Caesar

.

Good Luck!

TO JFC SHAPE FROM CAG CVW-11 WE'VE RUN INTO SUPPLY ISSUES AND WILL BE UNABLE TO SUPPORT OPERATIONS FOR 72 HOURS. PENDING PART DELIVERY, WILL ADVISE JFC SHAPE WHEN CVW-11 CAN CONTINUE OPERATIONS. (Trans/RL: Have a TDY for a few days)

Top Gun did one thing I haven't seen before or after - it depicted the more physical aspect of air combat from the cockpit. In other movies, you have folks looking straight ahead, never/rarely loosing sight of an enemy, or having an enemy just randomly go from defensive to offensive somehow. Top Gun has the aircrews twisting and turning, looking back, left, right, up, down, straining to maintain SA. They are fighting against "g", loosing sight, reacquiring, no "radar vision" shown there. Enemies generally maneuver into position, or when they show up unnoticed there is a good reason (overt focus on one bandit, radar/sort group 1 while not paying attention to possible threats hooking behind the 3/9 line.) In that regard, I haven't seen another movie that matches Top Gun. I would never put it in the same league as Pearl Harbor, and Iron Eagle/the series might well be a contender as one of the worst movies/series of all time IMHO (a friend and I watched III last weekend; he felt his Netflix had been soiled - hell, I prefer Plan 9 from Outer Space!). That said, yes TG is gimmicky, has a less-than-ankle-deep plot, and makes plenty of errors, but you really do have to take it as a popcorn movie. Heck, I enjoy "War Games" in spite of all the blunders they make with the ITW/AA network (among other things). As a popcorn movie, I think Top Gun is great. Other good ones IMO that I see listed include The Final Countdown, Flight of the Intruder and Memphis Belle.

Sorry 'bout that, Sid, blame it on bad research on my part. Could "exchange" if no one had any gripes about it.

Been enjoying it myself. The thing is, Battlefield at one time was ONLY multiplayer (most folks here remember BF1942, right?). The SP campaign is a bit linear and I'm not much a fan of that, but I still love the BF series especially for MP. The fact that its point-based (both map and "victory" points) forces you to work as a team to take the points, and centralizes the combat, rather than the COD series which is more lone-wolf kill everyone. Less tactics needed, less team play needed to win, so I'm not as much a fan as I used to be. I'm pretty happy with BF3 (sans install and the strange web-browser launch system, but those are more afterthoughts than anything), it looks gorgeous and still has that great Battlefield play. On that subject, I'm finding it more and more that games today focus too much on graphics and not gameplay. Look at the new Ace Combat - sure it looks great, but half the time you're not even controlling the jet, you're just watching stuff explode as you mash buttons. If I want to watch Top Gun, I'll watch Top Gun. By not damaging the good play dynamics (don't fix it if it ain't broke), Battlefield provides an experience that both looks great and plays great, and that's a winner to me.

TO JFC SHAPE FROM CAG CVW-11 ACKNOWLEDGE MESSAGE. ALL AIRCRAFT READY AND ABLE TO SUPPORT OPERATIONS. END

TO JFC SHAPE CAG CVW-11 ACKNOWLEDGES ROE CHANGE

Dave, let me know if there's any stuff specifically you need me to do. I'll be sporadic this weekend, but I'll see if/what I can do.

//PRECEDENCE IMMEDIATE //271202ZOCT11 //FROM CAG CVW-1 TO: CO VFA-2 WE CAN GIVE YOU A HAND WITH THE BUSTED BUG. FLY TO GW AND WE'LL HAVE THE RIPPER'S MAINT DEPARTMENT TAKE A LOOK. //END

VFA-11 on CAP. No hostile actions encountered.

GEORGE WASHINGTON IN POSITION. 32 F/A-18F, 32 F/A-18C, 6 EA-6B, 2 E-2D.

//PRECEDENCE FLASH //FROM SHAPE JFC-OPS CELL //SUBJECT FORCE PROTECTION //TIME 260000ZOCT11 445TH HEAVY AIRLIFT FROM WPAFB, REQUEST SUPPORT FOR PAC-3 PATRIOT BATTERY DELIVERY TO AOR. EXPEDITE DELIVERY TO WITHIN 72 HOURS FOR FIRST 15 BATTERIES AND RADAR SUPPORT EQUIPMENT. DEPLOYED UNITS USE EXTANT PATRIOT BATTERIES IF AND WHERE AVAILABLE. RECOMMEND EXPEDIENT HARDENING AND RISE TO MOPP-2 AS BASELINE FOR ALL AIR BASES WITHIN AOR. APPROXIMATE RANGE OF SHAHAB-3 IS 1200MI. RECOMMEND MOVE BASE COMMAND CENTERS TO HARDENED STRUCTURES (ESPECIALLY CONCRETE BUNKER/BUILDINGS) IF POSSIBLE. //END

//PRECEDENCE EMERGENCY //FROM JOINT FORCES COMMAND //SUBJECT CONFIRMED NUKE-FLASH //TIME 252240ZOCT11 NORAD HAS CONFIRMED NUCLEAR DETONATION AT GPS COORDINATES 34.651285N, 54.215698E THROUGH DSP/SBIRS AND NUDET ASSETS. MISSILE TYPE UNDER INVESTIGATION, SUSPECTED SHAHAB-3. IRAN HAS CLAIMED ITSELF AS A NUCLEAR POWER AND MAY PRESS A NUCLEAR ATTACK UPON ISRAEL. INTELLIGENCE ASSETS ASSESS WITH MEDIUM CONFIDENCE THAT IRAN MAY BEGIN FUELING NUCLEAR-TIPPED MRBMS WITHIN THE NEXT WEEK, AND ASSESSES WITH HIGH CONFIDENCE THAT IRAN HAS PRODUCED AT LEAST 4 MORE NUCLEAR WARHEADS. ALL UNITS WITHIN AOR WILL INCREASE ALERT STATUS. //END

//PRECEDENCE FLASH //DTG 252014ZOCT11 TO SHAPE JFC FROM GEORGE WASHINGTON GEORGE WASHINGTON IS IN POSITION IN THE PERSIAN GULF

For #1, check the DeploymentMethod for your wings - they should read "AUTOMATIC_MACH" by default. I think you have to change that to MANUAL or MANUAL_WITH_BLOWBACK, and set your animation ID (kind of like your flaps). The thing is, I've never tried it with MANUAL, so I have no idea how well it will work; suffice to say to give yourself control, it cannot use AUTOMATIC_MACH as its deployment method, and you're going to have to experiment some. For 2 and 3, MB's got you covered. I remember the same info in terms of carriers - you can either have an indestructible carrier that you can take off/land from, or have a destructible carrier which you cannot.

//PRECEDENCE FLASH //DTG 250341ZOCT11 TO SHAPE JFC SUBJECT POS ACK EAM GEORGE WASHINGTON ACKNOWLEDGES EAM READ AND UNDERSTOOD

Happy Birthday, and good luck!

//PRECEDENCE FLASH //DTG 242149ZOCT2011 TO JOINT FORCES COMMAND SUBJECT POS ACK MANDY GEORGE WASHINGTON ACKNOWLEDGES MANDY. GEORGE WASHINGTON IN AOR. GW/VFA-11 STANDING BY FOR ORDERS.

VFA-11 Red Rippers, F/A-18F currently on station aboard CVN-65 ENTERPRISE in support of OIF. Assets may be recommitted to Iran.

If you need another virtual Naval Aviator, I'd be in.

Probably 1975. The F-14 and F-15 were in service by this time, but all-aspect IR missiles (AIM-9L and comparable missiles) were still not on the front lines yet, meaning you still had to defeat your opponent by outmaneuvering him if you closed to dogfight range. Missile technology by this time was getting better, but was still not to where it came by the 1990's with "death ray" missiles with extremely high Pk, longer range, and excellent maneuverability. Still my favorite year to fly overall.

The Navy did invest in the Slammer for the F-14, the problem was that the A and B models didn't have fast enough processors for the AIM-120 (there's a specific bus that was too slow), and the F-14 already had the AIM-54, which was far from a lemon. The Navy did perform suitability tests with the -120, and the F-14D could have feasibly carried it with its newer avionics. As it was explained to me, because the F-14 had the AIM-54, a multi-mode to include Active homing missile, and for purposes of standardization among the Tomcat fleet, the Navy decided to forgo giving the newer missile to the D as well, in spite of the fact that it was able to carry the weapon. EDIT: Apparently the equipment to allow the A/B/D Tomcat to carry the -120 wound up costing too much as well (around $150M for software/hardware to provide only single shot capability, compared to multi-shot with the AIM-54), to include unique launchers (would require modifications to the tunnel launchers between the engine nacelles). In the end, the missile was not pursued even in the D.

It does look like him. Also looks like his end was anything BUT peaceful.

Hey Greyman, I've been fooling around with an SF2 campaign set recently and I have found at least some of the issues that are probably preventing you from getting your F-14's into your campaign. But first: It is fairly well documented that if you leave the blower plugged in for too long, you'll overheat the engine and set your plane on fire. You're not going to get an F-14 up to Mach 3 without it catching fire in SF. As it stands, the F-14's top achieved speed was 2.34.05M in Grumman tests (1973), with crews claiming higher numbers, but rarely naming "who did it" (One revealed to be Capt Dale "Snort" Snodgrass who pushed an F-14 to beyond 70,000ft and to around 2.5M, which also nearly destroyed the engines from overstress (ref both: "Wings of Fury" and "Bye Bye, Baby".)) Sustaining speeds higher than 2.3M can cause canopy warp, and a placard limit of 1.88M was imposed later due to the possibility of Ramps failure at high speed. In terms of the engine settings, I have no idea what most of the pointed-out values are; FireSuppression makes it so that there is a chance an engine fire will go out, but if you're going too fast, or the chance fails, you're going to burn. I also don't know how high you'd have to set your overheat temps. One thing you might do is check an airplane's values that is M3 capable and transcribe them to your planned M3 capable F-14. In terms of getting your F-14 units to show up in your campaign: Note that you've named all of your F-14 units as USNUnit001. Make sure these increment. Also, check your UnitID number against the AirUnit number, and ensure they match. This is how I was able to get an pair of F-14 units into Spectre's Modern Korean war campaign for SF2. For example: From the campaign's .ini: [uSNUnit005] //UnitName=VF-1 "Wolfpack" Squadron=VF-1 ForceID=1 UnitID=19<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<NOTE StartDate=07/05/2012 AircraftType=F-14D StartScreen=F-14DUSN.jpg DescFile=VF1Desc.txt StartText=Korean WarStart1.txt [uSNUnit006] //UnitName=VF-2 "Bounty Hunters" Squadron=VF2 ForceID=1 UnitID=20<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<NOTE StartDate=07/05/2012 AircraftType=F-14D StartScreen=F-14DUSN.jpg DescFile=VF2Desc.txt StartText=Korean WarStart1.txt From the campaign's Data.ini: [AirUnit019]<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<NOTE AircraftType=F-14D //UnitName=VF-1 "Wolfpack" Squadron=VF-1 StartDate=07/05/2012 ForceID=1 Nation=USN DefaultTexture=XVF1 BaseArea=TaskForce 77.1 CarrierBased=TRUE CarrierNumber=72 BaseMoveChance=0 RandomChance=100 MaxAircraft=16 StartAircraft=16 MaxPilots=16 StartPilots=16 Experience=100 Morale=100 Supply=100 Intelligence=90 MissionChance[sWEEP]=90 MissionChance[CAP]=90 MissionChance[iNTERCEPT]=90 MissionChance[ESCORT]=90 MissionChance=80 MissionChance[CAS]=80 MissionChance[sEAD]=0 MissionChance[ARMED_RECON]=70 MissionChance[ANTI_SHIP]=70 MissionChance[ANTI_SUB]=0 MissionChance[RECON]=60 MissionChance[FAC]=80 UpgradeType=Never [AirUnit020]<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<NOTE AircraftType=F-14D //UnitName=VF-2 "Bounty Hunters" Squadron=VF2 StartDate=07/05/2012 ForceID=1 Nation=USN DefaultTexture=VF2CO96 BaseArea=TaskForce 77.1 CarrierBased=TRUE CarrierNumber=72 BaseMoveChance=0 RandomChance=100 MaxAircraft=16 StartAircraft=16 MaxPilots=16 StartPilots=16 Experience=100 Morale=100 Supply=100 Intelligence=90 MissionChance[sWEEP]=90 MissionChance[CAP]=90 MissionChance[iNTERCEPT]=90 MissionChance[ESCORT]=90 MissionChance=80 MissionChance[CAS]=80 MissionChance[sEAD]=0 MissionChance[ARMED_RECON]=70 MissionChance[ANTI_SHIP]=70 MissionChance[ANTI_SUB]=0 MissionChance[RECON]=60 MissionChance[FAC]=80 UpgradeType=Never Also, check your squadrons (one of your F-14 units seems to be part of the 7th Tactical Fighter Squadron). Note that your first F-14 unit in the general campaign .ini shows the UnitID to be 31, but this does not correspond with AirUnit001 in the campaign's data.ini. Hope this helps, good luck!