal basket without regards to the verticle one. You'll only get blasted if someone doesn't think it through. Western aircraft, particularly American ones, have been used in combat by the air force they were originally designed for using the tactics they were designed for. As such, we know how they perform. They have also been widely exported and some of those exports have also seen combat. Russian aircraft...not so much. Has there ever been a single documented use of a Flanker in real combat used by the Russian or Soviet air force? We all know when and where the MiG-29 was used. How much can you really glean from this? The -best- argument so far I've seen has to do with mock combat involving the schlemm and archer combo. Everyone seems to walk away from that ACT with an appreciation for it. I cannot help but wonder how well it would work in reality. I don't know a whole lot about what the guidelines are for missile kills, but I've always been uncomfortable with that, tending to think missile kills are easier to get in training than they would in reality. That feeling applies across the board, not just with Russian planes.

Holy crap...MMO gold sellers are striking on flight sim boards? How low will they sink? :O

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say I disagree with the part I bolded. I don't think vice versa is true. In simplistic terms, I think the pilot that is used to having high AoA to play with is going to get in the F-15 and be out of his element. He'll have to really adjust. However, I think the pilot who's used to keeping the fight at 0.8 mach is going to get in the Su-27 and be and kick some ass! :thumbup: The Flanker doesn't have a bad thrust to weight ratio, nothing says you have to use high alpha like crazy. Sure, he'll have to slow down a bit because the sustained corner speed is slower, but I don't think he's going to be as out of his element as the other guy.

Having search lights is one thing; having the capability to view a thermal image of a tank 10 kilometers away and using that to target it and kill it with a missile is another thing entirely. The Ka-50 does not have this capability. The search light is probably there because nothing says you can't fly it at night, you just can't fight with it at night without 3rd-party illumination.

LMAO Train? Are you serious? In the US you don't get to select method of transportation the postal service uses, just that they're the ones handling it! I think you're borked. :megalol:

No, not clickable, not possible. The only thing you can do with a cockpit in LOMAC is to re-skin it. The positions of MPCD/VSD/HDD are hardcoded. The HUD is hardcoded as well.

I think this entire thread can just be reduced to the following: 1. You increase AoA, you become an airbrake, you slow down. You may get in parameters to shoot, but at the expense of a great deal of energy. So much that you're putting yourself in danger. vs. 2. The ability to operate at substantially high AoA is a major advantage. It puts you into parameters to shoot first. The danger you may put yourself in is lessened by the fact that you're killing him before he kills you. If I'm not missing anything here, the right question to ask is "How dangerous is this loss of energy?". We're lucky to have two people commenting in this thread who have real-life experience. Comparing posts #57 and # 73 is interesting: I'm not trying to reduce those two posts or pit Rhen vs. IvanK. However, the two philosophies presented in those posts do differ. Or maybe its more accurate to say that the differences between the two aircraft they flew creates a different point of view.

Making fun of someone's educational level while not backing up what your saying with anything is kinda sad. Post #82 in its entirety: I think now you're either trolling or there must be a huge language gap here, because you're not communicating clearly. Either way; no more food for the troll and no more discussion. Its best not to discuss things when there's a language gap. I don't feel like running around on this hamster wheel for 10 more pages.

The funny part is that this argument is nothing but East vs. West. It can be sugar coated, but it is what it is. The minute you say something negative about high AoA, take note of who disagrees. Also take note what aircraft preference they have, East or West. This is in no way one-sided. Bring up something negative about the Raptor and then also take note of who responds and what their aircraft preference is. My observation is that in these little spats there's usually a clear difference on who seems to be able to back up their argument and who just posts things that try to either try to detract from credibility or make the other person look stupid rather than presenting an argument of their own.

Wow....grats on looking silly. He never wrote that. Post 47 in its entirety: If you honestly think what I bolded is "leet speak" or you cannot understand what he's saying, not what he intended to say, what he ACTUALLY said...you're beyond help on this one, man. Why don't you explain what is wrong with what he said? You have yet to do that. Until then, you have no credibility. By the way, there is not one little thing incorrect about what he said. Not one. All of it is 100% truth.

SOLD! Thanks for posting those. Downloading them ASAP! :yay:

I didn't think there was anything negative about the video. What you have is a fighter pilot giving a very brief account of what happened in a very casual setting. It wasn't "just the facts", he was free to give his opinion. That's a good point. It reminds me of reading accounts of battle given by Allied soldiers in WWII. You may read an account from a veteran referring to the gun on a Panther tank as an "eighty-eight". The historian or enthusiast may be quick to point out that the Panther fielded a high-velociy 75mm gun. For the veteran, such distinction is pointless. All he had to know was that the Panther's gun was very dangerous.

That's the biggist ":huh:" for me. The other stuff isn't as important. For example, the bit about the datalink. The USAF guy might just have assumed they were using their own datalink since they couldn't use NATO's when in reality, they weren't. However the discrepancy in the close combat part is interesting. "For starters … not a single Sukhoi 30 MKI fighter was `shot down’ in close air combat missions at the Mountain Home air base. In fact, none of the Sukhois were even close to being shot down in the 10 odd one on one sorties which were planned for the first two days of the exercises at Mountain Home. These one on one engagements featured USAF jets such as the F-15 and F-16 in close air engagements against the Su-30 MKI. The majority of the kills claimed in these engagements were granted to the Indian Air Force with the remainder of these being no-results. Indian Air Force Sukhois did use their famed thrust vectoring in these one on one engagements." Compare this to what the USAF pilot said: 1. F-15s "dominated" 2. The Indian pilots were amazed at the F-15s ability to BFM with an actual combat load. 3. The Indians used their thrust vectoring in scissors but due to the aerodynamics of how the TV worked, it seemed to hinder them more than help. 4. The Indians ceased to want to do 1 vs. 1 after losing engagements. There is a significant contradiction! Wha...? :huh: Where'd you hear that? I'll be perfectly honest here...if that briefing was for retired USAF brass, that would hurt its credibility a bit in my eyes. The one saving grace, though, is that he did give an honest opinion on the capability of the MKI vs. the F-15 and F-16. That's either the hallmark of an honest person or a skilled and crafty bullshitter. ;)

When I try to open the zip file or extract it, it says its corrupted! :helpsmilie:

I'm gonna bump this...I totally missed this thread. :( Oh well, I found news of your next video at lockonfiles. :) I think enjoyment of your tutorials is a forgone conclusion. :D

There are some things in that article that directly contradict that video. Interesting. Reading over the comments, its clear that the people commenting have also seen that video. Who should you believe, the layperson journalist reporting in a public story who is making an effort to be impartial but also wants to debunk? Or should you believe the expert who is speaking candidly in private who also tried to give credit where credit's due but pulled no punches about the outcomes?

What in the world are talking you about? You've lost me completely. Dude, this WHOLE THREAD is about 'high' AOA. We don't have to pretend Pilotasso was talking about high AoA, we know it since he's discussing it in a thread where that happens to be the topic. "Being on the same page" was a reference to your post directly and others indirectly. I totally understand what Pilotasso's saying and I agree. ;) High AoA can be good and it has its place, but its not always optimal. It is my personal opinion that its not all its cracked up to be. To me its like completely ignoring the other dimention you have to manuever in and focusing on one, at all costs, even if it kills you. You don't have to out-rate someone to get on their six. It helps, but not if it will get you killed too. So again, I ask, are we all on the same page?

Wait...so you guys naturally run stuff that isn't necessarily dual-core optimized on only one core? :huh: For those of you who play it, do you set LOMAC to one core? Is that the normal way to do it? You all are acting like you would have never thought to set the affinity to all your cores. I would have never bothered to set the affinity to just one! :) EDIT: Take this fellow for example: So it DOES sound like you all were assuming it should be run on one core. Strange. I've never even heard of changing affinity until I read about it hear on these boards concerning LOMAC. I just assumed that there was no point. Can someone clarify so I'm not in the dark? :(

This comment is making me wonder...are we all on the same page? When I think "high AoA", what I think of is hauling the stick back as far as it will go. That certainly can be bad for your health. You're spending smash for angles at all costs. I'm getting the feeling that this isn't what others are talking about. But if not, what ARE you talking about? :huh:

I didn't know you actually flew Hornets. You get a big fat S! sir, I highly respect those who put their butts on the line and do or did this stuff for real. :) Contrary to what I said earlier about what I would pick, here's what I think. I think the tendency is always going to be for the fight to get lower and slower. There's that video out there that shows Vipers vs. MiG-29Gs showing guns kills at speeds that are much slower than either jet's cornering speeds. So part of me thinks that the high AoA jet is more forgiving. Since the tendency seems to be "lower and slower", a jet that fights well toward that tendency would be more forgiving. OTOH a jet that must keep its speed up to fight is less forgiving but more capable in the hands of a pilot who's very good at not playing the low and slow game. I always have a tendency to prefer the thing that is harder to use but better once mastered, hence my *virtual* preference. Does that make sense? Would you agree? So I ask you; what REALLY happens in a Hornet when you bleed off that energy to trade it for angles? Some seem to suggest that you're now a sitting duck wallowing around waiting to get shot. Is it that bad? Discounting radar guided weapons, whats to stop the Hornet driver from popping off flares and pointing his nose down? Nothing says you can't jink in a dive.

Looking at the credits...looks like we'll have Ironhand narrating the tutorials. Excellent!