Maverick-90 Posted December 8, 2005 Share Posted December 8, 2005 F/A-18E/F.....killed the T-cat.....I HATE IT!!!!!!! :icon_evil :icon_evil damn Plastic Bug......T-Cat was much cooler and had a far better Range without 5 ext. fuel tanks :icon_jook Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anivanov Posted December 8, 2005 Author Share Posted December 8, 2005 F/A-18E/F.....killed the T-cat.....I HATE IT!!!!!!! :icon_evil :icon_evil damn Plastic Bug......T-Cat was much cooler and had a far better Range without 5 ext. fuel tanks :icon_jook ??????????????????????????????????:confused::confused::confused::confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mobius1 Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 F/A-18E/F are still young ( they are short time in U.S. Airforces ) and they will play an important role for many years..... Agreed.;) Stupid thermals... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cali Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 can anybody explain why a long time ago was just F-number and now F/A- number.. ? Thanx At first it was just going to be a Fighter (F-22) aircraft and they changed it to a Fighter/Attack aircraft (F/A-22) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zaGURUinzaSKY Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 At first it was just going to be a Fighter (F-22) aircraft and they changed it to a Fighter/Attack aircraft (F/A-22) Cool thanx duuu Robbie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anivanov Posted December 11, 2005 Author Share Posted December 11, 2005 At first it was just going to be a Fighter (F-22) aircraft and they changed it to a Fighter/Attack aircraft (F/A-22) Do you know maybe, why they decided to call them F/A-22, not F-22??;););):confused::confused::confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundowner.pl Posted December 11, 2005 Share Posted December 11, 2005 Do you know maybe, why they decided to call them F/A-22, not F-22??;););):confused::confused::confused: Two for price of one. One more mission for the same money - that was move for those who yelled that it is only a fighter. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] "If a place needs helicopters, it's probably not worth visiting." - Nick Lappos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaman Posted December 11, 2005 Share Posted December 11, 2005 I've read somewhere that there are some plans to adapt YF-23 to become a stealth fighter-bomber (with more accent on the bomber side). Sundowner.pl are you comming from Polish flightsim community (saw that ".pl" and 1 post count) ? 51PVO Founding member (DEC2007-) 100KIAP Founding member (DEC2018-) :: Shaman aka [100☭] Shamansky tail# 44 or 444 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 100KIAP Regiment Early Warning & Control officer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra360 Posted December 11, 2005 Share Posted December 11, 2005 It was renamed F/A-22 to gelp secure more funding for the aircraft. It was seen by many that the F-22 cost too much for just one role. So in 1997 it was decidede to give it a secondary strike role and was called F/A-22 instead. It's suprising that the F-35 is not yet called the F/A-35 seeing as it will be hitting ground targets more and will not be assigned many air defence missions, in the USAF at least. And in the future Lockheed is suggesting a FB-22 variant to replace the F-15E and F-117. It will have a larger wing and weapons bay but it will be slower. This is still around 15-20 years down the line and the YFB-23 concept may well go head to head with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anivanov Posted December 11, 2005 Author Share Posted December 11, 2005 It was renamed F/A-22 to gelp secure more funding for the aircraft. It was seen by many that the F-22 cost too much for just one role. So in 1997 it was decidede to give it a secondary strike role and was called F/A-22 instead. it was stupid to give him a secondary role.the money for progress of F/A-22 they could spend for improving of F-22.then he would be even better......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperKungFu Posted December 11, 2005 Share Posted December 11, 2005 No…it’s smart to give the F/A-22 multi-function otherwise it would be useless to the military. Think about it…how many times have we actually engaged in a real A2A fight? Most of the time we are bombing the crap out of some guy, which is why the F/A-22 is equipped with AG capabilities. Besides, the F/A-22 is already equipped with the latest bells and whistle and it will do just fine in an aerial combat. It will probably never see a dogfight anyway since it keeps shooting down its opponents in BVR mode. Personally, I think it cost too much, a little over $300 million each. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anivanov Posted December 11, 2005 Author Share Posted December 11, 2005 Think about it…how many times have we actually engaged in a real A2A fight? Most of the time we are bombing the crap out of some guy, which is why the F/A-22 is equipped with AG capabilities.. then they can invest to aircraft which main purpose is attacking ground targets......... and the A2A thing:they can keep their planes and work on them until they make a perfect plane....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperKungFu Posted December 11, 2005 Share Posted December 11, 2005 That will cost more money, all aircraft of the future should have multi function. We see a great example of this is the F-35, which has a lot of functions. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anivanov Posted December 16, 2005 Author Share Posted December 16, 2005 i agree whit aircrafts of the future, but right now they don"t need multi role aircraft.........they can simple use the aircraft they have........:D:D:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhen Posted December 26, 2005 Share Posted December 26, 2005 No…it’s smart to give the F/A-22 multi-function otherwise it would be useless to the military. Think about it…how many times have we actually engaged in a real A2A fight? Most of the time we are bombing the crap out of some guy, which is why the F/A-22 is equipped with AG capabilities. Besides, the F/A-22 is already equipped with the latest bells and whistle and it will do just fine in an aerial combat. It will probably never see a dogfight anyway since it keeps shooting down its opponents in BVR mode. Personally, I think it cost too much, a little over $300 million each. The F-15 is still the "gold standard" for air superiority aircraft. Why is it that the US can bomb "the crap out of some guy"? It's because the F-15 has done it's job and established air superiority in the first days of the war. The F-15 became "dual role" with the inception of the B-Eagle only AFTER the F-15 became a proven aircraft in its air superiority role. This will be the same with the F/A-22. The F-35 will replace the F-16CJ and it's role will be the primary A/G aircraft for the USAF and the USN - even with the "new" superhornets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anivanov Posted December 29, 2005 Author Share Posted December 29, 2005 The F-15 is still the "gold standard" for air superiority aircraft. Why is it that the US can bomb "the crap out of some guy"? It's because the F-15 has done it's job and established air superiority in the first days of the war. The F-15 became "dual role" with the inception of the B-Eagle only AFTER the F-15 became a proven aircraft in its air superiority role. This will be the same with the F/A-22. The F-35 will replace the F-16CJ and it's role will be the primary A/G aircraft for the USAF and the USN - even with the "new" superhornets. Agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animalmother Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 To update this thread, the A has been dropped from F/A-22 to cut costs and the F-22A has officialy gone operational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anivanov Posted January 15, 2006 Author Share Posted January 15, 2006 thanx on that information Animalmother Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annihilator911 Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 F-15 is the best cause i never have problems with it. with the other planes they keep going up or down by it self all the time! only way to fix it is to restart the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anivanov Posted January 25, 2006 Author Share Posted January 25, 2006 F-15 is the best cause i never have problems with it. with the other planes they keep going up or down by it self all the time! only way to fix it is to restart the game. yeah, true.i tryed to fly with su-27 the only way to stabillize it is to press "h", wait for stabillizing of the alltitude and then again to press "h" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anivanov Posted January 25, 2006 Author Share Posted January 25, 2006 F-15 is the best cause i never have problems with it. with the other planes they keep going up or down by it self all the time! only way to fix it is to restart the game. yeah, it"s true.27, 33, 25, all the time up and down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maverick-90 Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 F-15 is the best cause i never have problems with it. with the other planes they keep going up or down by it self all the time! only way to fix it is to restart the game. Flankers and 25ers are easy to keep steady...it's just small, very small movements, otherwhise they start to do that...and it's very important to TRIM them! F-15 has Auto-Trim which make's it a toy to fly :icon_toil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaman Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 @Annihilator911 You'll never get a pilot license if you don't learn how to constantly trim your aircraft. 51PVO Founding member (DEC2007-) 100KIAP Founding member (DEC2018-) :: Shaman aka [100☭] Shamansky tail# 44 or 444 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 100KIAP Regiment Early Warning & Control officer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anivanov Posted January 27, 2006 Author Share Posted January 27, 2006 Flankers and 25ers are easy to keep steady...it's just small, very small movements, otherwhise they start to do that...and it's very important to TRIM them! F-15 has Auto-Trim which make's it a toy to fly :icon_toil yeah, small movements, but that up and down thing is very useful to me especially when i must do some hard manuevers. bad side - this isn"t f-15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team Glowing_Amraam Posted January 27, 2006 ED Team Share Posted January 27, 2006 I fly the F-15 a lot, but i have no problems at all controlling any of the SU fighters. Trimming is key, which in my case, is solved by pressing "H" now and then hehe ;) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgJRhtnqA-67pKmQ3A2GsgA ED youtube channel https://www.facebook.com/glowingamraam My facebook page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts