microvax

BF is running 1.5.4. 1.5.5 is incompatible with 1.5.4 on a networking level. Dunno how often I said that already :D

Pretty stronk meme moments yesterday: If I had knewn that the anti skid seems not to be operational without engine power I would have done a better job at not dying in the end I guess.

Well its probably way more correct then before. :DD

No Transwarp RTB anymore.

Indeed I didnt take that into account. Thats a very good point.

You can do that in the replay, just open le track in ME, enfore f10 views all, problem solved.

Its fine, I am bad at taking things personally, I just noted it ! ;P Its very much possible to put everything in mathematical terms. I would not use numbers though. Numbers would be indeed a PITA to formulate such things in but it can be done. And oh well the unkown can be measured: https://youtu.be/eI91bT-p5Oc?t=1819 For once the triggering and secondly maybee even more interesting is the picture where they actually measured a positron but thought they didn't. Employment of aircraft can be described by statistics. Pk is such a thing and often misunderstood. I dunno how often that chart made its appearance. The BVR advantage/disadvantage of aircrafts over the flanker. But I agree that its not easy nor trivial nor matches the calibre of such statistics the calibre of the problem we are facing. :D But its possible. I see the problem you are having with the disappearing of backbone tasks such as refueling and CSAR. I did a lot of refuel runs before but atm its simply not adding anything. And I also get that 2 slots is not exactly ideal. I do not think though 4 MI8 slots would be Ideal either. Gazelle L variant on red side would be noice I guess. The russian cammo looks so russian its extremely hard to misidentify as bluefor. :D

Yeah, as I said I do agree that the rambo gazelle setup is not sensible and pretty unfair unless the mi8 gets similar capability. Also no questions asked multi tasking beats speed in most scenarios. The only thing which makes me consider the problem not as severe is that practically 8 people running around doing oneshot deployments is practically never happening. If they did I would agree that red should at least get 6 mi8. But with the situation atm I would say 3 max 4 are fine. I think practically you can also reduce slots per gazelle type to 1 and stick with 3. But I dunno one would really have to do some statistics to see how slots are utilized and whats connected to them beeing utilized. Yeah the gunners are indeed magic, as is the "we do not care about EGT"-functionality.

Honestly I really have a high opinion of you bodyorgan, but you get emotional so freaggin fast. And I honestly do not see why. Except my indeed trolish question about what cant be described by math, since I found that statement that math cant tell you everything pretty funny. I mean there is things math cant tell you things about because nobody can. But you can pretty much formulate everything you can think into math. You would be amazed by the amount of operators that is out there. I said 2 times in my lengthy post that I do not have good data on startup times and kindly asked you to give me the times you would regard realistic. I was freaggin honest there. I ddint say "not factoring in startup times is legid, redfor 1337 mi8 fast startup squadron op". I did literally say "So lets say 1 Minute for deploy and takeoff. And I am still not factoring in start time. I have no good data on that one. If you have, please provide it or do calcs with them factored in." Your next statement is redundant. As long as I do not have any data, I cant make a well educated statement. Its not that I do not believe you that the uh1 starts faster, its more that I cant factor in that part since I do not know how much faster. I am legitimately saying that I do not know that part and asking for halp TWICE and all you read is "OMG REDFOR OP". Also I did say that I can see one more mi8 for Redfor working well, actually improving the situation. So why exactly am I not understanding that there is an situation favouring one side ? I mean the only bluefor helicopter which can attack stuff without dying is the 342m pretty much. The L has worse armament then the Mi8 by far, the mistral, well its the mistral lets not talk about that 1960s rear aspect BS launcher, uh1, I dunno. Thing is really taking down shilkas, the rest works for me. It gets really complicated if you now try to factor in the gazelle doing both rolls attack and cargo. And I will not be going there. But I indeed agree that all gazelles having bomber call in plus troops plus crates is not really sensible. I want to remind you that I opted for Redfor having 2 mi8s which get the same bomber strike capability before I am sticking to that. I think with 6 Mi8s its possible. ;P Well well, I guess I will go and measure startup times myself and come back later. :)) Its actually funny that you end with REDFOR is allways op since the argument started with the statement that bluefor is OP and my point was, that looking at the numbers Redfor is in a disadvantage but not in terribly big one. I asked for input to refine the statements I made, nobody took the torch. But honestly I am interested in a more precise statement then "good enough" so I will take some measurements. :) And I indeed would not be surprised if you are right.

That is some next level bullshit. Even in calcs heavily favouring the MI8 regarding your statement that the performance is equal for blueflag relevant tasks the mi8 is 20% faster. Try taking a gazelle from mm59 OVER the mountains to Beslan. AKA do not take the Canyon of death. You have to go slower then 80kph to get over them. Had you ever to slow down to 80kph in a mi8 to climb over that stuff ? I guess not. Huey is struggeling a little with altitude. Gazelle really is just at the edge of killing the engine 99% of the time up there. Nobody said its impossible. They are just a lot worse at handling higher altitudes then the mi8, not even talking about KA50 :D

I did not factor in startup time that is correct, since on some FARPs red choppers start hot while blue ones dont or it is the other way around. Really not sure. I did omit that indeed since I didnt have good data at hand. If you have, lemme know how the numbers look if you factor that in. I do not agree at all that with shorter distance the differences in effectiveness become less prominent. Alone 1 10km trip takes an uh1 roughly 1 minute longer then an mi8, pure flight time. I have no Idea how to land the UH1 faster then the Mi8 but that might be my incompetence. When MI8 and UH1 were both sides I was faster on the ground and back up in the air then hueys by miles but again might be just me. But what I can asure you is that the gazelle needs a lot longer to land anywhere without dying or taking damage if you are not able to land on a road. The x2 I did choose was honestly a rough estimate and was intended not to make the mi8 look too good. I am a little bit confused about that one. But okay, we can for the sake of argument say they need an equal amount of time to land and takeoff. That literally is so far from what I have in terms of experience in all the helis that it really just feels wtf wrong but I am willing to just do it for sake of argument. So lets say 1 Minute for deploy and takeoff. And I am still not factoring in start time. I have no good data on that one. If you have, please provide it or do calcs with them factored in. So one averaged bluefor heli deploy takes you 8 minutes, Redfor takes 6,5 minutes. Bluefor could do 30 deploys per hour with 4 helis where redfor could do 17,5. If Redfor got one additional Mi8 per FARP it would be able to do 28. But again I do not think theese numbers are representative, maybee I will just take averages from people deploying crates from tracks at some point, depends if we get a real discussion going or if its just going to stay like "I have a feeling". I agree that bluefor technically has some amazing oneshot deploy capacity. Afaik all 6 Gazelles per FARP can take crates. So we could technically setup 2 SA6 two stingers and a ammo crate oneshot. How often does that happen. Yeee. Never seen it. The max I have seen working on one FARP is 3-4. Not even sure If I saw 4 working on the FARP. Thats why I did limit my calculations because 5 or more helos on one FARP is something which I didnt see so far. Usually we have 2 people running around building defenses and then jump to the next FARP to do the same. And in that scenario mi8s have the big advantage. Since our pilots are tied up an even more extreme amount of time with UH1 and Gazelles which have neither the speed nor the climb/high alt performance, nor the very good landing gear, nor the smaller threat by fighters due to no IRST looking at them. I think the setup atm is actually quite okay. Red has the way better machines in terms of Helos. Blue has more of the less potent frames. Both have their advantages and disatvantages. I could see one more Mi8 slot for Redfor without breaking stuff. It would make the not on comms people blocking slot problem less prominent without completely going over the top in deployment speed relation. I do not know if there is a imbalance someone would have to do some real analysis but since you already stated that not everything can be shown by math i think thats pretty hopeless and would be a waste of time. :D If you are so kind tell me something which cant be described by math. :D [Which would be necessary for it not to be able to make statements aka tell you things about things.]

I dunno, the problem I noticed most of the time was lack of mi8 pilots not excess while running red last round. I already mentioned not on comms people blocking slots. I get that problem. And I do not know why my calculations are silly, you didnt specify either. You yourself said, one needs an effective workforce if you need to attack and defend at the same time. If 2 MI8s run the same performance in defense deployment as 3 bluefor helis you have a very effective workforce. Average 80km transport flight an MI8 is also roughly 7 minutes faster. So Red does not have a Problem with effectiveness of its FARPs. Unless you can provide things I missed which heavily shifts the odds towards favouring blue. The other problem is blocking slots. That is a totally different problem from not having the capacity to do something. And I get that it exists. Only solution for that would be adding more helos to the FARP. That would shift the effectivenes or overall capactiy per FARP in terms of performance. I do not have hard data here but what I usually listend to is rocco desperately asking people to take mi8s from somewhere and it was pretty rare that the slots were taken. So I dunno. Its again a question if we want to keep the setup which is different in capacities for both sides or if we want to balance it. I dunno. I do not have a hard opinion about that one. But in the current asymetrical setup, which I love btw, I do not see a massive inbalance which would break it.

nah unfortunately no, it works over the export.lua. So yee DCS needs to be running and piping data through le export.lua.

Yes we haz 6 gazelles and 2 uh1s per farp. You have 2 ka50s and 2 mi8s. mi8 needs 4,8 minutes for a roundtrip 20km including one landing taxed at 0,5 minutes. UH1/Gazelle roughly need 7 calculating 1 minute for landing. 4 blue pilots can do 34 deploys per hour like that, while 2 mi8 can do 25/h. 3 blue pilots can do 25 deploys/h. So yee, given that 3+ is pretty rare and redfor already can do the same with 2 helos which bluefor needs 3 for I do not see the necessity unless I am retarded. I mean I see the problem of not on comms people taking slots but there is no real solution unless we mix helis again.

run the track of your blueflag visit, then you can rewind that as often as you want. :)

its not as easy as that... go here: http://imgur.com/a/xrc6o You get the Idea after a few pages. Question from me would be if the swedish aim9j got seeker upgrades at some point to make it all aspect. Also if technically you could carry AIM9L on the outboard stations. AFAIK the interfaces are the same and I have even seen some pictures with it beeing on the outboard pylons. But as allways that doesnt mean it has been cleared to do that or ever did it. But since the charts do not include BK90s as well, I was wondering. :)

Its indeed adding a whole dimension to the "are the strikers still in danger" question if GCI has no picture. And for a2g you have to rely on eyeball and other methods.

Hmm yeah no ELS then, still would be probably possible to see radar on the same frequency as the jamming. So directional info, overfly, mark, throw a BK90.

If it has a record option, that indicates that it has a broadband receiver. I mean it would not make much sense if you wanted to gather intel if you can only receive stuff from your own radars. Unless you want to detect Viggens landing at the next best McDonalds during excercise, driving through the drive in and taking back of with a "fresh" set of supplies. ;) To some extent receiver frequency is going to be limited, but general radar frequencies of the time should be included to make it usefull I guess, since also Jammers will be operating in that spectrum. But I dont know the specifics of the receiving part of the Radar, but it isnt neccessarily limited to the frequency of the emitter. If the passive mode can be used like the a2g map and curser can be placed that would be faboulous. :D

much want such need, many bk90s and rb05. ;D Honestly cant wait for heli hunting. RB05 for the bantz, gunpods for efficiency, aim9s for the average unsuspecting helo. If the a2g radar has enough resolution to spot helos on the 15km scale that would be brilliant. BTW. A dev said something about passive radar modes, can it be used as poor mans ELINT ? That would make bk90s a quite formidable weapon against portable Radar threats. inb4 all the sa6s in Blueflag get insta nuked.

Gib info already ! :DD I cand betray myself anymore that my mirage is close enough to a Viggen. :D

http://www.x-plane.org/home/urf/aviation/img/malmen76/37arm-01.jpg second from the right. 150rpg, 3degrees downwards pointing iirc. mounted on the inner wing stations, not the fuselage ones.

I guess Pedalkraftgeber would be similar. Theese non Viking english speaking people didnt get the memo that a Geber => giver ist a sensor not a generator. :D At least thats what my intense guessing at swedish yields in this case ! :D

Air to Air TACAN works. Air to ground TACAN works.

Yeah, seems like that will bug report it then to get feedback if its supposed to stay like this or if that will change. :) Thanks for the feedback guys ! :)