Bremspropeller

Die MB-339 st ein Stück performanter und hat zwei Waffenstationen mehr als die C-101 und L-39. Die Bewaffnungsoptionen sind bei der Macchi etwas umfangreicher - abgesehen davon, dass sie keine Heater tragen kann. Da haben die L-39 und C-101 ihren Vorteil. Wenn man Trainer mag und sie auch öfter fliegt, dann kann man durchaus drüber nachdenken. Stehen die anderen Trainer auch nur im Hangar, dann braucht man nicht den dritten Staubfänger.

+1

Have considered Automan's advice (relight button)? That could be the issue, since the throttle seems to stay in place.

Engine Master and JPT Limiter on? Possible double bind on an axis?

Trying to prevail on a server with a duckton of SAM activity makes you fly low through the valleys and popping up over those hnggnnfh ridges...

Lots of great info, thanks @Thinder

WAAA, I WANT FREE CANDY!

It's out.

PG in a blizzard will be my guilty pleasure.

That would explain the clear-and-straight cut vertical stabilizer.

Only EQ5s. EQ6s weren't around in 86. So by your independant logic the superiority of the Horper is driven home by the availability of Pave Knife for the F-4. There wasn't any need for more advanced targeting options in the USAF, as other assets had that role already (F-4, F-111), making this role financially unavailable for export-customers. The AGM-62 was ill-suited for the attack-profiles flown (no Viper could carry them anyway). The Hornet had TGPs available, but at the time of it's combat debut most of the PGM weight was carried by the A-6 community anyway. Still no evidence that the Hornet would have been a more valuable aircraft to the iraqis - unless their whole air force would have been completely re-vamped. Iraq, however, was not working embedded in a NATO-environment and hence buying one or another type of aircraft alone would not have significantly shifted their weight into another direction. That's what your logic fails to grasp here. AS.30Ls were the preferred laser-guided ammo here. Seems like the Iraqis weren't quite satisfied with the BGL-250/400 LGBs, though. How many Harpoons could the Viper carry back then in the mid 80s? IIRC the Norwegians did integrate their Penguins in the very late 80s. I didn't write that. You chose to interpret it that way. Mind you that in '86 Hornets debuted by shooting HARMS. EQs had been using BAZAR missiles for some time before. Israeli Vipers CCIPed the sheet out of that new clear reactor in Iraq. Superiority. There is no gold standard for the Mirage, as each version is built to customer specs. You now manage to ignore this fact since how many - four or five posts? So the USN can't afford actual aerial tankers. They did quite well for the past 60 years with organic or air wing tanking alone. Iraq was conducting low-level buddy refuelling to bomb targets deep inside Iran or down low in the southern Gulf region. This capability came in handy, when they'd retrofit Su-22s and some MiG-23s with AAR probes. Retrofitting IL-76s wasn't deemed practical. Nor did they offer this kind of strike-capability. That's some nice mental gymnastics here. The F1 wasn't bought primarily as interceptor (the EQ2 served this role because the EQ4-6 wasn't ready yet), but as multirole and attack aircraft after it was clear that it not only surpassed everything the soviets had to offer (and were willing to export), but that it also had substanttial growth potential. It seems the jamming outfit on the Mirages worked quite well, as supposedly none was shot down when carrying Remoras. The F1 still managed a ~1:1 kill ratio against Tomcats - mostly depending on who saw whom first. All things considered, that's not bad at all. By weight, the F1 is a LWF, too. It's just a fancy marketing term. The F1EQ's Sycomor CM-pod could offer threat-specific chaff dispensing. That's because the Tonkas were arguably flying the most dangerous missions. It's quite evident that the F1 was an aircraft with substantial capabilities - some of which preceeded the F-16's contemporary capabilities by a couple of years. This is going to be my last response to you, since you're cleary out on an agenda and your 'independant thinking' is mostly lost on the "not built here"-syndrome. I don't see any value in discussing this any way further.

The EQs were using laser-guided ammo during the Tanker War as early as mid '86. That's when supposedly superior Vipers and Hornets (Horpers) were mostly flinging dumb ammo with CCIP/ CCRP. You know, F-16As and Hornets that just debuted their combat careers that same year. The iraqi F1s were also using ELINT pods and buddy-refuelling pods. Good luck finding those on contemporary Horpers. Supposedly "superior" F-16As. The lack of PD wasn't an issue. The lack of a comparale long range missile to the AIM-54 was. The Super 530F and D were as good as contemporary Sparrows. Good luck fighting a Tomcat in a heaters-only F-16A in that scenario. But no biggie as the Horper is "superior". I'm not rationalizing, I'm telling you AdlA had no money for all the bells and whistles. Hence they'd only put a RWR into the F1 starting at No°79. How many internal jammers does the F-16 have? How many internal jammers and EW gear did contemporary Jaguars and Tornados have? If you want to have an idea what the aircraft was ultimately capable of, have a look at all the export customers (or the FATAC CR and CT models). The EH, EDA, EJ and EQ models (especially the EQ5 and EQ6) were all very advanced for their time. Even gauging against american aircraft. Yeah. Or alternative facts.

Gibt bald richtiges Laternen-Licht. Erst auf der PG Karte, später auch aufden anderen Maps. Wäre eine große Veresserung.

A 2000-5F would be very cool (I'd throw money at it), but I'd actually prefer a 2000D with all the bells and whistles.

That's what she said.

Seems to be tied to a WOW logic. It will turn off as soon as you touch down. The CR and CT seem to be using it as some sort of runway light/ taxi light. They'll turn it on on ground.

There were lots of Palestinians flying in the Libyan Air Force. Not a proper independant air force or faction by itself, though. - Libyan Air Wars vol.1-3

Close that book and never open it again.

A real classic.

With 20mm or 40mm sparrows?

Yeah. *cough* bribes *\cough* The Viper's flyaway cost started low, mostly because it was bought by the USAF in four digit numbers. Plus it shared the exclusive motor with the Eagle for almost a decade. One post ago you claimed it was installed on the second tranche of CEs right from the factory. Make up your mind. An F-16 with comparable capabilities would have taken at least two additional years on top. That is IF they'd have gotten the export-clearance, which is of course an exercise in what-ifism in itself. Then again, buying Vipersand Hornets wouldn't make much sense if you already had a decent Dassault fleet (EQ2 and EQ4 aircraft and some SuEs). Got a source on how they would have preferred the Viper/ Hornet? Dude, you brought up the M2k. I'm talking about the F1. Besides, Dassault delivered what AdlA ordered. Ignoring this fact is a path you're taking voluntarily. The F1 is a 1960s airplane by design. And it's a very good one. In fact, it's a budget version of the F3, which the AdlA would have preferred after they were told they wouldn't get the F2, after they couldn't get the G8. They were under pretty severe budgetary constraints. The same is virtually true for the M2k vs M4k, which could never be built because of ca$h issues. By the time the M4k got to be a thing, the Rafale was already another thing and FRance was going to be pulling through with this supposedly eropean project on it's own. Get a decent book on the subject and read it. It won't hurt, I promise. The F1 is precisely comparable with the 101B and 106, since their initial service role was congruent. The F1 was supposed to be a transitionary aircraft, replacing earlier types as the SMB2. It wasn't going to be France's answer to designing fighters in the 70s or even seen as a replacement for the Mirage III. That would have been the Mirage 2000 and Mirage 4000. The latter would have been the F-15's contender.

So...Friday I'm in Love... There's got to be a cure for that harrowing waiting-period.

HEY MRS ROBINSON!

Yes, it's a rear-aspect only missile. The EM is all aspect.

I do think the hook ain't down and it didn't catch a wire here.