Elf1606688794
-
Posts
233 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Elf1606688794
-
-
4 minutes ago, Stackup said:
Do you really believe the video intended to be historically accurate? No, it's for building hype as you said. As such, they made up a fake mission, in a fake conflict to show off the SEAD capabilities of the F-4E. How is that false advertising? The F-4E is perfectly capable of the mission set as shown in the video, whether it would have been technically classified as a Wild Weasel mission 50 years ago or not.
We aren't in the 60s, 70s, or 80s anymore and like it or not, Wild Weasel has become the common term the majority of people associate with the mission depicted in the video. So they used the terminology people in general are familiar with. In other words they catered to the majority of their audience who is paying them by buying their aircraft. It doesn't matter that this particular squadron never did this in real life because DCS is a game! It's not real life and neither is the mission depicted in the video. Most of DCS is historically inaccurate anyways, with made up missions and conflicts, AI units from the wrong time period that fly like UFOs and see through terrain and clouds, aircraft missing weapons because they haven't been added yet, etc. It's pretty laughable to expect a marketing video to be a perfectly historical representation of an aircraft because that's not the goal of marketing a game. Heatblur is simulating the F-4E the aircraft, not making a documentary film on its real life usage.
You've made your point that you dislike the video based on the historical innaccracies. That's fine and you're entitled to your own opinion, but the video wasn't made for perfect historical accuracy, it was made to advertise the DCS: F-4E module and show it performing the SEAD role. It did what it was made to do perfectly.
-
5
-
-
30 minutes ago, Vampyre said:
The low knowledge gamers who don't know, don't care for the most part. Those who do, point out the discrepancy.
Elitism at it's finest, errr worst.
-
6
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Vampyre said:
That doesn't take into account that the F-4E's at Spangdahlem carried Shrikes also in the Wild Weasel role or that every other F-4E could also carry Shrikes. (This doesn't mean that every aircrew was trained in Wild Weasel missions, just that the airframes were capable.)
Were you at Spangdahlem? Did you personally know anyone that was? I knew several, not just my old crew chief.
Lastly, you are beginning to bore me with your tunnel vision.
-
5
-
-
26 minutes ago, Vampyre said:
Except the fact that the 20th FS was a training squadron at George in the 1980's that never did the mission. That is what this tempest in a teacup is all about. Those who know better will point out the discrepancy and those who don't will say it's fine. The information I posted is a clarification for everyone to digest and at least have a clue to what the history is. It is all correct. The strongly held belief part is funny though. It's just history.
Incorrect. We're simply saying its something as gamers that we have to deal with because we can never have every variant for historical accuracy in every possible scenario.
I would also put forth that you are the only one creating the tempest in a teacup.I will again quote part of the website that shows the history of the USAF at Spangdahlem AB in Germany and highlight the important part that you might have missed.
QuoteBy mid-1982, the unit had upgraded its aging aircraft for more advanced F-4E and F-4G jets. Each of the wing’s three fighter squadrons flew a mixture of E and G model F-4 fighters. The airplanes were paired into “Wild Weasel” hunter/killer teams capable of locating and destroying enemy radar-guided, surface-to-air threats in any weather.
The F-4E's could, and did, carry Shrikes for killing the radar sites and that is historically accurate. That is what makes them capable of performing the Wild Weasel mission. No one is arguing that a German training squadron was doing Wild Weasel missions.
-
4
-
-
Quote
By mid-1982, the unit had upgraded its aging aircraft for more advanced F-4E and F-4G jets. Each of the wing’s three fighter squadrons flew a mixture of E and G model F-4 fighters. The airplanes were paired into “Wild Weasel” hunter/killer teams capable of locating and destroying enemy radar-guided, surface-to-air threats in any weather.
https://www.spangdahlem.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Article/293639/wing-history/
My first crew chief on a weapons load crew had just come from Spangdahlem AB in Germany where he worked on the F-4E and F-4G both of which could (and did) carry the Shrike on Wild Weasel missions. (He was pretty much in awe of those pilots cast iron cajones in deliberately attacking SAM sites.)
If you notice, I said that "to my knowledge, ALL F-4E's could carry the Shrike which makes them capable of Wild Weasel missions", not that all of them were trained to do so.
My comment was in response to someone saying that the 20th FS wasn't a Wild Weasel squadron. He's right of course but that doesn't mean the aircraft they flew weren't capable of Wild Weasel missions. Since this is a game/simulation and we'll never have every single variant that everyone desires, in many instances we'll just have to make do with what we've been offered. In this particular case, it's not to big of a stretch to have German F-4F's substituted by the F-4E, even for Wild Weasel missions. I know thats not ideal, but its what we have.
All that said, your post definitely contained interesting information and I probably should have been more specific in my previous response.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, LG_Barons said:
Nice video, but small mistake in the beginning. 20th FS was not a Wild Weasel Squadron.
To my knowledge, all of the E models could carry the Shrike which makes them all capable of Wild Weasel missions.
-
On 1/31/2024 at 3:16 PM, Chaffee said:
If you want a free online option for pdf markup and editing, Kami is excellent.
Thanks, I'll check it out. LibreOffice is another option I was pointed towards and it's working for some worksheets that came with a YouTube course I subscribed to but it seems less than perfect so far but it might be the PDFs and not LibreOffice.
-
I would pay for an F-14D.
Heatblur, did you hear that?
-
2
-
-
On 1/4/2024 at 6:08 PM, RustBelt said:
or Air Warrior grey hair
I wouldn't say that everyone played AirWarrior as if it was Quake, many did but many others did not. I used to terrorize the Big Pac arena and always tried to make it back safe from fighting the Borg Cubes. I didn't always succeed in my goal of landing but then, no one did.
-Elf-
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Captain Orso said:
How dare you sir, that would have made the perfect paper weight
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Lobo LXII said:
All too true. What I called Mk-76 practice bomb I believe you called BDU-33,lol
Exactly. One time we (a friend and I) found a BDU-33 minus the spotting charge in a dumpster, so we snagged it and used it as a boat anchor.
-
1
-
-
36 minutes ago, Lobo LXII said:
As a 6531 Marine Aviation Ordnanceman (USMC '80-'88) I have loaded my share of MK 82's equipped with snakeye fins. There is a small steel band the holds the fins closed. A Brass arming wire runs thru a clasp on this band and to an arming solenoid on the bomb rack that is mounted on the MER/TER. This was to give the Aircrew the choice of dropping it retarded or unretarded. The ejector racks on the MER/TER released when a CAD (Cartridge Actuating Device) was fired, opening the hooks and extending a piston (about 5") that ejected the bomb away from the rack. The arming wire was not pulled out of the retention clasp until the bomb was 2 to 2.5 feet from the rack.
I did the same job in the Air Force. We didn't use brass arming wire, it looked like steel to me but could have been something else. Funny how the Marines and the Air Force used different terms for the cartridges that went into the racks. We called them impulse cartridges and you guys called them Cartridge Actuating Devices. In the Air Force I was a 462X0 (the X was replaced by your skill level 3/5/7/9).
-
1
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, freehand said:
I was responding to EIf1606688794
I have LibreOffice but I didn't know you can edit pdf's with it.
-
You certainly get your money's worth from your PDF reader.
-
I don't have an iPad and it looks like that is only available on the App Store. I will never use something like that on my iPhone because with my old eyes there just isn't enough real estate available to use it to read documents. I'm glad it works for you though.
-
17 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:
I don’t get it, you can spend hundreds on hardware to run dcs, plus more on the modules, the two monitors, etc … yet you can’t pay for a pdf utility?
I spent 7 euro on the pdf app for my iPad on 2010, it has served me fine for almost 14 years, moving from one ipad to the next easily (along with my pdf documents) … how can’t it be worthwhile?
I don't use the PDF utility enough to make it worth spending the money.
I use the DCS modules, PC and flight gear enough to make it worth the money I've spent.
It's not that I can't pay for it, I won't pay for it because I don't use PDF's enough to need it.
*Edit* What PDF app did you buy that only cost 7 Euros? Adobe wants a monthly subscription and there is no way I'm doing that.
I have the second monitor so that I can open the appropriate template I made for whichever aircraft I'm flying at the time. (I used LibreOffice's spreadsheet to make a template that I fill out for my stick/throttle.)
-
On 1/2/2024 at 10:48 AM, Simo said:
Personally I find the main limitation with PDF format manuals is the lack of responsive formatting.
What I don't like is the inability to edit them or make notes without paying for a PDF reader. I have two monitors for my PC so I can have a PDF manual open while I'm flying if I so choose but I can't make notations in it without paying for a reader. I simply don't use PDFs enough to make paying for a reader worthwhile to me.
-
Has Heatblur said which naval variant(s) they will make? If not, why do so many assume it will be a J/S and not a B/N? Inquiring minds want to know.
-
24 minutes ago, Hiob said:
Actually that's not pessimistic. They said winter. The better part of winter falls into the beginning of next year. So I would even say it is safe to expect it release next year.
Oh crap, I misread what he was saying.
Apologies Manhorne!
-
2
-
-
23 minutes ago, Manhorne said:
No. Its called living in reality not fantasy...
Pessimists tend to say that.
-
4
-
-
12 hours ago, dcsil2pilot said:
again, the release date they gave in september of "before 2023 is over"
They've sorta said this a few times and winter 2023 IS before 2023 is over. I'm sure you could understand why someone would think it's coming before 2023 is over when the 2 "dates" they've given sorta match up, so if they are going to miss one it would be nice to know sooner than later.This time they've said "winter of 23/24" so it's unreasonable to think they are failing to hit their projected release if it doesn't happen before January 1st.
If it releases after March 18th then you will have a legitimate complaint. March 19th is the first day of spring in '24.
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, dcsil2pilot said:
Sure, but that doesn't mean it's not coming in 2023. The last discussion of an actual release date/year was in Sept when cobra said it's coming in 2023. The pre-order saying Winter 23/24 still includes that
I would just hope we don't get another 2022 where the release comes and goes with nothing until later in Jan. There was even talk in November of 2022 where they said the phantom was nearing completion instead of just telling us "it's not coming in 2022. It's going well but we're behind schedule"Uh, in your post you included "The pre-order saying Winter 23/24". Their release date won't be missed if it comes out in late February or early March because that is still the winter of '24.
-
On 11/20/2023 at 5:57 AM, Manhorne said:
Honestly I believe it is in no way going to be released before the end of this year. They will have to give it some time on Steam at the reduced price to make up for those who were able to get it that do not use Steam. We are 2 weeks from December there is not enough time. Second we still have no videos yet of it that are not just fancy cinematic teasers. Also as far as I can tell none of the Youtube content makers have copies of it to make training vids or review vids. All that combined says no 2023 release. I do not see them releasing this before maybe late February or March at the earliest . But I believe we wont see it released before Spring or early summer 2024. I know everyone will say "They said this winter". Well they can say whatever they want and they made no statement saying it will be released by this date.
There is a pessimist in every crowd.
-
3
-
-
On 11/6/2023 at 6:34 PM, Bremspropeller said:
I know what both the F-4E and the -21PFM fwd view looks like, as I've sat in the former and stuck my face into the cockpit of the latter.
I've sat in the cockpit of many F-4E's and in the cockpit of a MiG-21 although I don't know which variant it was. In fact, I've sat in the cockpits of multiple MiGs including the -15, -17, -19, -21 and -23.
First In, Last Out! F-4E Wild Weasel Trailer and Manual release!
in DCS: F-4 Phantom
Posted · Edited by Elf1606688794
I looked this up. There were multiple variants of the Shrike and only 2 had the Mark 49 Mod 1 seeker that was capable of homing in on the SA-6 radar. Those two variants were the AGM-45A-9A and AGM-45B-9A.