Lockon Operation Red Flag/Combined Air Exercise

[TucksonSonny]

This setup COULD work assuming we skip AWACS and EWR (due to EDs failure to implement datalink on US side).

 

 

Blue is rather hampered, in RvE I'm the only one of the signups (afaik) that actually fly the f-15, so the same as with JaboG - We will be a little bit everywhere with the feet/kt reatings :).

 

So shortly, what I recommend:

 

1. No AWACS

2. No EWR

3. Limit SOME of the Red Force planes to lesser weapons (for example 2 mig29s only with 29A-loadout).

4. Also perhaps cutting away ETs from some of the Su-planes. I'm not entirely sure about this, but it is very certain an ET coalition will have an advantage in terms of bvr movement compared to a "Pitbull Coalition".

 

Normally 3-4 would not be nec, but since half of blue Coalition fly planes they normally dont - will be tricky :).

 

I will be there either way though, and I think the rest of RvE will as well.

 

* No ECM is only an advantage for the Su-27

* I would allow the short-range T version for the Mig-29A

* Cutting away ETs from some of the Su-planes is not acceptable in my opinion if F-15C gets full 120C-loads.

If finding Mig-29A pilots is a problem then you can always count me in flying a Mig-29A with the T.

~{148th}~Van :D me

[Fudd]

Gents,

 

The reason for the "inbalance" on the fighter side is an effort at preserving a NATO vs Warsaw mission.

 

As far as weapons loadouts goes, we will allow what is allowed in lock-on with a clean config file. In other words the 29A will have the T, F-15's will be allowed a full 8 Aim-120's if they wish, ET's will be allowed and no R-77 on outer pilons of the Mig-29S.

 

There is no plan to incorporate EWR or AWACS in this mission, because of the obvious lack of datalink in western aircraft.

 

I made all efforts to include the aircraft people requested and take into account the overall fairness of the mission. If everyone on blueFor feels like their outgunned, than have your squad leaders PM me and I will see what I can do.

 

S!

[504smudge]

would it not make it more interesting, more fair/skilled to have no AIM120's or R77's

[Woodstock]

As I said, it wouldn´t be too farfetched to just add Ukraine to the blue side.

Not speaking for myself, I´m happy, but for others it´s also a matter of motivation to be able to fly the aircraft one specialized in.

Talking about the longevity of Fudd´s initiative in terms of participation numbers...

[Laud]

The 120s are no problem because they suck compared to the 77s! ;)

 

As this first mission is kind of a tryout I'm ok with the setup. But I'd be the last who would say a word against getting Ukrainia into the NATO (I mean they're closer to the NATO as to the Russians... today...). ;)

 

Also the ETs are no problem. The advantage on red side is the huge amount of long-range weapons (R-27ER/EM). I know in RL it's a whole different story, but in LOMAC the 120s stay a kind of a short-range-weapon. My good I don't fly the F-15. :)

 

So let's see how everything's gonna work!

[S77th-GOYA]

would it not make it more interesting, more fair/skilled to have no AIM120's or R77's

 

No, it would not. Take the 120 away from the 15s and then you must limit the Russians to R-27Rs. There is no way to do a NATO v Warsaw and be exactly even.

 

I'm more worried about the total number of planes and turning it into a lagfest. If the server we use is decided upon, it should be tested in a mock battle with the same planeset and similar amounts of ground forces.

[Laud]

It's more the number of ground units than the number of aircrafts which limits the server-performance!

 

We noticed that on our dedicated server as well as on the LLTM.

 

Number of aircrafts should be o.k. so far.

[Woodstock]

My good I don't fly the F-15. :)

LOL, your bad you gotta fly the MiG-29A (GER) this time, boss...:doh:

[Laud]

LOL, your bad you gotta fly the MiG-29A (GER) this time, boss...:doh:

 

Have a look at Svens PM (in our internal forums)! Seems to be o.k. with the two Migs. *ggg*

[159th_Fusion]

Fudd has a good handle on the mission, just let him set it up and let's fly it. This isn't life or death guys...this is RED FLAG...A.K.A (practice) We are doing this to learn tactics, teamwork and planning. 3 Sqn is looking forward to this no matter what the outcome is.

 

Couldn't have put it better, thank you Cali for the vote of confidence, it's much appreciated.:)

 

As Fudd has said, the first one will be simple. As a way of testing what things do and don't work, from there things will be adjusted to make the next one better, so on and so forth......

 

The primary goal is to make it fun and serious at the same time (not an easy task). After all, this is a game that we want to enjoy playing.

At the same time this is a learning experience, it will help us all fly better, fight better, plan better, work together better and most importantly, help the various sqns that play LO interact more, make new friends, alliances and partners. Thus helping to improve the LO experience as a whole.:thumbup:

[NotiA10]

amen brother !!!

 

:pilotfly:

S77th-NotiA10

 

 

p.s/ great job fudd !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[159th_Viper]

Fudd has a good handle on the mission, just let him set it up and let's fly it. This isn't life or death guys...this is RED FLAG...A.K.A (practice) We are doing this to learn tactics, teamwork and planning. 3 Sqn is looking forward to this no matter what the outcome is.

 

Words of Wisdom - Good Man Cali :)

[Fudd]

:thumbup:

 

Thanks Gents!

[S77th-GOYA]

Fudd, is there anyway to add at least 2x29S to our side?

 

Why would you get MiG-29S and we not get F-15? Just let Fudd handle it and deal with what you get to work with. Remember what you just wrote?

[RvEYoda]

* No ECM is only an advantage for the Su-27

* I would allow the short-range T version for the Mig-29A

* Cutting away ETs from some of the Su-planes is not acceptable in my opinion if F-15C gets full 120C-loads.

 

If finding Mig-29A pilots is a problem then you can always count me in flying a Mig-29A with the T.

 

~{148th}~Van :D me

 

ET-part was more of a joke.

I never said I wanted the 29As not to have Ts.....perhaps I musinderstood and you wanted to say that the T-version isnt that much worse than ET (I agree, very short smoke trail makes it very lethal)

 

I did not mention ECM in that post at all, so I don't know what you're talking about? My post before that was only a suggestion =)

 

And about ECM only hampering Su27s I disagree VERY VERY VERY VERY much.

F-15 can no longer use TWS anywhere near effectively if the enemy is jamming beyond 12,5 nm, and within 12,5 the angular spread of bandits makes tws almost useless. Anyone saying otherwise has not fully understood the benefits and disadvantages of the f-15 in a multiple bandit situation. But either way we already came to the conclusion that ECM would be allowed.

 

EWR/AWACS should though in my oppinion at least be LIMITED. For example one weak ewr station at home plates and/or Awacs planes VERY far behind.

[3Sqn_Fudd]

Sounds like fun...

 

We all have to get together on Comms afterwards and talk about the engadgements...

[Laud]

Why is everybody here always so stressed by critics??

 

Only answers comin up then are always "sh** up! ED makes a great job...,

John Doe makes a great job..." and so on... Believe it or not there will always be people seeing things different.

 

For now things seem to be unbalanced for me. But no prob, first mission is more a tryout than the last battle. So everybody relax and wait with praising Fudd until everything has proven to be great. ;) (Fudd, I hope you get me right here!!)

 

Anyways: Fudd, really appreciate your whole work in this project.

 

Can we now go on and brief mission objects and other more sensefull things?

 

Thank you all gents!

[RvEYoda]

I think we should all raise our hands & cheer on Fudd. This exercise is VERY much appreciated :)

 

But that DOES NOT mean we should not try to make it as good as possible!

[3Sqn_Sven]

Wow it's funny how people react to the aircraft set up. When I first saw it, I thought Blue team had the advantage with 10 F-15's. And I still do. So everyone's opinion will depend on how they employ the weaknesses and strengths of their aircraft.

 

Fudd, just keep on doing what you're doing dude. Let's try and keep the criticism to a minimum until after the mission.

[159th_Fusion]

Let's try and keep the criticism to a minimum until after the mission.

 

And please ensure it's constructive criticism at that gents.

 

The first mission may well go horribly wrong for all we know, I'm sure it wont of course, but the possibility is still there. So we'll need constructive input to improve the setup, so that the missions keep getting better and better.

 

Flaming will only result in no Red Flag exercise at all, which is not what we want ;) .

[Teknetinium]

ET's? didn't you mean balls?:D

How about limiting 120's to a set number, nah this will get silly.

 

jupp thats wright frosti, I hear no talking about that. limting m-120s

[S77th-Dante]

Was just asking a question cause nobody in there right mind would fly the 29A. I talked to Fudd on the phone today and I said if it's any trouble then forget about it. And it's going to stay the way it is now but the next RED FLAG mission will be different. That is why I ask and the details of it.

 

quite a while ago now, we played a missions vs another group. for some reason they

 

A. made a mistake with the mission

B. thats the way it was ment to be.

 

we were set with MiG-29A's vs 27's and 29S and su-25t

 

now the 25t were not even in our area. they were doing something in georgia. while we in 29A's were in the ukr.

 

to cut a long story short. our 29A's were droping 29S's like flys AND we were outnumered 2-1.

 

now admitidly on the re-make or re-do of the map. we had 29S and 33's f15's it didnt take long at all at that point. in fact i think the enemy decided to take off again and they were not mento, but then went down a 2nd time too.

 

at the end of the day , its not the plane. but the quality of teamwork & pilots.

 

that said. i believe this is a nato v warsw thing, so you should make use of the aircraft you do have. you may have alot of 29A's G's , you should make sure you use them otherwise you may find you dont have a Su-27 or f-15 or mig-29s down the track when you really need it.

[Laud]

Hi Dante! Long time not seen!

 

 

I think part of the prob with NATO vs Warsaw Pact is that almost all squads handle all aircrafts. As a result of this you'll find a lot of pilots who'll have to fly planes they're not sooo familiar with. Me for example (Su-27 Pilot for 90% of my time in LockOn): Mig-29A is no prob but I always get really confused sitting in a Mig ("G") and have imperial units on the instruments... F-15 is a total no go for me - just don't get it right with that bird.

 

The suggestion to count Ukrainia into NATO is absolutely constructive in my eyes! :)

 

Really looking forward to our first flight!!!

[Laud]

Hey RvE-guys! Has AS told you guys about the tactics-forum on the virtual-jabog32-forums? I just asked because until now nobody showed up there.

[Fudd]

How come the 169th isn't part of this? Wasn't there enuf room for them? I'm sure a couple of us would give up our slots to have them represented.

 

The 169th respectfully declined the invitation to attend this first mission. I hope that in subsequent missions that they will join us, as they are valued members of the community.