Jump to content

turkeydriver

JUNIOR MEMBER
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    120

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by turkeydriver

  1. Posted

    Just FYI, that F-14B just broke SOP by taking off in AB. The tomcats rudders aren't big enough to counter for an engine failure in full burner so they take off in MIL and then light the burners once airborne. The only exception i know off is when VF-31 and VF-213 did there fly in, the pictures showed that AB was selected possibly right before they left the deck-a tribute to the old days with TF-30s.

  4. Posted

    turkeydriver:

     

     

     

    There were reports from some U.S. pilots of MiG-21s deploying flares late in the war. So, I added them to the MiG-21MF (the other MiG-21 models that appear earlier don't have them).

     

    Eric Howes

    NICE. I'll try to keep Sparrows or guns on them. The A-4F isn't included in the updated decals-it just goes to the A-4E(67). Anyone know how i can modify the decal .ini to fix it?

  5. Posted

    Thanks guys- the two fixes above fixed the A-7. The A-4F still has a missing tail but I'm sure I probably misplaced a folder. The Easter Offensive is amazing-Flying an A-7E in support of ground troops pinned down in a city is just amazing. I actually feel like I'm making a difference. It's HARD to get those guys in between buildings but its satisfying getting the job done. Just gotta fix my A-4.

    Thanks to everyone who contributed to this awesome Mod.

     

    Oh 1 last thing, it isn't nice when the MiG-21s pop flares and dodge 3 of my 4 AIM-9s. I enjoy the realism-but did the NVAF MiG-21s have flares during the war? If so I'll leave them. Its just frustrating.

  8. Posted

    LCDR "Hoser" Satrapa has told a story of when he and his flight spotted a target of oportunity in the form of a supply train on the way back to the carrier in their F-8s over Vietnam. On his run in, he forget to switch to guns and pickled a sidewinder by mistake at the locomotive-as he was lined up to ake it out, the sidewinder guided perfectly and disabled the locomotive(blown smokestack and all) just before it entered a tunnel. He was congratulated for his ingenuity back at the carrier where he humbly revealed his mistake that worked in his favor.

  9. Posted

    OK so now for a positive review. I fortunately only have SF2 Vietnam ATM so no merged install problems. I have Windows 7 prof 64 bit, Phenom II 3ghz quad core, 4gb of DDR3, and a Radeon 4870. Normally the radeon would mean I'm running this game slower-especially when the SA-2s start going up into the overcast to try for the many B-52s up there.

    Well

    ...with the patch....

     

    THIS SUCKER MOVES!!!!

    I set the graphics to unlimited-with also turns on FSAA now (no more having to manually set before I launch.) Track IR and cougar running in the background and this sucker is pegged at 59-60DPS only because the sync to refresh rate is on. The graphics dipped to 30 once under very heavy action but the game overall is notably faster and better looking due to this patch. I don't have any of the bugs others reports but the loading screen for all a/c is an F-4D. The F-8 seems to handle better and is a real MiG killer above 350kts. That thing races around the sky like an Indy car. Everything on Hard mode. Yep this game rocks again.

     

    Hopefully I'll buy the TK Christmas special soon. Can't wait to try a Mirage or Kfir in SF2:I

  10. Posted

    Thanks MigBuster, yeah I made it a .cfg.txt file instead of just a cfg by accident. Now loading out my A/C as I see fit. man this game is great on a fast multicore system with plenty of ram.

    I played a night BAI in the Balkans the other night on ACE settings with 2 AGM-65D and 2 GBU-12 as my A-G stores. JSTARs vectored us off the preplanned waypoint to an infantry battalion. An active airfield with enemy MiG-21s just happened to lie directly in my new flight path, so I switched the A-G radar mode to snowplow, switched to the AAQ-14 and designated a parked MiG-21 on the ramp. My history with LGBs has been less than stellar as for some reason I can never get them to release unless I'm diving and under 3k feet.

    This time I made the drop in a gentle dive from about angels 15 and watched the weapon system do its work,-weapon view showed a good drop and track so I went back to the cockpit to watch. The bomb hit dead on just as I passed directly overhead. LGB hits are so much more rewarding at night when the green screen is more dramatic because its the major light source. I continued and took out a few T-62s with Mavs and a moving APC with the remaining LGB-near miss but close enough to destroy it. My wingman had been assigned targets and was beginning his run in when a MiG-21 took off and went vertical as my wingie passed over-he put 2 AA-8s into him and he was gone before I could blink. I spent the next 5 minutes using 3 AIM-120s in maddog and my single AIM-9M to destroy the shooter and his squadmates as they took off.

    Landing was uneventful, it was a great mission that got my blood flowing, just bad I RTB'd solo.

     

    Thanks again for the help.

  11. Posted

    I have it running fine on windows 7 64 bit. The only problem is now I have the FSAA bug with black loading and recon screens. I tried to make a BFops.cfg file and insert the force software GUI statement but it hasn't worked. Can anyone paste the correct steps to beat that problem? I have an ATI radeon 4870, 4g DDR3, AMD Phenom II 945.

  13. Posted · Edited by turkeydriver

    The F-14 was mauled very badly by the F-15. To the point the Navy actually quit the fly offs.

     

    Utter service rivalry crap. The navy can produce a similiar patch. "Mechanicswise" yes the planes were very evenly matched, with the Eagle having better engines from the get go and better T-W. The "flyoffs" referred to must be reference to engagements during AIMVAL/ACEVAL where actual engagment between the two was strictly off limits. They happened anyway, with the anonymous tomcat pilots getting guns kills after long engagements. Note this isnt due to the aircraft but due to the pilot's experienceThe HUD tape was confiscated and pilots reprimanded. (I have seen a printed picture of the turkey pilot's HUD with the gun pipper on the F-15 cockpit)*****edit Caeser beat me to it, see above**** When Aviation Week got word that Japan, who were being groomed for an F-15 buy, wanted to take the F-14 instead aftert the forbidden F-14/F-15 duels during AIMVAL/ACEVAL, everyone ensured the further engagemnts where squashed because of the marketing of the F-15 and the political pressure behind the buys. When the F-14A+ arrived, the aircraft had no problem ACM'ing on equal terms with the Eagle. I don't have to defend it, basic physics will show it to you. I'll never take anything away from the mighty F-15 as it backs up everything said about it and it has an amazing kill ratio thanks to Israel and our engagements with third world countries, but anyone trying to push the argument one way or the other isn't looking at facts. After 1991, when it was known the tomcat's days were numbered, the Navy put restrictions on the airframe during peacetime, to prolong the airframe and reduce maintenance costs. Training on tomcat ACM began to slide as concentration on bombing took a more prominent role. A navalised F-15 was most definetly researched to be a lower cost F-14 derivative. Simulation and analysis figured it would take 3 navalised F-15s to equal the intercept capability of a single F-14 and the F-15 would have far inferior performance to the Air Force version due to increaseed weight and strengthening to deal with navy life. As far as the above quote, the Airforce flew F-4s because of the flyoff between it as a navy jet and the F-102. The air force was not about to do the same thing with the F-15, it had too much riding on the design on reputation and cost. If the foreign sales of the F-15 had swung towards the tomcat-the F-15 would have been an extremely expensive troublesome fighter and the F-14 would have enjoyed lower cost and more improvements based on having a wider cutomer base with a fat funding promise. History favored the F-15 which isn't a bad decision at all. We couldn't afford both cold war jets, and the F-15 is a great bird for any Air Force. The Superbug fulfills the Navy's needs at this current time, and let's face it-air superiority over the land battlespace is an Air Force job-bravo to the F-22. Battles aren't being fought over blue water anymore despite the threat systems being developed. Until a Navy ship gets engaged by an airborne threat, the navy will never see priority placed on air defence like it did in the Cold War. So we will continue using a glorified light strike bird with afterburners that accelerates like a mac truck and burns gas like a Lamborghini-it can do its job though b/c of AIM-120C7(rolls eyes)

    At least I've got my flight sims to live the glory days.

  14. Posted

    I am just putting it up for discussion. I think most of the currently published Mig-23 flight models might roll and turn way too fast. Right now, I am just involved with the never-ending Mig-23/Mig-27 cockpits.

     

    Comments?

     

    http://www.warbirdsofdelaware.com/Airplane...87/Default.aspx

     

     

    http://books.google.com/books?id=6yJ8gfVAm...lt&resnum=4

     

    http://dewarbirdracing.com/Airplanes/MiG23...87/Default.aspx

     

    http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/vie...20-%200508.html

     

    From a book-reading flight sim junky they "feel" a bit too maneuverable.

     

    However, not a lot is published on the MiG-23MLD NON-export. These where the soviet bloc aircraft with significant aerodynamic improvements. They are modelled in the Desert Storm mod, but I believe they are meant to be the export MLD which has an ML body.

    The captured israeli MiG-23 was a Syrian? export MLD. The soviet version had higher AoA limits, better sustained turn, but G-limit was the same. I wish someone had a published reference work on that specific MLD type. One division in East Germany maintained their MiG-23MLDs while the rest where MiG-29. WHile it could not be argued about whish is etter WVR. I think the improved MiG-23 still had the awesome acceleration of the type and was good enough to keep alongside MiG-29s.

    Air Forces Monthly printed a report on MiG-23 vs F-15/16, but it was based on an export and showed tactics used to avoid the far superior BVR capabilities of the western aircraft. Anyone else wish to comment on their MiG-23 experience in game?

  16. Posted

    I dont believe so, i've seen pictures with fuel tanks and two matra rocket launchers?

    The Harrier cannot take off vertically with a combat load, the pictures would be of a jet with empty external tanks and lower internal fuel. Do you have the nozzles set for VTO? It's just not gonna happen at the start of a mssion period because thats realistic, you are too heavy. When you come back to base after a successful mission you can land and then VTO and land until you run outta gas.

  17. Posted

    Gotta say JJ Abrams did a near perfect job. Best movie of the year for me. The wife and I saw it on our anniversary-her idea.

    I think the plot was perfect because the old Star Trek is left untarnished, unaffected by this new movie. Star Trek desperatelly needed this. People are talking about how amazing the special affects were. Honestly I didn't notice it. I was too involved with the excellent acting and the laughs. Honestly I think this young revitalization of Star Trek is strangley timed to make the new Star Trek MMO a money maker.......just a theory though.

     

    The only way the movie could have been any better was if they snuck an F-14 in there somehow. :biggrin:

  20. Posted

    To be fair the F-4 carried a shark's mouth way before any tomcat did and it looks MEAN with it. If you can't recognize StreakEagle's point about the F-4 being more popular and recognizable you'er just not old enough or haven't read enough. Given in Japan the F-14 is arguable the most popular because they really wanted it.

    (Watch Macross Zero.)

  21. Posted

    Ditto to the above two. What's your deal, Streak?

     

    I'm sure he's just as passionate about the F-15 and is sick of the internet postings about the tomcat-which contrast his perspective on the tomcat as a big heavy interceptor that got popular because of Top Gun. He may feel like we're trying to discredit the F-15 or F-4, when all 3 jets are really very different aircraft.

     

    F-4=big, heavy, FAST, turbojet, multirole aircraft that started as a pure interceptor. Vietnam, Yom-Kippur, Iran-Iraq, and world wide sales made this jet a worldiwde icon.

    F-14=big, heavy, FAST, turbofan, designed from the outset as multirole, but focused on A-A for most of its career, with excellent recon, bombing, FAC, and other capabilities as it matured. This jet made a name for itself to the public with mere looks alone, and to those who know better by its awesome capabilities and record as a "MiG repeller."

    F-15=big, lighter weight, FAST, turbofan designed from the outset as a fighter(not a lb for A-G) that stayed as an excellent A-A platform, and had an excellent A-G version developed from it. This jet, like the F-4 made a name for itself by establishing records based on its performance and battle record.

     

    Little known fact-the F-14s LANTIRN pylon was actually the pylon made for the F-14D to carry the HARM(cancelled project). This helped make the LANTIRN integration super cheap.

  22. Posted

    Truth be told I thoroughly enjoyed Top Gun Fire at will as a sim, not the cheesy acting crap-I never was lucky enough to own Fleet Defender or Fleet Defender Gold. Janes US navy fighters and ATF were horrible survey sims at best.

     

    The F-14 will not be made into a sim because of all the red tape to get through to make a sim. It will never be sold in a store as a package sim at the Falcon 4 level because 1)Iran still flies it and 2) its systems are still classified. We all know that the AWG-9/APG-71 and AIM-54 missile had their weaknesses, but their capabilities are classified-and its not because of NCTR or JTIDS or the IRST on the F-14D-the As have the same treatment.

     

    The F-14 was prevented from kills in Desert Storm for a few reasons-none having to do with the cost of the Phoenix. The US Air Force was light years ahead of the US Navy at that point in the realm of target ID when good guys and bad guys are everywhere. The navy could care less because when you're blue water-you know that radar blip closing on the carrier is pretty much a bad guy, and the E-2C can confirm it. The F-15C was also the model of how a military weapons system should be taken care of. The update programs added what was needed at the right times-the F-15C had NCTR, (I think JTIDS as well) and was naturally the weapon of choice from an E-3 operators point of view because you KNEW it would be shooting at the guy you wanted it to. The F-14As and 2 squads of A+ in Desert Storm did not meet the requirements to process a hostile target without the confirmation of an E-3. The Iraqis did indeed run and hide from F-14s and did indeed engage F-15s(to there very quick demise).

    In Wings of Fury by Michael Wilcox(READ THIS BOOK) an F-15 pilot humbly admits that he and his wingman were successfully baited by a MiG-25 and then promptly bounced by a MiG-29 at their 9 o clock. It was luck that they were able to I believe outmaneuver the inexperienced pilot and he split S'd into the ground.

    It's apparent that you are as much of an eagle lover as I am a tomcat lover. BTW the navy still puts up recruiting billboards with F-14s on them-at least they did in 2007.

  23. Posted · Edited by turkeydriver

    StreakEagle when the F-14 wings are swept back, they only provide 30% of the lift-the rest is generated by the airframe-the "tunnel" is every bit a lifting surface and the upper pancake was designed that way to make it a lifting surface. While I agree on your assessment of the aircrafts focus. The F-14 was designed every inch as a dogfighting fighter-as long as you could put a huge radar in the nose and carry the AIM-54. VF-213 lost most of a wing in a mid-air collision and flew the jet back at low speed(wings spread) to land it. When the Israeli F-15 lost a wing, it had to fly at higher speed to keep from rolling. Pick up a clean tomcat and look at it-those wings are pretty nice for grabbing air in turns at below 330 knots, but by themselves have a fairly high wing loading. If the tunnel wasn't there-you'd have an a slightly less-weighty F-111B.

     

    One reason for the F-14s high cost was because it didnt have the politcal support the F-15 did-hence other countries buying them. IF the F-14 and F-15 production numbers were matched and they evenly split orders to other countries(just a hypothetical, ignoring the countries real needs in a fighter) the price would have been much lower, although still more expensive than the F-15.

    Numbers change depending how you look at them-the expensive F-14 double cycles every flight-meaning less fuel used on take-off anf landing, less wear and tear on the airframe and the aircraft carrier and then lasts for 30+ years( google F-14 "Christine")-where as the "cost effective" F/A-18, legacy or super, has to single cycle, burns up a LOT of gas doing just take-offs and landing, wearing out the carrier arresting gear quicker, and reaching its trap limit way to early. This is why the active navy has squadrons flying F/A-18As again, because they switched their late model F/A18Cs with the AIFF in the nose with the Reserve's F/A-18A+s with their very low trap numbers. The F/A-18Cs have rached their trap limit. Now explain to me how a hornet that costs 2/3 of the tomcats is more cost effective when at MAX it can only operate from a carrier for half as long. THe maintenance is where the argument is made-but back to topic....I miss my kitty.......

  24. Posted

    From what I've heard, the re-engined Tomcats surprised the Eagle drivers greatly when they first came on the scene. The F-15 guys had the F-14A figured out, but got their asses waxed by the A+/Bs.

     

    I'm also reminded of another story I read. Some F-14A's were down in Florida and had a mock engagement with some F-15's out of Tyndall, I think. I believe it was a 4v4 setup. They not only smoked the Eagles in WVR combat, but got simulated Phoenix kills on all the Eagles before the Eagles even knew they were there.

     

    Like the Shah said, the Eagle might have been the 'Air Superiority' fighter, but the Tomcat was the 'Air Supremacy' fighter.

     

    The words from the post flight debrief phone call where "uh......did you guys get new engines?"

  25. Posted

    Anytime, baby?... anytime before the last airframe was retired :biggrin:

    The F-15 may break into pieces if you pull 8gs, but it is still serving.

    If the Israelis aren't lying about their losses, the F-15 is the only fighter in history to go undefeated in air combat while also being one of the longest serving. Whereas Iraqis have some Tomcat wreckage to plant in their gardens.

     

    One guncam pic of an F-15 in an F-14 does not mean the F-14 was better at dogfighting. No doubt the Tomcat served long and well as a very capable platform... but when the Israelis needed a true air superiority fighter which did they pick and why?

     

    The Israeli evaluation team wanted to have a head-to-head fly-off between the F-14 and F-15 to really see which one was better in a dogfight, but the US would not permit that (I think the reason is obvious: neither service wanted to risk losing funding to their programs if Israelis tests produced a clear winner).

     

    So here is what the Israelis had to say about the F-14 versus the F-15 in dogfighting situations as quoted from Osprey Combat Aircraft . 67 Israeli F-15 Eagle Units in Combat:

     

    David Ivry, who headed up the IDF/AF's Air Department/Group from 1973 to 1975, had flown an F-14 from Naval Air Station (NAS) Miramar during a visit to the USA in early 1974. The sortie involved several Dissimilar Air Combat Training (DACT) scenarios against an A-4 Skyhawk flown by an adversary squadron. Ivry later recalled;

    "I was impressed with the F-14, even though it was heavy on the controls. The aircraft's engines were also sensitive, which meant that it was impossible to fly the Tomcat agressively as we would our jets."

     

    Israel Baharav was intimately involved in the evaluation of the F-14, and he later recalled;

    "During our evaluation of the F-14 and F-15 against the F-4 and A-4, we stuck firmly to the principles of the superior fighter versus the inferior jet. We prepared ourselves accordingly, and were thoroughly familiar with the performance statistics associated with all four aircraft. We instinctively figured that the F-14 and F-15 would carry more energy coming into the fight, but that they would turn more slowly than the A-4 in particular. Despite our preparations, we were simply amazed when we flew the F-15 against the F-4. The Eagle maintained its thrust-to-weight advantage and turned much quicker than the F-4. Here we had a superior fighter that was also more maneuverable than the inferior jet! When we evaluated the F-14, the US Navy pilots at NAS Miramar told us that the Tomcat could perform equally as well in a dogfight with an A-4. This did not prove to be the case, however, for when I flew the TA-4 against the F-14, the end result of the engagement was embarrassment for the Tomcat. Not only could the TA-4 out-turn the F-14, but during the turn itself, the Tomcat's energy state dropped so low that I was able to fly the TA-4 in the vertical as though the Skyhawk was teh superior fighter than the F-14 the inferior!

     

    Assaf Ben-Nun also flew a two-hour sortie in a TA-4F that included DACT against the F-14, and he too was disappointed to discover that the Skyhawk was superor to the F-14 in the WVR air combat scenario. He then flow a one-hour Tomcat mission from Naval Air Facility El Centro, in California, with the US Navy pilot Keith Sheehan in the back seat. Ben Nun remembered;

    "The F-14 lacked thrust, was complex and not user-friendly and was not aerodynamically clean -- indeed, the jet shuddered every time I pulled high-G or high angle-of-attack. During my sortie, I flew DACT against Amnon Arad in a Skyhawk, and although we finished with honours even at the end of the session, I found it hard to believe that the F-14 had no edge whatsoever over the A-4 in WVR air combat."

     

    The TF30 turbofans were the downfall of the F-14A, making it both unreliable and underpowered.

    The F-15's F100 turbofan had its issues, but when it came time to upgrade engines, the F-14 and F-16 got major upgrades first while the F-15 kept its old F100 because the thrust to weight of the F-15 was considered adequate without an upgrade. With uprated engines, the F-15 retains the thrust-to-weight advantage it always had over all other US fighters until the arrival of the F-22.

     

    Of course, while Israel chose the F-15, Iran chose the F-14... both countries could have had either one yet chose differently. I do not know the criteria that caused Iran to choose the F-14 over the F-15, though I would guess that they wanted the Phoenix weapons system to shutdown MiG-25 overflights. Of course, Israel found the F-15 was adequate in that role while being far more useful in the WVR combat situation they normally encountered.

     

    While I am sad to see the Tomcat retired, I certainly don't see it as such a great aircraft that no other could equal it or replace it. Of course, it would be nice if the Navy had replaced the Tomcat with an aircraft that actually had better range, payload, and preformance... but such is the way of politics and budget slashing in this post cold war world: the Super Hornet is smaller and cheaper.

     

    Historically speaking, whenever a discussion of these two great fighters happens, it mostly turns into trashing each others jet, this thread has maintained an attitude of professionalism, and kept above that.

     

    The F-15s record and capabilityies speak for itself period. It is an amazing fighter and the icon of american air superiority-greatly due to the Air Force's unparallelled ability to control the airspace over enemy territory in wartime and their pilot's focus on intercepts and A-A tactics.

    An F-14A with detuned TF-30s to promote longer engine life is not somthing to compare to an F-15 flown by a great pilot.

     

    However, the F-15 does has its disadvantages compared to an F-14A even in the A-A arena. While the F-14 is heavier, as long as it has a clean belly it generates HUGE amounts of lift( a swept F-14 has an entire airframe wing loading in the 40lb/sqft range)-and it can maintain that energy well when flown below 15k ft.

    It is noted that the navy thought about buying an "F-15N" because the F-14 was so much expensive. The F-15 was not as effective as the F-14 during AIMVAL/ACEVAL. No hotdogging here, the simple combination of a dedicated radar operator and the wonderful TVSU made a combo the F-15 could not compete with.

    The F-14B and D are matches for the F-15 in the WVR arena. The 6.5 g limit sadly was imposed for airframe life and anything over that doesn't help the tomcat that much more anyway. The F-14 can pull insane angles on a turn, you just have to watch the energy because pulling past a certain point will turn your jet into a big airbrake and you'll drop energy faster than C-5 trying to climb vertical.

    Tomcats have come back with 12.5g on the airframe and passed inspection spotless. One came back after a malfunction where the stick snapped and the aircraft performed a -10g outside loop. The crew passed out but woke up upside down climbing the other direction-the aircraft landed aboard ship but was subsequently grounded.

    I'll maintian the F-15 is better designed for dogfighting b/c it is easier to fly in a dogfight. You definitely have your hands full dogfighting in a tomcat as the you're wrestling an 70 lb stick at times.

    The F-14As TF-30s did give it a bad rap but there are plenty of kills on both sides on each other in wargames. There was a period of 4-7 years where a part with the wing sweep was producing metal shavings under g-load so the entire tomcat community was limited to 4-5g. Imagine how pathetic that is.

    While the F-14 cannot match the F-15s T-W ratio, wing loading(most of the time), or overall energy, it is an incredible dogfighter. Many super bug pilots who used to fly the F-14 still prefer for the A-A mission because it has better energy management than the draggy super bug. but enough-google search or head over to the tomcat sunset forums and ask for an honest to goodness F-14 pilots opinion of the eagle and how often they beat one. You'll be surprised.

    Japan almost went with the F-14 because they read of the AIMVAL/ACEVAL results and Hoser Satrapas gun footage. Politcal pressure ensured they bought the F-15. Canada, Great Britain, and few others wanted the F-14 but couldn't afford it. ENough rambling from me-gotta get back to work.

    I never was a "turkey" driver BTW, just a forum handle I've used for over 10 years.

    I do think F-15s rock BTW if I didnt make that clear enough.

×

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