FastCargo

You're not describing 'tearing' are you? Where your game refreshes faster than your monitor can, so you see the screen refresh... Also, Combatace do have a hardware forum section, but I'm not sure this is a hardware problem. FastCargo

Jarhead, thanks for trying to help...but he's asking about LOMAC... FastCargo

Pilots DO get replaced. I'm on the 1979 WOE campaign (that I modified to have carrier, British Navy, French, USN and USMC ops) and my Harriers were getting slowly decimated. At about the 3 week point, I did get replacement pilots...thank God...cause I was about down to a 8 ship... FastCargo

Hey guys, I was at Half Price Books today and found 5 copies of WOE for 10 bucks each. Any interest in me picking them up? It would cost about 5 bucks to ship. FastCargo

The military aircraft I've been fully qualified in have all been supersonic capable. I fly for a major overnight freight company in my civilian job. Thats about as simple as it gets... FastCargo PS Now, what my military bros call me (my callsign) is a different story...and no, I ain't tellin!

All airpower is subject to the overall political objectives of the fight. The majority of conflicts require destruction of ground targets, either in direct support of ground forces, or as part of a larger strategic objective. ALL efforts are in support of destruction of those said targets, from the guy doing a FOD check of the ramp to the tanker pilot patiently waiting in orbit. That being said, how quickly do the objectives not get met if the iron doesn't hit the target? You can do a bombing mission without air cover, SEAD, recon, FAC, tankers, AWACS, etc. Now, that will obviously impact your mission effectiveness and attrition rates to high levels. But the overall air support of the ground objectives stops as soon as the iron stops dropping. FastCargo

A lot of guys thought it looked like a steroid version of the AT-37. And it looks small, until you notice how small the pilot looks in the pictures. FastCargo

It's nice being able to do that...I'm slowly adjusting my Harriers so that they all have asymetric capabilities... It's funny how everytime I play the game, I keep finding minor errors...I was playing the WOE 1979 campaign and noticed (after I had died) that the Sidewinders on the F-15A Eagles were offset from the rails...floating or buried! And I KNOW I haven't tweaked the .inis of the stock F-15A models at all! FastCargo

Busy...too busy to enjoy myself. First real flight (not just a 'ride') was in a glider, being towed by a Piper Cub. Like trying to water ski and fly at the same time. FastCargo

Actually, take a look at what competed against the A-10: Northrop A-9 Looks a bit familiar don't it? Similar needs sometimes result in similar solutions. FastCargo

I think that's an outdated file. It was used in eariler versions of TK's sims, but now that groundobjects are treated like aircraft, I don't think it's used anymore. Also, you already have it if you have WOE. It's in the ObjectData.CAT file located in the Objects directory. FastCargo

Hahahaha...whoopsie!!! Tell ya a story. Back in 1995, we deployed to Bagotville, PQ, Canada for Amalgam Warrior. Basically an exercise where we simulated Backfires for the CF-188s to play with. Anyway, Bagotville is NOT as big a field as a typical B-1B base. In order to be able to park and taxi successfully, we had to taxi in a 'U' shaped pattern. With the center of the U being parked B-1s. In addition, we had to taxi with our wings swept until we got on the parallel taxiway (the right side of the 'U') due to the lack of clearance on the left side of the 'U'. Got it so far? Down the left side of the U, wings swept, then across the base of the U, then up the right side of the U, where we would 'un-sweep' our wings for takeoff. Sounds okay, right? Well, it was, except when on the base of the U, the engines are pointed right at the ramp with all the miscellanous stuff an airport has. Did I mention that there is (was?) a restriction that didn't allow us to sweep wings on the ground unless we were not moving. Well, a 4 ship taxies out, and lead gets onto the parallel taxiway, then stops to 'un-sweep' for takeoff. 2 stops on the base of the U...and Newton's law kicks into full force. When lead starts moving again, 2 has to push it up significantly to turn onto the parallel taxiway. The power equivalent to a Thunderbird 4 ship points directly at a stack of 300 lb cargo pallets. Which promptly go flying like so many leaves in the wind. They smash into a few buildings, take out a car and some fence. The total damage ended up being about $30,000. Plus the quickest revision of the parking plan I've ever seen... Don't screw with jet exhaust! :) FastCargo

Flying an aircraft within a thunderstorm is a bad idea. Severe updrafts, downdrafts, lightning, hail, etc. A hurricane has all that in combo. What you find with 'Hurricane Hunters' is that they tend to fly in the 'eye'. The VERY dangerous part though is accidently getting too close to the 'wall', where the strongest weather is. There are plenty of stories of aircraft going straight into a cell, and coming back out in pieces... FastCargo

He wasn't just a great pilot...but a great commander. What he did for the Triple Nickel was legendary. S! FastCargo

Oh my goodness! FastCargo

Guys, the biggest problem is motivating people to stay on the course, that's why I suggested SAMs in the other thread. Otherwise, it'd be easy to just bolt straight across. The Pacific Northwest terrain actually sounds like a great idea! Small, visually very nice with great vertical development. You know, the more I hear about this air racing idea, the better I like it! FastCargo

Wrench: Just finished making the DS mod...finally! USAFMTL: The DS...what is it? HrntFixr (coming in late to the conversation): It's a little handheld game console, made by Nintendo, but that's not important right now. Okay, it was funnier in my head... FastCargo

Hey, just heard a Viper and an Eagle scraped some paint. Heard the Eagle guy had to punch but is okay...the Viper guy was able to limp back and land. Glad everyone's okay...any rumors yet? FastCargo

Been having an interesting time editing and flying the UCAVs around. I've restricted the bombbays so that they can only carry the amount of weapons that can realistically fit (which is NOT much...a standard Mk83 takes up a whole bay, and forget any PGMs over 1000 lbs in yield). AAMs are even worse...either one regular Sidewinder sized IRM, or you can just fit 3 aim-9x's in a bay. Now if I can figure out how to get them to drop out of the bay before they launch (without messing with the weapons themselves...I've already tried increasing the EjectVelocity parameter). I added ECM, expendables, and a laser designator. Probably wouldn't have any of these in a real stealth shaped UCAV...but since stealth, GPS, and buddy lasing isn't really modeled, did this to increase the fun factor. The interesting thing has been the cockpit. I decided to drop in the F-23 cockpit, but deleting the HUD glass, uprights, and canopy rail. I then increased the viewing area of the HUD symbology (why restrict the HUD to a piece of glass that isn't actually there). Then I thought about it some more. With modern 'smart skins', mini cameras, datalinks, and sensor fusion technology, there really isn't a reason for a UCAV operator to have a cockpit at all. For most missions, a laptop, and a mini HOTAS would suffice...with display symbology similar to SFP1/WOV/WOE on the easier gameplay settings with the no-cockpit view enabled. The problem is what to do for ACM, where instant perception of nose position is everything. The trick is to be able to instantly resolve nose position without resorting to a TrackIR type solution (which is still not the same as craning your neck around). An idea is being in a 'globe' with the world projected around you, even on the floor. All you would have is a chair, rudder pedals (maybe), and a HOTAS. The globe would be fully touchable as well (designate a target by just reaching out and selecting it). All relavant aircraft displays would be on projected translucently on the globe. The biggest thing would be to put markings on the globe designating the attitude of the aircraft. Something like looking at a globe of latitude and longitude lines, from the inside...maybe just abbreviated symbols. This would help prevent the disorientation that 'padlock' view sometimes gives. Anyone want to try to build a UCAV 'pit'? :) FastCargo

Not really, and here's why. What about radar info? Sniper pod video, etc. Now that stuff doesn't need to be in the immediate view, it would be easier to overlay it on the outside world then building a virtual pit. As we all know, padlock view through a traditional monitor is disorientating, and not conductive to ACM. Instead by sitting a projected globe, your internal sense keeps a general idea of where the nose is at...as in a real aircraft. Now realize, I'm talking about a way to operate a real UCAV for an ACM situation. The nice thing about this setup is you could look down or straight back...because there is no real floor. Of course, how do you make a sim of a sim...:) FastCargo

Actually, you can have a hot ejection seat, but it's a major pain in the butt paperwork wise. Talking to the founder of Micron computers, who had a couple of Hawker Hunters, said his were full hot seats, but the FAA has to have paperwork for EVERY ONE of his flights. Not a simple flight plan, but pre-approval to fly with armed ejection seats. Plus, the MX costs to have mil-spec maintenance are REALLY high. FastCargo

Yep, it's easy to add fighters to a campaign...there are several threads about it. I've added french fighters to my 1979 and 1993 versions of the WOE campaign. FastCargo

The USAF/DARPA did some interesting stuff back in the day. Multi axis thrust vectoring, canards, etc. The AFTI/CCV F-16 was doing all sorts of strange stuff long before the russians started the airshow routine with the Mig-29/Su-27. Multi axis thrust vectoring actually is a bit easier than 2-D vectoring in that the hardware is easier to build. If you know how engine nozzles work, all you have to do is close the nozzle asymetrically to get off axis thrust. The best way of course is to build a ring mounted on a rounded collar to get true vectoring... FastCargo

It isn't the buying of the plane, its the expense of the MX and insurance. Especially if you maintain 'hot' ejection seats. It could have been a civilian T-38 at Scott AFB. I think Scott is a joint-use field...civilian side and military side. FastCargo

You do have the proper X,Y,Z coordinates for the pilot model? Also, though Saqanuay is correct for a specific pilot model, you don't have to have that line, in which case it should default to the pilot model included with the sim. FastCargo