Bremspropeller

Thanks, eh!

+1 confirmed in the CE with JULIs. Haven't tried the EE or the other Sidewinders yet.

A coop-option would be awesome!

^No. We should have an EQ6 with Exocets and other fancy bells and whistles insted.

Catch him and he'll tell you all about SAM city.

+1

The transmission of flight control commands purely via electrical signals is what defines FBW. The "flight control computer" is just an evolutionary step that came into being with relaxed stability and special and more sythetic flight control laws (like g-command, pitch-rate or AoA-command and roll-rate command). We can dicuss about where an AFCS or Stab Aug and a flight control computer transition from one the other, but that discussion is fairly moot in my opinion. The Mirage F1, for example, is FBW in pitch and yaw only, where it's mechanical controls are de-clutched in the normal flight mode, but can be re-engaged for mechanical control. Similar flight-control architectures (FBW primary with a mechanical back-up) were used for other early iterations of FBW aircraft. Such as the Vigilante. Or the Avro Vulcan. Or Concorde.

"Ferry range" and "combat patrol" are mutually exclusive for starters, but if people insist on using wiki data that's just copied from another inaccurate source, then they're bound to be let down by reality. I just about ran the F-14A on my wing out of fuel on a 200NM+ attack mission with a similar bombload two days ago, flying the F1EE myself. It's all a matter of using at least correct'ish profiles. In the F1 that means cruising high and fast (+30kft and above M0.85).

What ELC posted, plus on the F1 you'll probably hit 135°C inlet temperature first, before hitting it's Mach 2.1 limit.

Hey Aerges, with the BE release coming closer, I do have a wish regarding a standard skin, which is not yet in game for the two-seaters: It's EC 3/5 Comtat-Venaissin, which was the first Operational Conversion Unit of the french F1s, before that role was passed on to 3/33 Lorraine: http://bdd.deltareflex.com/cns_affiche.php?image=15541 http://spotaero.blogspot.com/2016/06/mirage-f-1-b-n518.html Cheers

Good perspective SuE! I think those considerations are coming short within this thread. On top of that, in the single instance where the 23 could actually capitalize on it's superior FQ capabilities against the F1CZ (which were constrained to only Magic 1s and V3B Kukris of similar capabilities at that time), it was an R-60, taken into the face, that put one F1CZ out of the fight. Both sides were relying heavily on tactics in order to denying the opponents their advantage. For the F1s that often meant flying low, radar on stby, waiting for a pop-up cue by GCI. "Clear cut" advantages many times aren't when meeting real ops factors. That's what makes some of those scenarios so interesting.

Keep in mind that your most probable opponets will also be constrained by a cockpit-visibility akin to a cast iron letterbox.

It would be cool if the radar-controller stick could be set onto a mouse X/ Y axis like the TDC controller in many aircraft.

This. You'll hit that spot of the runway that has zero line of sight change (it doesn't move up, down, left or right and just gets bigger). That holds true for all approach angles and will be true for a collision course of two aircraft - no matter from which angle you're going to collide with. Different topic but entirely the same concept. If you really want to hate yourself for an hour, just fly the jet with the HUD tuned down (off) and just fly by deck angle, ballpark trim, power and relative runway motion in your HUD glass. Sounds impossible (where'd my airspeed, AoA and altitude go?) but it's entirely doable. If you want to challenge yourself on a slow night and get a little better at basic handling (and not turn into a "HUD cripple"), that's a perfectly fun move to get more connected with the jet. And you'll see that you won't necessarily need the little bird in the HUD to determine your point of impact anymore - no matter if on short final or on a dive.

Never really thought about it from that perspective, but as you mention it - makes perfect sense! I'm just trying to keep it as much "raw data" as possible and not trying to fly the VV but keeping connected to the airplane.

Hey Razbam, a way to make the crew chief deploy and stow the boarding ladder wold be a cool immersion feature. Any plans of implementing this? Cheers

I voted for the Counter Invader. Because it would have a map, once we have a map. If we get a map. And there are some jets coming in to work with (Spad, Hun and Phantom). The WW2 and Korea types would be complete map- and asset-orphans.

Just use the pitch-ladder to get your dive angle and then transition/ cross-check to the pipper. It's all just a matter of getting used to and training. After all, manual bombing is more an art than a science. Says the artist formerly known as "Missed"

Turkeyfeathers (F-15I based) and 389th FS (Thunderbolts) in hi vis clean and lo vis weathered markings with early FY (86-87) serial numbers would be cool. That would make a nice semi-fictional combination.

As dorian said, there's no reason for the HUD pitch-ladder to coincide with the horizon, as there's no VV in normal mode. It's just a fancy attitude-indicator and in terms of doing it's job it's working perfectly fine. You'll also find the HUD to be geared, btw: The 10° pitch line is nowhere near actual 10°from the horizon line, yet you'll be at 10° when your nose (boresight symbol) is aligned with the line. Don't look at the horizon, look at the horizon-reference line in the HUD. You're on instruments! There's got to be an engineering reason why it's the way it is, but as dorian also pointed out: Geared HUDs are (were) quite normal. My take on it is that if you're referencing the gun-line (which is about your true water-line), then you'd be running out of HUD-glass and windscreen on top. Hence you're just building a smaller sight with a depressed horizon. Once you stop thinking about it and just fly it, it stops being an issue. Just use it to ballpark set a pitch attitude and do the fine-tuning with the steam-gauges inside the cockpit. Don't chase the VSI, just reference the altimeter. It'll get to be second nature after a while. If you want a horizon line that's actually referencing the horizon, switch to Landing mode and you'll also get a simple VV. I never use that mode at all, as flying 10° AoA and normally referencing the runway (or PAPI/ VASI) will get you there as well. If you're on the ILS or an NPA, you're looking elsewhere most of the time anyway.

There weren't too many Sparrow kills in the first place: Three Sparrow kills during the War of Attrition. 25 kills total during that time. Four definate Sparrow kills during the YKW. 85 kills total during YKW. 6.5 kills after the YKW (none by Sparrows). => 7 out of 116.5 kills made with Sparrows. Source: S. Aloni. (Some kills mentionend don't mention the missile-type, though). It's not an uncommon loadout nonetheless.

At the end of the day it's down to what your personal user experience is going to or supposed to be. If you're flying offline or on less than die-hard realistic MP servers, sure. But on other servers, people might raise an eyebrow or two, when you're slashing through a furball guns-a-blazin or lobbing Sparrows at anybody you manage to lock onto. When talking *capabilites*, we'll kind of need to establish the boundaries first. Are we talking about gamey setups, or are we talking about milsim historical mission design with realistic sets of ROE.

What's your climb schedule then? You're climbing using the region of max specific excess power, which is not pulling the nose up and waiting, but accelerating to speed x, maintain that speed in the climb with pitch and then cross over into a set Mach for the rest of the climb (sowewhere in the low-mid 20s), maintaining it with pitch as well.

A lot of this discussion is academic what-iffery and highly depends on the set conditions and ROE. Of course you can plonk that Fishbed head-on at 10miles without fear of repercusson, but is it really a Fishbed? As soon as you have to V-ID, which you historically would have to, you're in an entirely different game. Will we get Combat Tree? In the F-4E, chances are you're the strike package, so you'll get two Sparrows - three at most - and maybe (!) heaters. Hence, launching Sparrows in wild abandon isn't quite the way to go. The IDF tried to tackle the heater-issue by putting a Sidewinder (or Python 3, see below) with an adapter into oneof the FWD Sparrow-recesses: That was a post YKW mod, though. The way the MiG-23MLA is assumed to be a lead-zeppelin WVR makes me wonder how many people are in for a nasty surprise. It brings some arrows in it's quiver that will make you reconsider your BVR game-plan. The Flogger can shoot you in the face quite well and the radar (plus it has an IRST) will give the pilot a pretty good pre-merge SA.

This.