What interest you most, A-A or A-G missions?

[tflash]

My clock says we're posting two hours apart, and we're up to 85%

Wow.

 

No, 83 votes, only 66% ... your lead is waning :D

[X-man]

Well, the SAMs in Lockon are VERY stupid. They lock you up at max range and launch at their Rmax. Even in a slowmover, its pretty easy to avoid them if you're carefull enough....

 

I think what GG is talking about is that he (me 2) wants to see some SAM tactics where the SAMs wait to nail/spike you til very close. Basically, that the AD is more careful.

[GGTharos]

^^^^

 

More difficult to see, more clever and sets up more ambushes, yes :D Then SEAD would become much more interesting and difficult, too!

[GGTharos]

No, it is not. The USAF disagrees with you, and has official study to back it up.

 

Of course IRL A2G is just as challenging as A2A or any military mission.

[159th_Viper]

No, it is not. The USAF disagrees with you, and has official study to back it up.

 

Awfully Pretentious, Wot - Just because the USAF says so does not necessarily make it true, eh :P

 

I would have thought that in any Mission, be it A2A or A2G, the main goal insofar as the Pilot is concerned is to return in One Piece. Therein lies the Challenge - Survival. Cannot see how one can possibly draw a distinction.

 

After all, when faced with that Launch Tone in the Pit of ANY Airframe I'm sure the challenge in the Fight for Survival is the same............but then again, that's just me :)

 

One can of course argue that if you receive the launch tone, then you're doing it wrong. That would of course be selectively arguing the circumstances to the point of absurdity.

 

Then again, any comparison between A2A and A2G stands to fail in any event due to their vastly contradictory natures. Only one Constant remains - the Life and Well Being of the Pilot...............

 

And yes, as said: L.O.C.E.R.F. is where it's at. Me, I prefer A2G but it's a pleasure to Fly where the two work in Harmony to attain a Mutual goal.

[tflash]

I think we all agree LOCERF is a fantastic initiative!

[D-Scythe]

I would have thought that in any Mission, be it A2A or A2G, the main goal insofar as the Pilot is concerned is to return in One Piece. Therein lies the Challenge - Survival. Cannot see how one can possibly draw a distinction.

 

Pretty flawed logic. Just because two missions have the same end-goal doesn't mean they're equally dangerous. For example, both the 100-m dash and the 100-m hurdle requires the racer to cross the finish line, yet the 100-m hurdle is by far much harder and possibly more painful.

 

Or even better - two separate F/A-18 flights taking on identical missions with identical mission objectives, and the first flight suffers a loss-rate of 75% (because they're idiots) while the other 0% (because the pilots are competent). By your faulty logic, an inference cannot be drawn of the skill of the pilots - since the end-goal is the same, then it's impossible to draw a distinction. Which is just plain wrong. Real wars don't abide by the Hess' law of thermodynamics - things aren't equal simply because their challenge/goals/end effects are the same.

 

After all, when faced with that Launch Tone in the Pit of ANY Airframe I'm sure the challenge in the Fight for Survival is the same............but then again, that's just me :)

 

One can of course argue that if you receive the launch tone, then you're doing it wrong. That would of course be selectively arguing the circumstances to the point of absurdity.

 

Then again, any comparison between A2A and A2G stands to fail in any event due to their vastly contradictory natures. Only one Constant remains - the Life and Well Being of the Pilot...............

 

Limiting the threats of air combat simply to how well a pilot can evade a missile is very simplistic and not representative of the actual nature of things at all. Air combat is dynamic - only mud-movers would look at it in such a one-dimensional way :harhar:

[159th_Viper]

As I stated............selectively arguing the circumstances to suite one's point-of-view to the Point of Absurdity.........'twas an inevitability it was :music_whistling:

[GGTharos]

OMG I can't rep you D-Scythe. Them's fighting words! :D

[Highwayman-Ed]

Don't forget that fighter jocks have a much bigger ego, and therefore much more at stake and much more to lose :smartass:

[D-Scythe]

As I stated............selectively arguing the circumstances to suite one's point-of-view to the Point of Absurdity.........'twas an inevitability it was :music_whistling:

 

Then over-generalizing a set of conditions to prove one's point and just plain ignoring circumstances that are contradictory must be your "inevitability." I guess it's a good thing that the "inevitability" I provided was the one NOT logically flawed.

 

Also, it's a sign of a weak argument to attack the how an opposing argument is presented rather than the actual argument itself.

 

Oh wait, it now seems that the "end-effect," the goal, of my argument doesn't matter to you nearly as much as how I presented it. Strangely, for some reason, I seem to recall it was you who didn't care about the crap that led up to an end-result.

 

Is that...hypocrisy I smell? :music_whistling:

 

But it's great that you decided to sabotage your own argument instead of having me do it.

[Aeroscout]

I think the mods should close this thread... (I smell flames... and the war has already begun)

 

Let's just say both are difficult. However, like apples and oranges, it's fruitless (no pun intended) to compare them, as they are different things.

[GGTharos]

Incorrect. It is not like apples and oranges,and as said before, there's officialy study to back it all up ;)

[D-Scythe]

I think the mods should close this thread... (I smell flames... and the war has already begun)

 

There hasn't been any flames. I just didn't like his argument that "No distinction can be made between A/A and A/G because the pilot must live" and his subsequent rebuttal. I'm sure Viper's an outstanding guy.

 

BTW, distinctions CAN be made between apples and oranges. Sure, people have different tastes and it's true, it's senseless to compare them. BUT arguably it's harder and more challenging to eat an orange because you have to peel the skin off first :harhar:

 

Of course, then you factor in pineapples...:gun_rifle:

[mvsgas]

A couple of questions guys. Do you consider the SU-27, F-15, Mig-29 and SU-33 in LOMAC FC easier or harder to fly than the KA-50 in DCS BS? Because if you think the KA-50 is harder ( I mean, taking in consideration all aspects, FM, weapons utilization, SA, etc) and the KA-50 can only fly A2G, then how is A2G easier? I know it is a hello and completely different flying but, it is still A2G right?

[D-Scythe]

A couple of questions guys. Do you consider the SU-27, F-15, Mig-29 and SU-33 in LOMAC FC easier or harder to fly than the KA-50 in DCS BS? Because if you think the KA-50 is harder ( I mean, taking in consideration all aspects, FM, weapons utilization, SA, etc) and the KA-50 can only fly A2G, then how is A2G easier? I know it is a hello and completely different flying but, it is still A2G right?

 

I'm sorry, I don't understand. Firstly, the Ka-50 is a chopper - that in and of itself makes it more difficult and dangerous to fly period, let alone in combat. Secondly, if I take your argument and replace "Ka-50" with "Su-25T" (which satisfies your first premise as well - i.e. it is more difficult to fly than the F-15), the increased difficulty can be attributed to:

 

- the Su-25T flight controls/avionics being more manually work-intensive, and rudimentary, than the F-15

- the Su-25T being modelled in much greater detail/realism (and thus, more things the pilot has to pay attention to)

 

Either way, even fundamentally, I do not understand how you can take how "easily" a mud-mover flies and extrapolate from that a conclusion about how challenging the A/G mission is in general. As far as inductions go, that's a bad one.

[mvsgas]

Sorry I will try to explain myself. Do you think it is easier or more complex or do you have a more challenge flying the KA-50 in the game or a A2A mission. I know it harder to fly a hello but it is still flying A2G mission and that is what where talking about right? Witch one do you prefer and witch one do you think is more complex and challenging.

 

P.S.

Just wandering, if I understand what you guys are saying(not claiming that I do) all A2A in the game is more complex and challenging that all A2G. That is why I use the KA-50 as an example. It flies A2G and even I have never flown it, it seem more complex and challenging. Just wandering.

[Kuky]

D-Synthe and GGTharos... I invite you both to come and fly A2G in next RF then lets see how well you're gonna do and how EASY doing A2G just is ;)

[Highwayman-Ed]

I think the mods should close this thread... (I smell flames... and the war has already begun)

 

Let's just say both are difficult. However, like apples and oranges, it's fruitless (no pun intended) to compare them, as they are different things.

 

They're not Flames, that's good old fasioned banter between what I'm guessing are a couple of guys with close ties to one legal system or another.

 

:thumbup:

[Weta43]

It's not apples & oranges, but it is like asking which is harder - cricket (baseball) or chess.

Yes you have to be fitter to play cricket, & yes you probably have to have quicker reactions, more situational awareness of the 'what's happening in this very instant' kind, but is it 'harder' than Chess?

Take a month off cricket & you'll need a couple of weeks training to be match fit.

Take a couple of weeks off Chess & you're probably in a better mental state - not worse.

Does that make chess 'easier' than cricket ?

Same for A2A & A2G

That USAF study sisn't say A2A was 'harder', what it said was that the skills needed degraded more quickly without constant use than those for A2G. But that's because of the nature of those skills, not because the pilots are actualy 'more skilled', or A2A is 'more difficult' that A2G

[D-Scythe]

D-Synthe and GGTharos... I invite you both to come and fly A2G in next RF then lets see how well you're gonna do and how EASY doing A2G just is ;)

 

Fine, perhaps "easy" is not the right term to use. Lemme rephrase/explain my position. Yes, A/G missions are challenging - I didn't mean to come across and say that they are not. Pilots are presented with a set of challenges unique to the A/G mission - flying a slower aircraft not only makes mud-movers more vulnerable to the radar-guided SAM threat, but also to MANPADS and AAA. I would also like to counter this point and say that fighter jocks are the first to cross the fence and encounter a "full" IADs threat, untouched by SEAD, which is also very dangerous...

 

But more or less, the argument can be made that fighters and strikers are more or less equally as exposed to the same enemy fighter/SAM threat. Realistically then, how "challenging" an A/A or A/G mission is, is entirely dependent on the mission itself, and cannot/should not be generalized to "A/A is harder" or "A/G is more challenging."

 

However, this ISN'T the point. The topic asked for what is most interesting, not most challenging. GGTharos and I are emphasizing the fact that enemy aircraft present a far more dynamic set of targets than ground targets. This is undeniable - an enemy fighter can travel in any 3D vector in space at supersonic speeds, whereas ground targets are limited to slow, 2D motion. Sure, both air and ground targets can shoot back at you, and both threats are existent to both fighters AND mud-movers, but the fact that fighters are assigned to kill such flexible and dynamic targets make the A/A mission more interesting to me.

 

Furthermore, it is much more difficult for any kind of aircraft to survive an encounter with a flight of MiGs than with an SAM site - barring an ambush, its easy to survive/avoid any SAM site - the missile launchers can't pack up and chase your aircraft down. However, MiGs can both ambush you AND chase you down.

 

And that is what makes them more interesting as targets - these targets can do whatever you can do. Personally, I think about killing air targets during an A/G mission a LOT more than killing ground targets while on an A/A mission - like in Falcon 4.0 or Jane's F/A-18, when I'm equipped with both A/G and A/A weapons. Even in A/G missions, I regard enemy aircraft as far more lucrative targets, even more so than the actual primaries I'm assigned to hit.

[GGTharos]

I don't need LOCERF to show me anything. I've already designed A2G missions, I've flown A2G missions, and I've advised people as to how to make their A2G missions more challenging. I'm not interested in some attempted show at bravado.

 

A2A is quite a bit more dynamic; this is why it takes more training, constant training, and more ability to accomplish than A2G missions - that is not to say A2G guys lack ability - it is to say that when you have one situation which is dynamic, it will on average require more problem solving and more investment in brain matter than one that is -not-.

 

This is a fairly fundamental fact, whether in combat or science or whatever else you like to come up with.

 

And that is why A2A is more interesting to me.

 

D-Synthe and GGTharos... I invite you both to come and fly A2G in next RF then lets see how well you're gonna do and how EASY doing A2G just is ;)

[GGTharos]

You haven't shown me it's harder than A2A yet. You first ;) I have no need, and no desire to prove anything to you; I also have no desire to get up at some god-forsaken hour to fly around in a bomb truck (or a fighter for that matter) for a few hours.

 

If you wish to remain ignorant, it is your priviledge. Ciao. :D

 

there's a saying GG... put your money where your mouth is... show us all just how good you are at A2G and how little challenge an A2G is... it's not about some bravado the way you call it... fly redflag and prove your view not just loud talk about it. I am sure many A2G pilots would love to see how easy you do A2G mission.

 

and by the way, one thing is talking about personal interest another talking about challenge... you seem to claim A2G is piece of cake compared to A2A... so prove it and show us all how lacking we are and how it should be done.

[Kuky]

I don't think it's me who's the ignorant one and quite frankly think what ever you like... in properly set up ground units mission you'd get your ass smacked after which you can think all you like how easy or hard A2A or A2G is... I'm out of this stupid "discussion".

[tflash]

D-scythe and GG, our arguments have chopped a whole 1% of the A2G-lead in the poll! Some work to do still ... where are our wingmen again?