Mothman

I would recommend that you change the web hosting provider for one who does not shuts down the service when the bandwith limit is surpassed but instead automatically charges you the for the extra bandwith, provided that you have the funds to sustain such peaks in the bandwith usage. Media Temple is the one I would recommend. Just my 5 cents. Later.

Thank you guys. All I was saying is that the member who setup the bait and brought the issue of an alternate and "flamable" theory (while totally being off topic) was not an argentinian, and you clearly looked annoyed by the theory rather than by the off-topicness of the issue. You must understand that while people like you may be sensitive about such theories, because of a relative served in the Invincible (to mention an example) or whatsoever, other people are sensitive as well because people they know or maybe themselves lost a couple of friends during that controversial mission (to mention the same example) or whatsoever. I know it won't be easy to moderate a bunch of argentinian and british "kids" in a game forum about game set in a quite recent anglo-argentinian conflict, but... the picth should be that this is a gaming forum and that's it, instead of condemning "conspiracy theorists", "revisionists", or whatever you want to name it. Just my 5 cents. Blame the fisherman, not the fish who takes the bait. Not that you actually blamed anyone, but it's more effective if you warn the fisherman. Now I would like to know what Thunder Works is doing now. When's the public beta? Or demo? Any aproximate idea?

Skater: imho you should identify who's throwing the first flames (who came up with th issue in this thread) and go after him via PM. Otherwise it'll happen again. I'll bet on it. It's just a suggestion from a old fart. I like to discuss history, even conspiracy theories, alternate scenarios, etc... in a polite way. It is possible, depending on the quality of the participants. But this thread was a nice sort of developer diary and we all should keep it this way.

Nah. Those A-4B in 1982 had Sirius satellite/digital radio, CD player, subwoofer, and DVD player for movie playback in the HUD. The recordings sound very real to me. Maybe it's not a continious recording but rather a compilation to skip the periods with radio silence... who knows. There are accounts of A-4B/C having to abort missions because of radio malfunctions. I think that the chances of getting shot down increases when the radio is not working as the pilots should relyon radio communications rather than hand signs to warn their comrades about incoming bandits and missiles. Without the radio working, you'd better rtb, imho.

I think the Mk17 is a 1,000 kg bomb (or 1,000 pounder?). A flyable Canberra would be nice for this sim. :)

Look at these.

The FAA was not prepared for naval warfare and this is best seen when comparing the equipment and loadout of the A-4P (upgraded A-4B and A-C) of the argentine air force with those of the A-4Q of the argentine navy: During the anti-ship missions the A-4P used to carry 500kg iron bombs (Mk 82s?) while the A-4Q carried 250kg "Snakeyes" with retardants. Later in the conflict the air force updated their tactics and loadouts, although it was a little too late (the british had already landed). The HMS Sir Galahad and HMS Sir Tristan were the victims of that update, I think. Also the A-4Q had an Intertial Navigational system (Ferranti ISIS?) and the A-4P did not. Many A-4P sorties failed to locate the enemy due to weather conditions over the islands which prevented proper visual navigation after reaching the IP. This is what I remember from some book I read long time ago about the conflict. The argentine pilots were forced to fly low to prevent early detection and subsequent Sea Dart fire, not because of the small arms fire. Although I must say that I admire not only the argentine pilot's courage but also the british sailor who faced them with their mounted machineguns and other small arms. I wonder how this sim could simulate that small arms fire. It would lower the FPS somewhat, right?

A documentary about a single mission? Wow. I need to see that one. Maybe the National Geographic sells the DVD. I'll look for it around the web.

After some research, I realized that this audio file has been around for a while and that maybe some of you already knew about it. Anyway, apparently (I'm not sure) it was the A-4B mission (code name "Vulcano" and "Zeus") who sank the HMS Coventry on May 25th in open waters north of the islands and damaged the HMS Broadsword with a bomb that did not explode and went al the way through the hull. The "Vulcano" flight was formed by Cap. Carballo, Lt. Rinke, and WO. Carmona (who had to abort due to mechanical problems). The "Zeus" flight was formed by 1Lt Velazquez, Lt Osses, and WO. Barrionuevo (who had to abort after failing during the refueling ops). "Ranquel" was the KC-130 flight, afaik. "Rayo" was the support flight (a Learjet, I guess). More info on the mission here. I would really like to know if this audio is from that mission.

Ok. On my second run I got that the pilot describes impacts and explosions on a CL-42 by one of his mates. He also says he felt several impacts on his own aircraft. While egressing, his mates check for leaks and find a small one. The pilot then says he's going to go high to save fuel in order to reach the tanker, and that if "they" (the CAPs) get him then so be it (the Malvinas radar was reporting that 1 CAP was homming on them). Then all the pilots refer to which ship they aimed their bombs (the one on the right or on the left?) and all report they aimed at the same one. The pilot who's plane is damaged says he almost crashed against the ship's radar dome. Scary times.

Download link <-- This file was posted at the ECV56 Condor forum. Maybe it could help in the development of the audio files for the sim (???) Anyway it's interesting material, if you understand spanish. For those who don't, I am affraid there is no transcription that I know of (learn spanish, you limeys!). It starts with a pilot excited about seing other aircraft impacting its bombs on a british ship, then pilots exchanging damage reports (one is leaking fuel and he's assesing if he can make it back to base), then the Malvinas radar reporting 2 CAPs over the area where the attack was made plus another one farther north and a fourth CAP incoming from the carrier's location area. This is what I could understand so far, as I only listened to it once. I thought it would be interesting for some history buffs among us. It's a good testimonial, I guess, that depicts the intensity of air operations during 1982, i this case from the argentinian side. Regards.

Hi. Maybe this will help: Bullet resistant glass, which is made with several glued layers of polycarbonate (Lexan from General Electric) and sometimes also with acrylic, has between 75% and 90% light transparecy. I don't know about military jets cockpits, but I am guessing that it's made of plexiglass or some basic polycarbonate. 50% light transparency looks a bit opaque, imho... unless you're traying to simulate salinization produced when flying to low over the ocean (brushing the waves). Of course: plastics loose light transparency with age and get "scratched", but anyway I still think 50% is too much, especially for A-4 and Mirage Daggers where the pilot's life depend very much on his vision of the airspace and ground, imho.

Yes, it did.

The opening of the movie "Iluminados por el Fuego" has been delayed until september. I can't wait to watch it and listen to it in Dolby 5.1. :)

If I remember well, it depicts the battle for Goose Green and/or Darwin (i'm not really sure). Anyway, as far as I know it's intended not to be war movie, american style, but rather a portrait of the psychological stresses the soldiers had to suffer in battle and after the war once society forgot about them. Argentinian movie makers are very good, imho. The only problems are always budgetary. What they achieve with limited resources is commendable. The guy who filmed "1982: Estuvimos ahí" had a 500 USD budget! Of course, "Iluminados por el fuego" had probably a 6 figures budget I presume. I don't know, but that's what I could guess. You cannot compare one with the other. One is a big production, the other one is an example of argentinian creativity.