B-52G/H Mega Era Package

[KJakker 901]

I thought I should let you know that the following skins are low resolution while all of the other skins in the pack appear to be high resolution.

 

B-52G_89

 

379th Bomb Wing

 

416th Bomb Wing

 

B-52H_88

 

23rd Bomb Squadron

[wenkman 0]

Update for 14 Jan 2012

 

...

6. Inside canopy color changed to a yellow gold for better visibility.

 

Is it possible to have it absolutely clear/plain visible like the default ones? Or would that be against reality when it comes to the BUFF?

[jjlehto 15]

the ecm strength seems really out of this world. i respectfully remind that vietnamese air defences were able to engage and attack b-52s. 

[Stick 773]

On 12/8/2017 at 5:05 PM, jjlehto said:

the ecm strength seems really out of this world. i respectfully remind that vietnamese air defences were able to engage and attack b-52s. 

B-52G_72: This version went to Vietnam for Linebacker with the ability to carry only 27 bombs and very inferior ECM.

Perhaps this the version you may want to use?!

[jjlehto 15]

1 hour ago, Stick said:

B-52G_72: This version went to Vietnam for Linebacker with the ability to carry only 27 bombs and very inferior ECM.

Perhaps this the version you may want to use?!

I'm just saying that, as radar guided SAMs were perfectly able to observe and attack the B-52s, I feel the ECM are unrealistically strong. I mean, probably as it is you have more chance to acquire a B-2 than this B-52.

In addition, basically most of the bomber variants employed were D or F versions. In any case it's just my opinion, everybody can modify the inis as he sees fit. ECM is not a subject that can be measured and abstracted into a simulator with any rate of certainty; my observation is to remark that this model ECM does not abstract the historical reality at all, being the NV sams able to attack the bombers.

[Wrench 9,846]

Gents, you all know that you're complaining about a mod package that's nearly 10 years old, right?? And that the people that built it aren't even around anymore?

My suggestion is, if you have documented proof of the ECM issue and the capabilites the aircraft is SUPPOSED to have, is the make the adjustments in the data inis of said aircraft, state the reasons for the changes in your readme (documenting the appropriate USAF T.O.s or whatever), and upload the corrected data ini's to one of our many convenient  categories (suggestion: Object Mods / Ini File Edits) so the community can share in the correction. Don't forget to include a screenshot, either (required)

Because complaining about it in a 10 year thread, accomplishes nothing. Work the problem and share it with the community. That's how we do things here