ST0RM

Looks fake. More plastic/vac form-ish. I saw the guy pull up on a spoiler, but am not 100% convinced.

Newer IRM/SAMs have flare rejection, so more flares isn't always better, nor will guarentee a miss.

Kevin, your reply made my head hurt ;) So, the short answer is No, but with some editing, Yes. (maybe) Thanks!

Not all. Starting with the AIM-9L, the Sidewinder got an all-aspect capability. The MiG-23 in the TW series seems to be very resilient against AIM-9 hits in the tail.

Yes! From my standpoint, Comms was the largest limiting factor. We had the French running it, but the language barrier/accents plus the distances between transmitters caused a ton of lost comms. We'd try relaying for each other. Tanker to Tanker, or fighter to tanker, etc... Thanksfully we have 5 voice radios, plus SATCOM, so I would have to bypass the primary controller and go straight to our tanker planner with the updates. Things were happening at such a fast pace, that an ATO would have changed 3 times by the time we arrived on station. The lack of A/R training for the non-NATO forces, was really apparent as well. I agree that the Swedes need to work themselves into more NATO combat plans. They came in late, almost like an afterthought. Not getting political, because honestly I don't really know their policies. -S

Just curious. Would be a great match up. And with ezlead's formation takeoff. -S

True, but of the 5 nations to get them (Sweden, Czech Republic, South Africa, Hungary, and Thailand), the Swedes have been the only force to use them in action. Sure the Euro nations have flown them in air police duties, but that doesn't sell jets. Additionally, not much has come out from what the Gripens did during the Libya ops. I would have thought they would have used it as good PR for the aircraft and what it brings to the fight. The Swiss are an interesting nation when they acquire arms. So many wickets. This might be held up for some time, awaiting full approval from all parties. Are the F404/RM12 engines on the Gripens, common with the Swiss Hornets? -S EDIT: I just read that the Swiss opted for the Gripen NG or JAS-39E/F. It has the F414 engine as on the Super Hornet. So no commonality.

Iceland: 57th FIS F-4Es

A-10 Warthogs going anti-ship against the Soviet Fleet.

I've installed this and love the ability to finally take-off in formation. However, it overwrites all of the new airbase mod equipment. Has anyone successfully imported exlead's data into one of these modded airfields? Thanks! -S

The new models look nice. A couple of accuracy issues with the Tomcat, from what I see from the screenies. But nothing that will interfere with playability. I just hope it's more than an SF2 add-on. There will be the normal mad dash to buy this from the people who blindly follow TK no matter what. I assume some of the vets will stand-back and let the smoke clear before jumping on. After their review, I'll make my own decision.

Because the SAC crews (both bomber and tanker) back then were performing the nuclear deterence mission and the helmets had mounts for the nuclear flash blindness goggles. Additionally, our Tech Orders specified the wearing of helmets during bailout. Since then, they've relaxed the regs to allow us to wear our headsets for the flight, but have our helmet close by, attached to an oxygen source. Hope it answers your question. -Jeff

I think you are right. The money is about to dry up and Hawker-Beech has drug this out. I think the USAF wants to award the contract quickly to preserve funds. -S

Might I suggest another change? I flew ver 1.1 and love it. The new values for sighting the rockets help alot and the AI does a better job of hitting the targets on the first pass. However, the tail-rotor/yaw control seems to be excessive. Can we reduce it's effect or slow the inputs down? If I put in the tiniest amount of rudder, the tail swings around wildly. You could say to reduce the overall rudder inputs on the "CONTROLS" page, but that would affect all aircraft which isn't necessary. Thanks Dels! -Jeff

It's not a 707. The -135 line were completely different airframes. -S

Happy Birthday Ant. Hoist a few pints!

TO: JFC SHAPE FROM: 494 EFS RUNWAY AT BUSHEHR AB STRUCK WITH 6 MK.82S WITH DELAYED FUSING. RUNWAY DESTROYED. ADDITIONAL TARGETS OF 1X FFG AND 1X SUPPLY SHIP SUNK. EXPENDED WERE 12X MK.82, 4 GBU-12, 3 GBU-40. POST-STRIKE BDA SHOWED THAT NO IRIAF ACFT AT AB. REPEAT NO IRIAF ACFT AT BUSHEHR AB PRE-STRIKE. IRIAF ACFT APPEAR TO BEEN HAVE DISPERSED AFTER VFA-2 SEAD MSN. WITH ARRIVAL OF 4 FW, 494 EFS WILL REDEPLOY HOME.

TO: VFA-2 FROM: JFC SHAPE Det 1 REQUEST ACKOWLEDGED. TASKING WILL GO TO F-15E ASSETS FROM 494 EFS. REQUEST VFA-2 PROVIDE SEAD FOR 494 EFS STRIKERS. EXECUTE MSN AT 0200Z. CURRENT REF TIME OF 2105Z.

TO: VFA-2 FROM: JFC SHAPE Det 1 VFA-137 GUEST HELP, APPROVED AS REQUESTED. FORWARD MSG TO VFA-137 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE. BUSHEHR AB (6TAB) 2X SQDNS OF 10 F-4E (20 TOTAL). POSSIBLE RESERVES OF ADDITIONAL 3 CURRENTLY IN DEPOT AT MEHRABAD.

TO: JFC SHAPE FROM: 54 EARS ALL KC-135R TANKER ASSETS HAVE COMPLETED RELOCATION FROM RAS ASSANYA AFB TO AL ASAD AB. ALL FORCES PLEASE PLAN ACCORDINGLY.

Thanks again Kevin! -Jeff

Yeah, the F-35 isn't even operational, nor is the 58th a combat coded squadron anymore. They are an FTU.

TO: VFA-2 FROM: JFC SHAPE Det 1 PRIMARY BASE OF OPERATIONS FOR IRIAF F-14 ASSETS IS ESFAHAN (8TAB). HOWEVER, INTEL BELIEVES 8-10 ACFT FORWARD DEPLOYED TO MEHRABAD TO PROTECT CAPITAL. IRIAF HAS FLOWN COORDINATED F-14A/MIG-29/F-4 FORMATIONS TO ALLOW EXTENDED RANGE INTERCEPTS.

TO: VFA-2 FROM: JFC SHAPE Det 1 BUSHEHR AB: 20X F-4E. (INTEL CONFIRMS 16 SERVICEABLE) SHIRAZ AB: 20 SU-24, 4 P-3F, AND NUMEROUS TRANSPORT ACFT. C-130/IL-76 OMIDIYEH AB: 3 SQUADRONS OF F-7M (APPROX. 30 ACFT TOTAL)

TO: JFC SHAPE FROM: 494 EFS STATUS: GO --------------------------------------------------------------- TO: JFC SHAPE FROM: 54 EARS STATUS: GO