Jump to content

  • Announcements

    • Erik

      26 September - Maintenance Notification   09/21/2024

      CombatACE.com will be offline this upcoming Thursday morning, September 26, 2024. The duration of this event will be 4-5 hours. Our website will be unavailable and return an error during that time. Maintenance of our equipment is unavoidable, and this downtime will allow the opportunity to replace worn and damaged fans, power supply units, and thermal paste throughout all our equipment. Thank you for reading our maintenance advisory.

FastCargo

ADMINISTRATOR
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    8,142

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Posts posted by FastCargo

  1. Posted

    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

  2. Posted

    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

  5. Posted

    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

  8. Posted

    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

  9. Posted

    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

  10. Posted · Edited by 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

  12. Posted

    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

  13. Posted

    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

  15. Posted

    Now air racing could work! This would play closer to TW sims strengths. Wouldn't need super detailed terrains either. Maybe even have collidable objects above a canyon to encourage keeping in the course...

     

    You could even arm the planes...guns only. Any combat would have to take place on the course...so there is a risk of being in the lead...:) Do you go fast or try to combat your opponents to win? Yeah, I know, defeats the non-combat part.

     

    Actually, since we're brain storming here...another way to keep combatants in the course, line the course borders with SAMS that are 100% effective. Stray from the course and you die. Again, the idea would be to discourage trying to stray outside the course.

     

    FastCargo

  19. Posted · Edited by FastCargo

    i Read something about the Enemy defenses intercept the F-117´s communications with the tatical air comand(Radio !O.o) and the SAM operators localizated where was F-117 in that moment and his heading and speed...so they put the SA-6(not sure) in position to Seek the IR signature of Night hawk.

     

    Yes, and no. There are a few differences with what you read and what happened. But I don't know what is publically releaseable.

     

    FastCargo

  21. Posted

    Automatic IR SAM missile detection and countermeasures already exist...in fact, we're testing on our aircraft...pretty much a bolt on system. And that's for civilian aircraft...

     

    http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/sto.../aw091806p3.xml

     

    There are other IR missile detection technologies that exist and have been around a long time - you just needed the room to house the electronics.

     

    And that's all I'll say about that...

     

    FastCargo

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..

  I accept