G.J.S

Would likely be more productive to see a video or something - that way any possible flaws or faults can be disseminated. Which model of 'Winder? Launched in, out, or on edge of envelope? Fleeting shot? Had you worked yourself into a good position and range, to give your shot the best starting point? Many, many variables can have an effect on whether your missile connects - or just frightens.

Nice to see Ascot - even if it isn’t called out.

The echo can’t go from a carrier. Although the hook is exactly the same - same stress load, same type - the naval variants had tires made for a higher pressure. Land Phantoms use a much lower pressure. Landing gear (bar the tires) is the same generally, just some minor differences. The lack of bridle strop attach points on the echo is another thing that would preclude being vaulted off a carrier. Plus the echo isn’t ‘navalised’. The airframe as a whole wouldn’t be treated to the level required for salt laden environments.

You just made ED’s energy bill smaller . . . . Award yourself some points.

Apologies, meant the 'J' F-4, not that version of 'winder. Should have been more clear in initial response.

25 degrees circular scan.

Introduced on the ‘J’ , it allowed an off-bore sight capability by slaving the AIM-9 seeker head to the radar.

FG1 was the “hand-me-down” from naval service, and allocated to a few RAF squadrons when passed over, the FGR2 was the version more specific to the RAF. I never laid hands on the FG1 unfortunately.

That amount of runway is perfect to allow all the jocks of “other” machines to see what a legend looks like . . . That was our excuse anyway

SUBS in full effect . . . . Again

There will never be an easy answer to the question you pose. Weapon selection is based upon the target type and what you wish to achieve. Do you wish to degrade, or completely wipe a target? Is there a risk of collateral? Can the same desired effect be guaranteed with a smaller weapon? Maximum effect with minimum bang is the usual mantra.

Certainly PDS apparently. https://theaviationgeekclub.com/a-quick-look-at-algerian-foxbats-the-only-mig-25-fighters-to-take-part-in-nato-exercises/

Were you on the ground when the screenshot was taken? If not, Asking only due to the ASI at zero, maybe the GAU is susceptible to icing too?

If referring to player controlled aircraft, could it be down to sticks not having enough length to allow a smoothly gradual pull? The majority of sticks in use don't have enough length to allow finesse. If in reference to the AI, then that will be a core issue that ED will maybe be able to tweak.

Some fantastic work whiteladder, I love to see in progress shots just as much as the finished article.

See it from various viewpoints, https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Virtual-Tour/Cockpit360/ http://www.nmusafvirtualtour.com/cockpits/CW_tour/CW-2.html

Hiya Flappie. Cant remember exactly, and I don't have a track or anything as I posted this up as an afterthought. All I can remember is that I had a flight of 4 UH-60 inbound to Groom to land, using pads H01 to H04 inclusive, 1 & 2 were used as expected by the AI, 3 & 4 had the flight members just position in the hover OVER the pads (3 & 4) at around 200FT AGL, even though the others on 1 & 2 had landed and shut down successfully. There they remained - I had landed for fuel, this was completed and i took to the runway again and the 2 UH-60's were still over the pads, just hovering. The flight would have arrived at Groom circa 10 - 15 minutes before I dropped in, so the 2 members of the flight must be stuck in the hover for reasons unknown. Sorry I cant provide a track or anything, it was late and I just shut down without thinking, it was only next day I thought "better post it up as a 'maybe' issue just in case?". Regards.

Pads H03 & H04, AI Heli flights (seen with AI UH-60's) seem unable to land, instead hovering at around 200FT? H01 & H02 seem unaffected. Just for info.

It’s his “improvement” of the -18, says “it looks better” !?!!?. I just can’t . . . .

Be proactive, fly the donut (it’s in your eyeline for a reason) and anticipate throttle requirements that the ‘A’ needs over the ‘B’. Personally I prefer the ‘A’ , but if you are okay in the ‘B’ you are already on the way to being comfortable in the ‘A’ . Just understand that there is a excess thrust and spool up time difference, anticipate and act accordingly.

I vaguely remember having a discussion with a Boeing rep at Farnborough years ago about this seemingly weird design choice, if my memory isn’t pulling a fast one on me (age!)- it’s something to do with weapon separation tests in the early ‘90’s. The redesigned fuselage causes slightly strange adverse airflow effects at certain speeds and loadings that can cause a released gravity weapon to be pulled IN toward the fuselage barrel. The outermost pylons are kinked out 3 degrees, the next inner two kinked out by 4. It’s a cheaper alternative to a large redesign on what was (then) something already over budget.

That's a airfield violation Sir, you have been requested by the Station Commander for an "interview" . . . . HAT ON!! no biscuits . . .

Think it’s the normal AI one, with different skins. Can’t remember who did them, but there are loads and they are rather good - just on a UH instead of an SH.