F-102...

[Lt. James Cater 62]

First off i'd like to thank Veltro2k, Pappychecksix and Column5 for making this aircraft available and Dave for mentioning it enough times to make me curious about checking it out.

 

 

This is one hell of plane!

 

What initially had me skeptical about it was that A- It's a pure interceptor, B- They had to make the F-106 because it's performance was disapointing, and C-It was armed with Aim4s.

 

 

How it would work in WOE? I didn't have a clue but Dave kept bringing it up and i felt up to a challenge after a few walkovers in the past with high performance aircraft. The first combat test really opened my eyes to the posibilities of the Deuce and i was hooked. The first few sorties in the campaign were hit or miss until i figured out what would and wouldn't work and mission effectiveness then rose dramatically.

 

The Aim4G is teh win hands down! My jaw dropped when i saw it in action. You can keep your Aim9Bs and Atolls, the G is in a class of it's own. I was so used to horrifically bad Falcon performance that i actually had to go on the net and do some research on it. Damned if NF4 didn't give us a real winner! Just keep in mind it's envelope and the kill is as good as done.

 

 

The performance of the plane itself is somewhat deceptive. Dogfighting in it, for example, is pretty much a lost cause (to a certain extent). The advantages you have at hand are radar, an afterburner, plentiful fuel, and good high altitude speed. This is not a turn and burn bird. With that mentality you'll be lucky to make it past your first few sorties. You need to be a classic back shooter who stacks every possible bit of chance to his advantage.

 

393 is my current bird. The majority of kills scored have been while flying her.

[+Dave 2,322]

Do not forget FastCargo.

[Lt. James Cater 62]

Do not forget FastCargo.

Just going from what i saw during a quick look at the NF4 section at C5's site.

 

Thanks to Fastcargo also!!!!!!!

Edited May 15, 2009 by Lt. James Cater

[FastCargo 412]

Speaking of which, I forgot to give Ed back his modified MAX file...I'll get it to ya Ed!

 

FC

[MigBuster 2,884]

AFAIK the AIM-4D is supposed to have the same seeker head as the AIM-4G but be more suited to air combat hence why it was chosen as the USAFs champion :) - although i think the G and F have much larger warheads.

 

On many a mission the AIM-4A/B/C/D hardly dent bombers even when they are hit - even removed the armour from the tu-95A and they still get minimal / no damage by the smaller falcons - when they hit!

 

I did up the values of some of the AIM-4s - the G/F were already really high - but my thinking was they should hit a bomber flying in a straight line without counter measures (short of malfunctions) - otherwise having a fighter without a gun was a complete waste of time!!

 

I managed to down quite a few bombers with the ffars - its interesting to use them.

 

The SEA skin by KB looks ace

Edited May 15, 2009 by MigBuster

[Lt. James Cater 62]

Just got done to a successfull conclusion of the current campaign and i am fully stoked!

 

Oh hell yeah, i've got to take the Deuce into battle once again in the same campaign (because i think i can do better) and then look towards the future!

 

Just to show what else can happen, this bird produced 3 AI aces as well in my squadron.

 

I also forgot to mention the HVARs. Are they worth it? Fuggetaboutit! Turns Recce into Strike missions. Blew up 2 Mig21s and a Mig19 on the ground using these things. Firing them is like letting go with an artillery barrage.

 

 

This plane is hella fine and i suggest that people here give it a go.

Edited May 15, 2009 by Lt. James Cater

[column5 63]

Do not forget FastCargo.

 

The version in NF4 is Pre FC R3mix3d but will likely be updated in the future.

[column5 63]

I did up the values of some of the AIM-4s - the G/F were already really high - but my thinking was they should hit a bomber flying in a straight line without counter measures (short of malfunctions) - otherwise having a fighter without a gun was a complete waste of time!!

 

Just keep in mind that I set the AIM-4F and G up with better than real-life performance for the sake of game play.

[Lt. James Cater 62]

Just keep in mind that I set the AIM-4F and G up with better than real-life performance for the sake of game play.

 

I do feel a bit bummed at that revelation but am consoled by knowing that i did my best to fire from the missles' natural envelope rather than a "point and shoot" situation. That Mig19 i showed above chased me for for about 40 miles while i did everything from 100 to 35,000ft to reduce him to a bingo level and so make him predictable enough to set up for the kill.

Edited May 15, 2009 by Lt. James Cater

[column5 63]

I do feel a bit bummed at that revelation but am consoled by knowing that i did my best to fire from the missles' natural envelope rather than a "point and shoot" situation. That Mig19 i showed above chased me for for about 40 miles while i did everything from 100 to 35,000 to reduce him to a bingo level and so make him predictable eough to set up for the kill.

 

Well, its wasn't meant to bum you out. I think its still a challenge to employ those missiles successfully, but in real life they just weren't very good, which (among other reasons) is why the Sidewinder and Sparrow continued to be developed and the Falcon did not. (Unless you count the Phoenix, which benefited from Hughes' experience with the Falcon and Super Falcon.)

 

A major problem was the lack of a proximity fuse--to get a kill with the Falcon, you had to score a direct hit. The Sidewinder's expanding-rod warhead and proximity fuse made it much more lethal.

[Lt. James Cater 62]

All things considered, the winning defensive tactic was to take enemy planes on the "Rollercoaster".

 

That involved manuvering from near treetop level to high altitude while heading back towards friendly lines in order to wear them down enough to allow a moment to re-engage at the Deuces' advantage. I did that enough times on Recce missions and got some decent results. The MIG19 above is but one example.

 

Intercepts of IL28s were cut and dry. Encountering MIGs were a different story!

[Lt. James Cater 62]

Well, its wasn't meant to bum you out. I think its still a challenge to employ those missiles successfully, but in real life they just weren't very good, which (among other reasons) is why the Sidewinder and Sparrow continued to be developed and the Falcon did not. (Unless you count the Phoenix, which benefited from Hughes' experience with the Falcon and Super Falcon.)

 

A major problem was the lack of a proximity fuse--to get a kill with the Falcon, you had to score a direct hit. The Sidewinder's expanding-rod warhead and proximity fuse made it much more lethal.

 

Now that i think about it, virtually all my kills were within the real life Falcons' envelope. We did a lot of intercepts and IL-28s were the most common victim. Even then i had a few that manuvered in a way that the missle missed by a considerable distance. Fighters that i had lined up at range would sometimes break and cause a miss. I once fired 4 gs at one Mig21 who was definetly a Honcho. He broke at the right moment everytime. The Mig19 in the screen above started to break left but was too late, the missle got him in the right wing. A few times the missle caused the loss of a sure kill by simply not guiding at all despite a textbook setup.

 

My usual against fighters was defensive/offensive. Manuver in a way that kept me out of their weapons range/envelope while both moving back towards the right side of the front as well as causing them to expend fuel at a high rate. Once they got to bingo and turned for home , if the situation allowed it i would stalk them and shoot.