Help with Combat in SF2

[Malkuth 0]

When bombing how the heck to you know what your hitting? When I use the \ key to select my bombs or Rockeyes or whatever. All I have is caged Target reticle. I have no idea on how to hit something. Doesn't any of these planes have a target assist piper, or some sort of Release level flying automated computer?

 

Feels like I'm flying a million dollar WWII plane with Jet engines.

 

Also the Aim7 I know the thing was a pos in this time frame. But I mean I think I have only hit a plane once out of 25 shot so far.

 

Whats the secret to this thing?

 

I figure that once you see the yellow box surround your target (after you put radar into bore mode) that means its ready to go right?

 

What am I looking for, or do wrong. The AIM 9 has the nice sound to tell me when to launch. The Aim 7 has nothing it seems.

 

Getting a little frustraded with this.

[Fubar512 1,350]

When bombing how the heck to you know what your hitting? When I use the \ key to select my bombs or Rockeyes or whatever. All I have is caged Target reticle. I have no idea on how to hit something. Doesn't any of these planes have a target assist piper, or some sort of Release level flying automated computer? Feels like I'm flying a million dollar WWII plane with Jet engines.

 

You essentially are flying an aircraft with early 1950s A2G technology. HUDs with CCIP weren't really in wide-spread use until the late 1970s and early 1980s

 

Also the Aim7 I know the thing was a pos in this time frame. But I mean I think I have only hit a plane once out of 25 shot so far. Whats the secret to this thing? I figure that once you see the yellow box surround your target (after you put radar into bore mode) that means its ready to go right? What am I looking for, or do wrong. The AIM 9 has the nice sound to tell me when to launch. The Aim 7 has nothing it seems.

 

Play in hard mode and learn to use the radar. Here's a brief tut I did about four years ago on using the Sparrow & Shrike: http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.p...p;hilit=+shrike

[Malkuth 0]

You essentially are flying an aircraft with early 1950s A2G technology. HUDs with CCIP weren't really in wide-spread use until the late 1970s and early 1980s

 

 

 

Play in hard mode and learn to use the radar. Here's a brief tut I did about four years ago on using the Sparrow & Shrike: http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.p...p;hilit=+shrike

 

I take it you can use the Target Reticle in the Hud as your refrence point to keep the Lock on with the Sparrow?

[Fubar512 1,350]

I take it you can use the Target Reticle in the Hud as your refrence point to keep the Lock on with the Sparrow?

 

The gun reticle that's projected onto the combining glass is of no use in a BVR scenario. Use the steering (ASE) circle on the radar display, instead.

[Viper6 3]

with the sparrow keep your nose on the bogey Bombing takes a lot of practice, the smaller the target the more skill you must have to put bombs on it!

Edited February 10, 2009 by Viper6

[GreyCap 0]

Check this out for bombing. http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_055a.html

[Lt. James Cater 62]

Heed Fubar512's info concerning the Aim-7.

 

Going boresight works, but you have to be too close for comfort in certain situations.

 

For bombing lots of practice is the key, there's no way around it. However, sometimes inacuraccy can be beneficial. You can frequently knock out a number of tanks or vehicles even if you never destroy your intended target. Being area weapons, they cover a lot of ground and long and short ordnance drops often get results.

Edited February 10, 2009 by Lt. James Cater

[Romflyer 25]

Check this out for bombing. http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_055a.html

 

 

GreyCap......... that article is spectacular!!!

 

Thank you for sharing

Rom

[GreyCap 0]

GreyCap......... that article is spectacular!!!

 

Thank you for sharing

Rom

 

It is a very well done article. I know it helped me a whole bunch!  :yes:

[GwynO 16]

You essentially are flying an aircraft with early 1950s A2G technology. HUDs with CCIP weren't really in wide-spread use until the late 1970s and early 1980s

Play in hard mode and learn to use the radar. Here's a brief tut I did about four years ago on using the Sparrow & Shrike: http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.p...p;hilit=+shrike

 

Sorry to but in on this but Fubar you really do know what the OP is referring to is fire control, I suspect that you are well aware of the fact that radar bombing, loran, labs and ins based bombing modes where the norm for most bombing profiles since the 1950's. CCIP and hudology is something related but not the same thing at all. Plenty of aircraft had bombing computers to do the math without a hud, B-29 over Korea for example.

 

 

As for the AIM-7 not giving you a clue when to fire, that guide is excellent, but in an F-4 you also have the in range light in the cockpit.

Edited February 11, 2009 by Kopis n Xiphos

[MaverickMike 10]

When i was first starting to use these sims i also had the same problem with bombing accurately. I came to the great guys here for help and was given a great many tips. I think the one that aided me the most though was to keep practicing. This link will take you to Wrench excellent range terrains which offer a great target rich environment to practice various bombing techniques.

 

http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autoc...p;showfile=6164

 

Hope this helps

[Fubar512 1,350]

Sorry to but in on this but Fubar you really do know what the OP is referring to is fire control, I suspect that you are well aware of the fact that radar bombing, loran, labs and ins based bombing modes where the norm for most bombing profiles since the 1950's. CCIP and hudology is something related but not the same thing at all. Plenty of aircraft had bombing computers to do the math without a hud, B-29 over Korea for example.

 

 

As for the AIM-7 not giving you a clue when to fire, that guide is excellent, but in an F-4 you also have the in range light in the cockpit.

 

Do you know how LORAN works? In 1950's terms, you have two needles which coincide (cross) when you reach a specified TD (time difference). It was inaccurate, as LORAN A had little better than .5 NM accuracy, with 100 meter repeatability. LORAN C, which was introduced in the late 1960s, improved accuracy to about .1 nm, and repeatability was down to 10 to 20 meters. I cut my teeth, in a manner of speaking with LORAN, back in the day

 

The LABs timer is nothing more than a glorified stopwatch, and was designed for nuclear weapons delivery, using a variation of the old toss-bombing method.

[MigBuster 2,884]

haha - just use your waypoint timer for those methods :)

[GwynO 16]

Do you know how LORAN works? In 1950's terms, you have two needles which coincide (cross) when you reach a specified TD (time difference). It was inaccurate, as LORAN A had little better than .5 NM accuracy, with 100 meter repeatability. LORAN C, which was introduced in the late 1960s, improved accuracy to about .1 nm, and repeatability was down to 10 to 20 meters. I cut my teeth, in a manner of speaking with LORAN, back in the day

 

The LABs timer is nothing more than a glorified stopwatch, and was designed for nuclear weapons delivery, using a variation of the old toss-bombing method.

 

I knew that you knew about those, some people do, but too many don't. The OP brought up one of the most important issues of playability in the Thirdwire gamesm chiefly that what we do in game with "multi million dollar" jets is little more than what was expected in a Stukka divebomber or other such craft with a dumb gunsight reticle (i.e. no fire control). Yes LORAN A had its problems by all accounts, yes fire control was shoddy even into the 1960's but the important thing is it was the backbone of how it was done.

 

I put my two pence in because I feel too many people on CA would be shocked to realise that in a real life shiny 1960's jet fighter like an F-4 well before CCIP or even a proper HUD to show it on ever saw the light of day, the norm for bombing was for the pilot to give permission to a computer to drop the bombs at the right time. Accurate or not, that is what the OP was enquiring about but when it crops up it seems to end up boiling down to the same argument of.. it didn't have a CCIP/HUD so it had nothing, which is wrong, it means rather that we have nothing in game as is to even begin to hint at the vaguest, slightest accuracy of what 1950's onwards bomer/attack fighters did because what they certainly did not do was rely on doing the all math themselves with only a depressable gunsight to help!!

 

The game is fantastic at making things look good though, and there are ways to suspend the disbelief factor. I like to imagine for example that every time I fly a phantom on a strike mission in the Thirdwire games, that it took a hit in the avionics or they caught fire or something, or maybe the groundcrew tied one one the night before and installed it upside down. Other than that I turn on CCIP as a next best thing, I would suggest the OP to check out the knowledge base on adding it to aircraft if that might help to resolve the issue for now.

 

Glorified stop watch! I don't know about that, from what I read it was quite a complicated glorification to say the least! Besides, the nuclear application of over the shoulder lob bombing grew from the low altitude level bombing for iron bombs that required a much smaller CEP. Dive toss as another preferred method had accuracy at least as good as the early CCIP enabled HUD's and all.

[Viper6 3]

I use the F-4 a lot and I practice a lot but I also bring as many bombs as I can carry and I get into a steep dive and just let them rain down I don't care about collateral damage and out of 30 500 pounders 10 are going to hit the target "Dive Bombing, so Easy a Caveman can do it!!"

[+Typhoid 231]

the bottom line on bombing technology is that through the early '80s the bulk of bombing technology was still pretty much dependent upon the pilot putting a sight on target and counting "one potato(e) two potato(e)" as he pulled.

 

there were a lot of various "bombing aids" in the form of computers, radar cursors, off-set bombing, nuke countdown timers, navigation assistance, etc. One of the more sophisticated was the computer generated "fly to" cursors with an automated bomb release.

 

but all of that still boiled down to the pilot putting the sight on the target somehow and dropping a "stick' of bombs spread across the countryside with the faint hope that one of the many would be close enough to the intended target that the lethal radius would overlap.

 

As evidence of that - review radar bombing of Stanley Airfield during the Falklands War. Even more recently - the war in Georgia this past summer involved a squadron of Backfires conducting the same tactics and radar bombing technology against an airfield, with somewhat dismal results (best defensive tactic for survivabiltiy when facing an inbound Backfire raid from the Caucus Military District is to stand at the intended target point.......)

 

the real truth is that until the advent of guided weapons, which is pretty well simulated by the way in the sim, bombing with dumb ordanance was and still is pretty much flying the plane with a gun sight of varied sophistication on the target and letting the stick go at the right time. The sim actually does a pretty good job of representing that.

[GwynO 16]

You raise some very good point here Typhoid, I do not dispute the fact that computer aids are not one hundred percent accurate, merely that they are and have been for quite some considerable time, the norm. I intend to continue this in another thread so as not to hijack this one further. I will say though that I disagree with your view that the reality of military aviation is to fly a depressed reticle over a target with absolutely no fire control whatsoever other than "one potato two potato" that strikes me as pure fantasy to be honest, that such dead reckoning bombing has been used since the 2nd World War is no doubt true, but it is by and far the exception to the rule.

 

As for the fact that you correctly state, that fire control is prone to error, my attitude is to model it into the code. I believe there is or was an entry for CEP in the old weapon editor, perhaps TK has already been thinking along those lines, certainly I am not proposing he add something to the game that makes bombs magically fall off the aircraft and always hit the target, that would be just as bad as not having any fire control at all imho.

 

With respect sir,

Gwyn.

 

the bottom line on bombing technology is that through the early '80s the bulk of bombing technology was still pretty much dependent upon the pilot putting a sight on target and counting "one potato(e) two potato(e)" as he pulled.

 

there were a lot of various "bombing aids" in the form of computers, radar cursors, off-set bombing, nuke countdown timers, navigation assistance, etc. One of the more sophisticated was the computer generated "fly to" cursors with an automated bomb release.

 

but all of that still boiled down to the pilot putting the sight on the target somehow and dropping a "stick' of bombs spread across the countryside with the faint hope that one of the many would be close enough to the intended target that the lethal radius would overlap.

 

As evidence of that - review radar bombing of Stanley Airfield during the Falklands War. Even more recently - the war in Georgia this past summer involved a squadron of Backfires conducting the same tactics and radar bombing technology against an airfield, with somewhat dismal results (best defensive tactic for survivabiltiy when facing an inbound Backfire raid from the Caucus Military District is to stand at the intended target point.......)

 

the real truth is that until the advent of guided weapons, which is pretty well simulated by the way in the sim, bombing with dumb ordanance was and still is pretty much flying the plane with a gun sight of varied sophistication on the target and letting the stick go at the right time. The sim actually does a pretty good job of representing that.

[Lt. James Cater 62]

I've read countless books on the Vietnam war and pored over endless materials about the weaponry and tactics involved. The only two aircraft that had any kind of accuracy with auto weapons release were the A-6 and F-111. EVERY other plane did bombing the traditional way.

 

At this moment i'm re-reading "When Thunder Rolled" by Ed Rasmius for the Lord knows how many time. In the book his flight does a COMBAT SKYSPOT mission in which the bombs hit 2 MILES from their intended target. Virtually all other bombing in the book is done stuka style.

 

General Chuck Horner in "Every Man A Tiger" tears apart Loran aided bombing. It quite simply never worked as advertised.

Edited February 12, 2009 by Lt. James Cater

[GwynO 16]

I've read countless books on the Vietnam war and pored over endless materials about the weaponry and tactics involved. The only two aircraft that had any kind of accuracy with auto weapons release were the A-6 and F-111. EVERY other plane did bombing the traditional way.

 

At this moment i'm re-reading "When Thunder Rolled" by Ed Rasmius for the Lord knows how many time. In the book his flight does a COMBAT SKYSPOT mission in which the bombs hit 2 MILES from their intended target. Virtually all other bombing in the book is done stuka style.

 

General Chuck Horner in "Every Man A Tiger" tears apart Loran aided bombing. It quite simply didn't never worked as advertised.

 

I have never read Ed Rasimus, he is on my list though. To be honest most of my reading into the Vietnam air war and military aviation in general goes back 10 years to when I lived at home pouring through my fathers collection of hundreds upon hundreds of various flight magazines and the occasional book about his favourite warbird, the F-4 Phantom. What I remember reading was very different, I clearly remember the emphasis was on the accuracy of amazing systems and how advanced they had come from the Second World War aircraft of only two decades previously.

 

I will ask my father to lend me his collection the next time I return to the village whenever that will be, in the meantime I will have to search out some books in the second hand shops. As for the F-111 well that is possibly my all time favourite aircraft ever, in close competition with the Bone and the Vulcan.