Skywall23

Note: This topic isnt about politics but the experience of a soldier in Iraq, and I dont want to see my topic closed some guys started talking about politics ok? Thank you now lets get to the point: http://braden.weblogger.com/2004/12/08 Read this, but be advised that your jaw may get loose. :shock:

Yeah, I remember when i was playing an online Su-25 interdiction mission, and the bomb blast didnt destroy my targets unless I did a direct hit. Weirdo to say the least.

That reminds of the air combat and arcade sims where your squadron pilots/wing leader/ your pilot, say to a determined aircraft to leave determined air space. And once we get a flyable C-130 ( :twisted: ) a new tactict will appear: air piracy! This combined with a resource management would end like this on online games: "Land on our airfield , so we can grab your resources, or you will be shot down!" :o

lol

Lol, if we continue like this we will have a collection of Mirages in the game. :twisted: Btw did the F1 get submissed to ED?

Thats babelfish, i cant understand nothing that is there. :?

Galevsky, please remove your sig/banner. About the AWACS system....fanstastic.

Roger Sycthe, its good to see that the Flanker can still have an advantage towards the Eagle. Never thought that Eagle could catch the Fulcrum in turn rates and AoA! :shock: Oh well, looks like I need to do some research to get myself updated. :roll:

Ok then, looks like the F-15 is dogfighter after all. :arrow: Looks like Uncle Sam should be proud of McDonnel Douglas.

Yeah I think that not having unlimited skins is sad, but LOMAC came only with 1 CD, maybe they didnt have time for that or space.

But let us remember Flanker pilots The Su-27 we pilot in LOMAC was build to counter the F-15A not the F-15C.

Ok I will test those speeds you gave me. About the F-15 hanging in turns to the F-16 i have my doubts. The F-15 aerodynamics are clearly for speed porpuses not maneuverability. The F-15 are a clear example. Unlike the F-16 or Su-27, the F-15 wings are short so it cuts less the wind/air making it faster. Thats a problem that the Eurofighter Typhoon creators are facing, because the Typhoon wings are in Delta they tend to make the plane be more faster, and since the Typhon is a multi role fighter it attacks gound targets...and when that happens the Typhoon wins too much speed so it isnt able strafe/bomb the target for many time. The F-16 and Su-27 wings have a good lenght. That's why it doesnt acelarate so fast, unlike the Eagle. The Su-27 should have a higher angle of attack I think. It should be more manoubrable when having no missiles in the wings and 70% (not 60% like we see). By the way, what is the weight of an F-15C empty and an Su-27 with only 60% fuel? Who of them has less weight? I dont have LOMAC installed so if anyone could post some screens or at least check that out i would apreciate.

Hmm....what about the manoubrability (please guys tell me how do i spell this word :? ) of the Su-27? Shouldnt it be more manoubrable? I know ,I know that the fuel on 100% makes it spin, stall, etc , but dont you thinkit shouldnt be like this? I mean the Su-27 loses speed very fast. The best angles of attack i can get are between 350 Km/h and 500 Km/h but the plane cant hold very well that way. It will quickly lose speed, and i will get to stall. Zzzzspace said that 60% of fuel should make the Flanker a good dogfighter. But i think that value it too low. To avoid spins one of the features your plane must have is aceleration. The more powerfull the engine the more time the plane will hold on (of course it also depends on aerodynamics etc). One of the things that I liked to see on the list of 1.1 was that the Su-27/33 can now roll faster, but in Flanker 2.0 when you pass the first toturial, the instructor tells you that the Flanker beat several speed records established by the F-15. Is this true? If yes, how can the engines of the Flanker be so low when it comes to the acelearation? Or are we only talking about top speed? I doubt that, since i believe those records must be done by distance: [This example is no real data] Su-27 hits 500 Km/h in 300m Su-27 hits 1000Km/h in 3 Km. I think the records are made this way. Maybe not by distance but by time. You may also see that the Su-27 model design is more pro-manoubrable. Unlike the F-15 it hasnt the air absorving mouths on then side of the cockpit. I still remember when I went to hyperlobby and saw some people claiming that the F-15 was a very good dogfighter in this game. Should it be like it is? :shock: I could bet my arse that the F-15 theory is destroy at long/medium range, but since im no expert on aircraft, I will leave this matter for the professionals. So shall the angles of attack of the Crane be higher...or not?

Thats afirmative GG. In fact I remember that JJ Alfa also said that the SM version of the Flanker was only a prototype.

JJ - Alfa wrote: Is this the modified Su-27? Yeah, and for it looks like if we wanted ED to model the SM version, ED would have to model air-to-ground modes on the Su-27. :shock:

If Eagle Dynamics models datalinks on the F-15 we (Su-27 pilots) are doomed! :shock:

Like me. :mrgreen:

:o

I second that.

Hold on a second, are you trying to say that we will get 1.2???? :shock:

bump again

Bump!

I second that. I third that.

English is easier than russian. ;) (quite more)

He's russian Kula66. That's why he misses points very easily. Its not his mother language the one we are speaking here. :?