CE_Mikemonster

..really?

Good info there, it would never have occured to me that having a high profile can actually be an advantage in some environments.

I was naturally suspicious as well regarding the capabilities of the F-22, but honestly after I read some pilot accounts etc.. The thing is as well, planes nowadays are planned to be in service for 50 years. The F-22 is unarguably the best air superiority aircraft in the world, and I presume will always be updated and upgraded. the higher specs the 'baseline' model has the better the upgraded model will have. I really think that 187 isn't a small number considering how it acts as a force multiplier to F-15s even when it's missiles are expended.

That was sort of my point about using the F-22 as a political tool. I wasn't saying 'Lets go and do it.'

Erm.. Are you an economist? :huh:

I've always disliked the looks of the Hornet but this changed my mind slightly! Edit: actually... nahh, you can keep it lol

Imagine the fighter force that the US has based in the Middle East at the moment and the influence that has on Iran. Now imagine if half of these fighters were F-22's, and the other half were F-35's. How would you feel? Personally I think it's ridiculous not to use the F-22 in sizeable numbers, the sheer dominance of it is an enormous political tool against 'rogue states' such as North Korea. On the upside, 187 is still an enormous number of planes, and more importantly allows for Operational Evaluation. So at least the technology will be retained and updated rather than left by the wayside or seen as unneccesary. The key thing however, imo, is to retain all of the engineers and institutions that make such things possible, in order to still be ahead 50 years from now. That's a bit of a vicious spiral though I suppose if you're not exporting in any significant numbers. And at any rate, in air superiority terms, the F-22 vs any Fourth Gen jet is basically clubbing baby seals. Talk about a force multiplier.

Hahaha yeah, I translated it back from Russian to English using the same translator and it was a bit gibberish, but i'd already posted :(

Да они были бы очень полезны для создания путаницы в НАТО, однако, как хорошо для НАТО разведывательных найти в электронном виде? Если НАТО сделали знаю правильный сайт для ложного полку, но не сказать, Россия .. удивлению сторнируется. Сербские военные однако сделал хорошую работу на недопущение НАТО, так что мне делать удивительно .. (Переводчик Google)

Yeah, it's very complicated - But remember Falcon is 10 years old and still going strong! I installed Allied Force a while back for a 'blast from the past' and it took me ages to find the modding community (and then find a current mod, even though there's only two!). Was very much worth it though. Check out the Open Falcon [4.7] and FF5 websites and forums. You won't regret it. One note though; check compatibility with your system in the forums/FAQ's BEFORE you dl the installer lol. OF stung me like that hehehe. There is a hell of a lot more to both mods than the small summary I posted before, they are very.. expansive[!?].

Hehehe I know, I only noticed after I linked then I thought 'DURRRRRRRRRR' and re-checked who i'd replied to. Sorry mate, wasn't trying to patronise LOL

Hahaha some funny comments on there

See here: (bottom of page) http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=668553#post668553

A timeline ^ Feel free to use Dr.Google; www.google.com But yeah it is a PIA to learn about all the different versions. Just remember, the only current versions of Falcon 4.0 are: 'FF5', 'Open Falcon', and 'Falcon 4.0: Allied Force'. To use FF5 you need an install of Falcon-4.0 or Allied Force. FF5 and Open Falcon are mods made by the community. You can 'dual install' so that you can play both Allied Force or FF5/OF depending on your mood. FF5 has updated AI, graphics, weapon systems, new cockpits etc etc if you like those things. I'm not very sure about OF, AFAIK it is mainly just about modelling the F-16 and it's systems in detail (to a very high level). Both are 'better' than Allied force in every area, HOWEVER Allied Force is still the most popular version of Falcon, namely because it has the most stable multiplayer experience (afaik). FF5 is apparently extremely hit and miss with stability in MP, I don't know about Open Falcon - I can't play it on my system.

Cheers, are they just dragging a tarp over it? Interesting how many cars you can see in Indianapolis, is that anything to do with the factories? (Very tasteful by the way, I hope they kept those rooves!)

That made me laugh out loud, thanks! Honestly you would not bankrupt your opponent by making them fire twice as many missiles at fake tanks. These decoys (if they are as good as claimed) would be useful, but for other reasons which i'm sure you could point out Hajduk. Logic says that the situation where these decoys would be used would either be: 1). Full scale war. - You will not bankrupt your oppenent using decoys because modern wars happen so fast that ammunition produced after the start of hostilities would probably only arrive in-theatre after land or air superiority had been won. or 2). A prolonged bombing campaign against a small/vulnerable state (with full air superiority to the aggressor). - You will not bankrupt NATO in this circumstance (as was proved by operation Allied Force). You stand just as little chance of bankrupting the United States. - They may run low on weapon stocks [NOT RELEVANT TO MY/THIS POINT please don't start a new argument topic] but that is NOT the same as 'bankrupting' themselves. The cold war was not a 'war', it was a confrontation. The USSR was bankrupted, but not because it was actively 'fighting' a war. NATO decoys made no contribution to it's bankrupcy.

That's a very good point. I think you can see what i'm getting at here, would you want to wait ~20seconds whilst you wait for your missile to hit the target? Can this fire on the move? I wouldn't like to be stationary on the modern battlefield in a BMP.

Good link, though for a strange second I thought the pilots were about to fly a Hyundai into battle. 'Mirror, Signal, Manouver!'

(about 9M123 Khrizantema) I thought that the design of the carrier looks ridiculously complicated and presents a lot of parts for failure to be honest. The 6000m range is impressive, any idea how long the missile will be in flight for? (all I could see was 'supersonic')

I've pulled this off http://history.sandiego.edu/GEN/WW2tIMELINE/britain.html Just thought some quirky things would be of interest. Apparently the trick was creating a lifelike shadow.. :book: Just some BoB stuff there. I find it interesting how countries facing defeat can come up with some desperate and imaginative ideas, some of which actually work.

The other thread reminded me of a whole lot of wacky tactics used in WW2 by Britain to try and confuse Axis powers. Lot's of interesting things, but the most important thing to remember I suppose is that, There's a lot of stuff pulled out of comic book fiction when you look around, and some accounts would leave you to believe that certain things were truly effective when they weren't. One amusing example is of a German plane dropping a wooden bomb on a fake railhead in North Africa :) I'm only really aware of the British rouses though, was hoping some of you could post about ones used in the Pacific, Balkans, Middle East, Pacific etc etc..

Hahaha good link, nice quirky video lol I'm taking it that the only countermeasure when these are used will be signals intelligence and good photo recon? I mean.. If there are two SAM sites and only one is confirmed to be operating in that sector then good sigint and thermal imaging (of the SAM's deployment) should be enough to only prosecute the right target. Cost isn't really an issue here though (you don't win the initial 72hr air war by bankrupting your enemy do you?). Who's saying that these would be GREAT targets for cannon-practise? LOL, any takers? Interesting image, i'll see if I can find the name of the guy who's idea the rubber tanks were [Found it: Jasper Maskelyne]. He used to be a stage 'magician' before the war, old habits die hard I suppose! Also i'm sure he had something to do with a group of signallers in Scotland imitating full scale military manouvres being carried out. (Sorry for OT) Edit: on the subject of WW2 decoys and deception, i'll make a new thread.

Well seeing as you've gone and done it now I will go away for a while again - this time on a holiday flight from 'Moron Air Base' to 'Hallbergmoos.'

Wouldn't it be great to have your honeymoon on that thing eh? With a glass floor obviously. Mind you, I keep calling it the 'aeroscat', so maybe that's not such a good idea.

I really do love something about certain big helicopters, great links Kusch!