Caesar

I just rejoined after about a year and a half absence because I had to colloborate on a Latin presentation with the other Seniores. So, yep, I'm on there.

'Evening all, As I'm getting closer to commissioning and EAD date, I've been doing research on my assigned base and was able to get a fair amount of information on it (Vandenberg AFB) and some of the surrounding area, but as I'm trying to get as much info as I can, I figured I'd ask here: has anyone been assigned to Vandenberg AFB? If so, were you on base or off (I've gotta live off, not being married)? I heard most of the newer LTs are in the Santa Maria area about half an hour away, but areas like "Lompoc" (sp?) are closer and cheaper. Any places I ought to avoid? Anything you could tell me would be great.

All right, well thanks for the info, Dave! I'm looking forward to it.

Well, I suppose any "need to know" stuff you've encountered; I fear I've been a bit vague, though. The info I have so far is: Lompoc, Santa Maria, Vandenberg Village and Montiavo are the more common places; Lompoc and the Village are closer and less expensive, but less people live there, while Santa Maria and Montiavo are more expensive, but with more people there; my BAH should make either of the later affordable, though, albeit maybe not ideal. I have a car, so that's not going to damage my pay, which will help. Also did some background on the units at the base and will be going over available map info shortly. Things I'd be interested in knowing: Are there any drawbacks to any of the areas you've lived in? Crime rate, fires (as Viper pointed out), hippies that'd put flowers in my Mossberg? I already know I have to keep my AR-15 locked up in NY with my family until I get my actual base assignment because it's not CA legal. Is there anything you think especially pertinent, or that you wish you knew before you got there? (though from what you describe, it sounds beautiful.) Thanks for your replies!

Cool beans, and thanks. I've heard sitting alert is the "fastest way to get a Masters or PHD in the military" so we'll see how that goes .

13S1X, or space/missile trainee. I've been thinking of missiles first, maybe transitioning to space ops later on.

YGBFSM

Scissors with Swing Wings... Also, friggin' awesome shot, CA_Stary!

Flying the F-14A as much as I do, I like to keep the fight in the weeds (<5k feet) and get as slow as possible as fast as tactically possible (usually <200kts). As a result, there's plenty of times that the enemy aircraft run outta speed, then nose down to gain speed and just crash into the ground. It has also happenes if I'm on their tail and they're trying to accelerate to escape; they'll nose down in burner and crash.

ToS...that pit is AWESOME!

Roger, Spinners, sorry about that. What it might be then, topcat, is that you have the older .bmp file for the missile (if the missile is grey with a white nose, and yellow and black stripes but no other markings). In the latest version of the Mirage Factory Weapons Pack, it should have the newer .bmps for both the AIM-54A, and -54C, which have the extra markings found on the missiles (see below). EDIT: Wow, RTFQ (self), I've never tried to get a .tga decal onto a missile before, so this one's a bit out of my knowledge. As best I remember, missiles and bombs skins are done with bitmaps, but you might be able to get a decal on them; I just don't know how. Anyone else with more expertise on this might know?

Think the missile's "paint" is either AIM-54A.bmp or AIM-54C.bmp; try to find those.

Hard mode does give you the most out of many of the aircraft, but you do have to know where your plane fights best and try to keep it in that area. Energy management is key, and you have to know where your aircraft stands against an opponent's, where you better perform, and where your opponent does, and exploit those advantages, while nullifying his. Out of a question, what airplane are you flying in thats leaving you behind in a turning fight?

Bravo Zulu. I Deo Quom. S!

I've tried it out, it's all right; in fact I think that's where I first got to use Flying Toaster's new F-14B Tomcat model. Pretty basic, but fun; I haven't gotten in-depth enough with it to know all the functionality, but I know airframe stress is built in...:blush2:

What I fear is that we're repeating history, getting fixated on the fight we're in now, rather than the fight we could be in in the future. For example, the Century-series aircraft and their contemporaries (F-4, F-8) were designed to fight an atomic war, because that's what was going to happen. Training got fixated on that as well (even more important than the aircraft themselves), and then we found ourselves in a conventional war involving missions ranging from MIGCAPs to CAS which did not work out well; the technology developed to either deliver nuclear payloads or intercept enemies with nuclear payloads, crewed by pilots who hadn't trained for that role in years, were far out of place in the skies over Vietnam. In today's war, and against the current enemy, yes, UCAVs are very useful. The F-22 and F-35 probably aren't necessary to even bring in-country against the threats we're currently facing; the 4th gen fighters and heavy bombers we've been using have worked out fine. But, in the event that a new threat arrises, one which has the technology to bag our 4th-gen aircraft, like the SA-10 (which Jedi Master has pointed out) or better, we can expect to see parts of Bugs, Vipers and Eagles raining down from the skies. That "Toy" F-22 and F-35 may well be the only things keeping us from getting caught with our pants down, hitting high priority targets in SAM rich environments, or blasting the SAMs safely so our other bomb-trucks without the tech get on target. Not happy about this news, but money makes the world go 'round, and cuts happen to the best of 'em.

What, are you kidding? It's a fantastic community that involves not only pilots/ROs/designers/fixers but also a helluva lot of civie and non-Tomcat military fanatics too! I'm certain you'd fit right in. EDIT: I think I know of 5 CA guys over there, including myself, dwcace, column5, flying toaster and ToS are there. There might be more with different usernames or that I haven't seen yet.

To paraphrase Monroe "Hawk" Smith: Take that 1000lbs out of the nose and the plane can turn into a rocket ship. In his case, part of a two-ship of Tomcats on the waist catapults, his wingman had a cold cat, and the Tomcat limped off the bow, falling from view, the crews punching out immediately after. About a second later, the F-14 comes back into view rocketing straight up vertical, still in Zone 5, flips on its back, and heads right for "Hawk" and his RIO. The crewless Tomcat just misses the side of the ship and crashes into the water, the subsequent splash gets "Hawk's" plane wet. Had the crew not punched out, "Hawk" estimated the extra weight of both crew, seats and canopy would've likely cost the Navy not only the plane, but also the aircrew. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if it was a similar situation with those planes shown in those videos, but of course, there are going to be people who say "Derrr! \/\/|-|47 4 n00b! Waste 0ph +4><paier muniez! My 1337 skillz c0uld ha3v pfl0wn it out!" They are sometimes called idiots, or in Latin "stulti."

I would say "cool vids" but that it looks like half the folks in 'em got killed. Rather, thanks for posting these vids, and here's hoping mistakes can be learned from.

It really is a great site, GB. That particular thread is good not only for knowledge about the Tomcat's ACM/BFM performance, but ACM/BFM in general; a lot of stuff within the past few days was posted on rolling scissors and dissimilar dogfighting from some real gonzo sticks.

Depends on what you want to do with it: If you're looking for to fix it or fly it, NAVAIR NATOPS 01-F14AAA-1 (/AAP/AAD-1) and -1-1 are what you're looking for. If you're looking for pictures, look for "The Cutting Edge" by C.J. "Heater" Heatley If you're looking for aerodynamics and unique Tomcat capabilities, "Grumman F-14" by James P. Stevenson is a good one. ADM Paul Gilchrist has another book out on the Tomcat as well that I haven't checked out yet, but has gotten rave reviews. Book name is: Tomcat! The Grumman F-14 Story. Then there's F-14 Shipborne Superfighter which is very expensive (the time to buy was back in 1996) but has loads of data and great pictures on the Tomcat. (Current lowest Amazon.com price is $250) Hard to say which is best. EDIT: If you want to get into some of the real down-n'-dirty ACM/BFM stuff the Tomcat could do, one of the best places to look is a website, rather than a book: tomcat-sunset.org, under the heading "The Hoser Chronicles and the Evolution of Air Combat" - over 100 pages of both stuff Hoser pulled, and ACM with the F-14 and NAVAIR in general, spoken by the man himself and various others he flew with including "Turk" Pentecost. Also, just thought of "Roger Ball" about Monroe "Hawk" Smith and his relation with the Tomcat/community. Just ordered it, will let you know how it is; the excerpts of it that I've read are pretty intense.

I thought AESA radars were X-Band, just like Pulse-Doppler ones?

Over G is all right; I own it but I don't consider it a "hardcore" game. Its a lot better than AC or HAWX with regard to its simulation qualities (i.e. not arcade) and is as close as you're gonna get on a console, but it seems to try "too hard." Even unloaded and at 50% fuel all the aircraft handle like pigs, lack G authority at speeds that they should have it, some planes are overmodeled, some are under, weapons ranges are pretty jacked up (waaaay too short), but it's infinitely better than HAWX. The cockpits are nice; though not as 3D or refined as AC6, and it is CHALLANGING. Actually, a good way to put it is Aero Elite for the XBOX 360, but more in-depth, with more options, weapons and aircraft, and overall better (IMO). You do get to take off, but I've never had to land. On ground missions you have to taxi to the runway, then take off, while on carrier missions you start on the catapult. I'd definately recommend renting it, or buying it if it isn't too expensive.

Is it just me, or is the Tom Clancy name just being thrown on garbage these days? I recall back when "Clancy" meant the game was researched and at least provided some realistic taste of whatever it was simulating (be it strategic warfare, tactical shooter, whatever.) It just seems like there is no longer any heed to that at all. I think you put it well, Grinch, it feels like the game was made by teenagers.

I can think of no better way to describe this than an old-fashioned joust... Last MiG, hard fought, he got enough distance to do a 180 and get his nose on me, while mine was on his. High pucker factor as I realized what was about to happen. I just happened to pull the trigger first.