stickz

they didnt have those lovely exotic paint schemes when they first arrived fresh out the box at cottesmore in 1981. Probably the only plane that would drag me outta the viggen. (Bar a BAElightning perhaps)

Completed it, and enjoyed it. Although the night time exercise never got anywhere near a target. Bit surprised that my somewhat stretched pc specs manged to run it well. nice job by bunyap though thanks for it. Lot of work put in for the briefings.

Thanks for the extra insight renhanxue. I knew the limitations imposed for the locations and that in reality nevada and persian gulf would be out of zone. Just not aware that it included the vertical also. Unlike the lat/long, it just seems somewhat of an unecessary limit. Needing a special switch for this purpose plus code. And I cannot really think of any logical reason for it, even if you are not reasonably expecting to see higher terrain (its still 800m higher than uk has). Nice to know its not bug, and that I have found out why and when. Its lovely to fly and fight in (apart from those blooming mavs). Its image caught my imagination way back in the early 70s (those then novel canards) even when working on lightnings blasting your senses daily (just to show my age). Only a tornado could shift it from number 1.

thanks for answer Ragna. Been driving me nuts trying to discover when it occurs. I take it then that if above the trip height (2.4km it seems) and the ground rises above you, the viggen jockey is totally dependent on either terrain avoidance mode of the radar, VFR or pre flight planning for a warning. Did they hire a dutch computer programmer to be involved in writing the mission computer code?

Question for those experts with the viggen. Been plagued for ages wondering why the HUD altitude selector switch HOJD CISI seemed to occasionally physically lock in the LD (barometric) position. Tonight I finally found out when it occurs. When in NAV master mode and RHM (radar height) selected, when my altitude hits 2.5km (climbing) the switch physically switches to the LD position. Any attempt to switch back does not work (switching noise occurs but switch locks back to LD). I know the radar height only works to 600m but it seems strange that the switch mechanically moves (although not impossible). Even stranger that it occurs at that height. It also seems illogical that flying over high terrain it does not then indicate ground rising to within 600m below you. When I drop back below 2.5km it is again switchable. Also in LANDING/NAV mode it also locks into LD @500m. Is this normal occurence? Can find no mention in bugs, anyone else seen this - or is it some fault on my installation (or my searching ability)?

Certainly an engineer was not considered by the designers. If you did not have your arm ripped apart by locking wire daily you were on holiday. But it did teach you to work blindfolded and be totally ambidextrous. As for entering intake, you squeezed your head sideways in at the top by the standby pitot then pushed and let your weight carry you down and in. Surprising the size of some who could get in. Wonder if I still could? When you really did not want to do it was after a bird strike to check the intake vanes. Several heavies had to be pulled out due to collapse over the years. Counted something as a right of passage.

The 2 front line squadrons at Binbrook (5 & 11) throughout the 70's, mk3 were missile only and mk6 had the belly guns in ventral tank. We never hung anything under the wings (apart from the odd recalcitrant liney) and offered a prayer up when equipping the overwing fuel tanks - usually only for overseas deployments. It may well have been possible to change - but never done and the jockeys never trained for anythoing other than A/A. And from your earlier post - if you think the cockpit was cramped - should try fitting with 2 people hanging upside down in there to replace the computer red plug under the floor behind where the bang seat would sit.

that GR4 rear pit surprises me a bit, looks barely any different from the GR1s at Cottesmore from the early 80's even with my radically reduced memory now, it looks very familiar. Thought they would have at least updated the MFDs and CRPMD, I vaguely thought they had updated from green screen to colour MFD but from that look at seems pretty similar although guess it could be deceptive this many years on. Similar to you, would love seeing a 2 seat weapons capable version of this.

The manufacturers claim that RDI will detect 90% of 5m^2 fighter-sized targets out to 66nmi (122km) in clear air using a four-bar search pattern over 120 degrees in azimuth, and 60 nmi (111km) with a single-bar pattern over 30 degrees in azimuth, dropping to 50 nmi (93km) in pulse-Doppler look-down mode." Why would the detection range decrease using a smaller horizontal and vertical azimuth? Actually the manufacturer is not strictly saying the detection range is less, they mean the odds of you detecting the target is reduced (very fractionally). And yes I realise it comes down to a similar thing, its just the perspective put on it. In principle it should not, a 30deg single bar scan would pass over the target 16 times to the 4 bar scan once (assuming constant scan rate), so the odds would be much greater of breaking the target from noise floor. Especially if specifying a moving target and platform (ie reflection power varying). If target position is known then it will not matter which scan pattern you use provided a bar of the 4 bar scan sweeps out the same area of sky as a single bar scan sweeping over target, but this depends on how the manufacturer sets up the mechanics of the antenna scan. However, at extreme range, the target needs to be pretty well central in the 3dB beam width for max power to be reflected back to the receiver. As the target range increases so the adjacent scan pattern beams overlap. So your odds of detecting a target can be marginally increased. A target right on the extreme edge of the beam bandwidth may be seen 'better' by the adjacent scan. You are seeing an example of manufacturer specmanship. Often these values are quoted by systems engineers maths ( especially modern stuff), backed up by flying a target at a known height and path through a range, whilst you try to detect it. With a single bar at extreme range you have to be pointing antenna boresight right into it, a multi bar may see it less precisely aimed. Sorry if I aint described this very well, I am a very long in the tooth radar engineer.

antenna elevation control is on the front of the stalk of the throttle for M2000 (Blind side to pilot). As far as I know is has no function in game but probably cannot be accessed in that position anyway. But a rotary control works antenna elevation just fine