L4key

Ok, I'll bite, and use your own quotes... "The 17 Mirage IIIEAs were the Argentine Air Force's primary air defence interceptors and should have been a threat to the Sea Harriers. However, following the disastrous combat on 1st May when two Mirage IIIEAs were lost, the aircraft were rarely seen over the Falklands except for a few decoy and escort missions." "Commodore Mike Clapp's tactics for the air defense of San Carlos had proved very effective. Defence in depth had worked. The outer layer of Sea Harriers on CAP had shot down a mixture of nine enemy aircraft, mainly Mirage V Daggers and Sky Hawks. But although the air-air confrontations had been exciting in the extreme, it was already clear that the Argentine pilots were not going to mix it with us; knocking them down had become a question of being in the right place at the right time." Yes - why? It had a lot to do with - though not entirely, because the Argentines had respect for it's capabilities as proved in day one. Do we say the F22 is rubbish because no-one fights it/the US in the air? No - because it's so good the USAF relies on it's deterence factor as well. Simplified? Yes. A stretch to compare the SHAR and F22? Of course - but the point remains the same, the Argentinians obviously knew their fuel restrictions on day one but still were ok with engagements? Saw SHAR more than a match and thought better of it. In my book thats a success and credit to, amongst other things, the SHAR's A2A capability.

Woo hoo! Go Vaulty! You tell 'em! :lol: Can I not refer everyone back to http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=821330&postcount=63 ...in a vain attempt to knock this on the head? It didn't really work last time so I'm not sure why anyone'll listen to me now but seems a good compromise as me and Vaulty want to have the SHAR's children and everyone else thinks it's a complete pudding of a fighter?

I get to a stable hover about 10m above the ground just off and 45 degrees (as the above posters said) to the side of the pad and nose forward slowly and slightly to the side. It helps to be as low as possible when close to the FARP so you can see it, but approach from the side with no buildings/vehicles! As soon as you touch down, even if it is a bit bumpy, kill (re-centre) all the trim to avoid falling over!

Well - you killed anything yet??

Are you selecting the hardpoint you want to use? If you press Y it selects the Vikhrs, giving you the outer green lights. I just checked the tutorial and it's not clear on that point. 'I' selects the inner hardpoint ie rockets fyi.

I was at the same stage as you when I came accross the following tutorial: http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2626185/STICKY_Tutorial_How_to_take_of.html As the Frederf alluded to, to get you launching weapons through the medium of forum replies would take forever, download this and print the manual and I guarantee you that within half an hour a tank will be toast. Did the job for me, thanks again ParaB! Ps sorry about not being able to find a link to anything on this site Mods but I did search first.

Surely no-one buys BS thinking its like HAWX??! It's about balance, I really don't have a lot of time to sim - though believe me I try and make time! Had I needed to learn full start up for example or ABRIS waypoint planning to get going and getting success in missions I'd probably not be flying now, but would have discarded. ED have to make a product that is ultimately as realistic as possible but they'd never make any money in this market if it was absolutely rigid in it's 'real or nothing' approach. IMHO noobs should be treasured, not got at, for they represent a potential convert to simming that provides income for ED and as such development funds for A10 etc. Surely private servers on MP get rid of berks who really can't fly and have no real intent on trying to do things properly? Anyway, treat a noob as another helper toward getting new modules and the continued success of ED. :thumbup:

Fair point, but even if they were A2A Eagles you'd still hope for Typhoon success given the relative ages of the aircraft surely? P.S - Lucky we didn't send up some Sea Harriers, then your Eagles/F22's would be in trouble.... (sorry thread mix) :lol:

:lol:

You started it the whole debate by calling it ugly IIRC! :lol:

As opposed to the one sided English langauge ones? :huh: I can assure you, most UK media to do with the subject ever since takes a very 'balanced' view, in most cases it is criticisied for being too 'left wing' and anti Thatcher/war etc so sorry but I don't buy that you are in some way more enlightened because of your documentaries. Is it not just as possible that Spanish language documentaries have agendas? - I don't neccessarily think they do by the way, but I can't see how you can imply critisim to English ones on the same basis. This is also borne out by the fact that most of your points in relation to the engagements have already been accepted as accurate in this debate by both, even us who only have the benefit of propaganda ;)

Facts as I see them thus far from this debate - 1. Early engagements went sufficiently well against the Argentinians to change their tactics - had it failed in this and been the dog of a fighter that it should be as A2G platform then as Nigel Ward (indeed, excellent book) said, the ability to protect the fleet would have been over-run fairly quickly. This could be considered a failure on behalf of the Argentinians, true, but to deny the Harrier recognition entirely in this respect here is unfair. 2. It did perform better 'than expected' against air superiority fighters, I have read this twice in different places. 3. It would get whooped 9 times out of 10 by modern fighters, obviously. 4. It's not particularly 'beautiful' in a conventional way, but holds appeal more as a deisgn classic. But two points thus far missed - When was the 'Kestrel' first tested - 1960? My bet is then, and up to the 70's, it could have been a very comparable A2A jet. I might be wrong on this but I'm sure I read that it's use of vectored thrust allowed even better performance and unmatched manouvres in VR confrontations... Anyway, can we not agree that for a primarily tasked ground attack airframe (and the only option A2A for the RN in '82) the Harrier was 'surprisingly' decent in the A2A role?

If I may refer the honouroble Mr M to the Falklands war when 20 Sea Harriers held off the entire Argentine AF, as referenced by my esteemed colleague Mr Vault. Argentine pilots nicknamed it the 'Meurte Negra' (sic) or 'Black Death'. Mirage III's? Still pretty impressive. Ok, so now most 4th + generation fighters may prevail but considering the harriers apparently questionable dynamics they'd still get quite a scrap! In fairness, probably a jack of all trades, master of none. The USAF at one stage said they didn't want it because they questioned it's payload - they said 'it couldn't carry a coke bottle round an airfield' or something like that! Edit: beat me to it V!

Vault - was 100% with you until you mentioned the T10, I would put that in the less attractive of harriers!

See - beautiful!

Well, consider offence taken! :D That's so unfair! The GR5/7 & SHAR Mk1 are great looking. Granted this incarnation with its big nose, and possibly the snoutish GR3 aren't as pretty. Still better than the Yak anyway. ;)

Yeah - what DS said, take notes. I watched the training missions and jotted a few reminders down and after a few runs of my own I was ok at the basics of target aquisition and weapon delivery. I have no idea why the ABRIS is there still other than to show me my route (I can change waypoint) but thats about it. Same with the PVI800, not much of a clue there either! That said I still have flown and completed 3 campaigns (quite) easily, with a low spec rig as well I might add. Now I can fly and fight and have got slightly bored of this I'm going back to learn manual start up and ABRIS. You don't have to know as much as you think at the start to get a lot out of this sim. Plus - ask on the forum - you'll get few unhelpful 'rtfm' snipes but if you exhausted a search or the sticky's first for your problem you'll get an answer.

Did the trick for me! Only had to shoot down one this time, and I just about managed that. :)

Can't we have a 'what kind of thread do you want to see next' thread? This has been done to death! zzzzz Tornado btw ;)

About to try - any tips of what I should prioritise with the new triggers?

It detects the motion of your head so you can 'look' around the cockpit, zooming in and out as well. Rather than use the mouse. I don't have it (yet) but everyone raves about it so it won't be long before I'm in the club. This sim has the best cockpit interaction and realism already - so I imagine it's unbelievably good with track ir. The only way I know to 'duck out' of the screen is to press 'alt-tab' which minimises and switches you to desktop. That might work?

People will get suspiscious of your joystick, throttle and track-ir though! Unless your job is a UAV pilot ;) Arf! Sorry, no practical advice as I don't know :(

Nice one Eddie, might not be as pretty but the GR4 looks mighty fine. :thumbup:

Or see 'City of God' DVD for further information. Mega film :thumbup:

Expertly argued Lucas but couldn't agree with you less.;) ED could model a flying bathtub and I'd fly it. I'd never have picked a KA50 before experiencing it. One thing at a time, whatever they can do that they can do justice to, and don't rush it we want it just right, just like BS. The great thing is about ED they don't seem to be too worried about commercial demand and I think that is what makes BS so good, the focus and only doing something they know they can nail. Oh look you've got me involved on one of those threads I can't stand! :doh: