Gocad

Fun fact: Post count is meaningless.

Impressive.

StationID refers to the individual weapon station of an aircraft. StationGroup ID refers to a slot in the loadout section. You shouldn't have more than six of those, since the game can't handle more than that. You can put several individual weapon stations together (as long as they have the same Attachment type), which means you can load several stations at once. Take the Sparrow stations of a F-4B. 4 stations = 4 different StationIDs, but they all share the same StationGroupID.

While I do like flying in the WWII time frame, I do feel it's a bit done to death (the same goes for all modern day flight sims)...and as far as I am concerned I have yet to come across a sim that would as much fun as SWOTL. The CFS series never did it for me really. European Air War came close though... What I don't like about WWII flight sims in general is that they seem omit certain theaters...like the Mediterranean. A SF2 powered WWII sim featuring all major theaters from 1939 to 1945 would be great.

So I wasn't dreaming that there is something wrong with using Alt+N in the SF2 series. One explanation could be that using Alt+N transports you immediately to the objective, meaning no time passes for your flight, so I guess the problem could be that your flight arrives hours before all the other flights are meant to show up. That's just my theory, though. Not sure if that's really the case. It might be useful to raise this question at the TW forums....

I never said that it was good, but it's still not useless.

When it comes to tools of war (vehicles, weapons, etc.) you won't have much of a choice really, you got to live with what you got in your arsenal. And you can pretty much count on that most of your equipment hasn't been designed for the kind of conflict you're about to enter...

Read the first sentence of the first post of the OP: That's what I was getting at when I made the statement about different methods and types of war. I'm sorry to say this, but the initial post simply makes no sense to me. I do think that the OP is trying to compare something here, but I have no idea how that should work given the initial premise here. (Btw, that is not a political statement.)

Comparing the casualty number of wars that are decades and centuries apart isn't that much conclusive, since warfare (tactics, technology, etc.) and the (medical) treatment of wounded is constantly changing. Not to mention that wars themselves are hardly comparable.

Der sogenannte "deutsche Weg" in Sachen Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik ist schwer totzukriegen....ich frag mich ohnehin was die Verlegung der PzH bringen soll, gibt doch wahrscheinlich eh nur Theater wenn die das Teil da mal benutzen. Ich finde es auch ziemlich heuchlerisch von einigen Politikern, die nun so tun als hätte sich die Lage in Afghanistan urplötzlich verändert....es ist lediglich die ganze Schönrednerei endgültig von der Realität eingeholt worden ist....wofür die Soldaten im Einsatzland die Zeche zahlen müssen.

No doubt, using the AIM-9B means extra work, but it's one of the rare moments where 'work' actually means 'fun'.

To be honest I thought so too for a long time until I (re)read some comments regarding the importance of the ACM/gunnery training of the Crusader pilots and how it affected their use of the AIM-9: After all, to reach a gunnery position a pilot has to fly through the AIM-9 envelope. That sentence made me think...and change the way how I use the AIM-9B. It felt like I had been enlightened.

I picked Vietnam, but actually it would be more like 1940s to 1960s. I admit it's fun flying a mission with some 4th/5th gen fighter loaded with lots of BVR missiles, but it becomes boring fast. A jet fighter with armed with cannons and maybe a few 'winders in case I want to finish a fight fast is the right thing for me. I wonder what aircraft could fit that description....oh, right.

Nice shooting, but what's with the AIM-9B bashing?

Neat.

A final note about the piston vs. jet debate...it's the pilot's skill that matters here. Given equal pilot skills my point would always be on the one flying the jet... The P-51 looks beautiful, btw. Will it be part of a standalone game, or is it still an add-on for WOI 2?

As cynical as it may sound, but I don't see anything wrong about the Defiant having a hard time...it was removed from front line service for a reason.

Looks more like a Mitsubishi F-1 to me...

A is closer, especially with regard to ROF. Btw, warhead weight should be 0.260 and ammo weight 0.516.

Of course it could, but it really depends on the situation. The Brits tested a Vampire against a Spit XIV (which pretty much outclassed the Mustang in most aspects)...and the Vampire was clearly superior, performance wise. Still, given the right position and the right pilot at the controls, even a piston engined fighter would have a chance against a jet.

Rest In Pieces?

It's not like that FAC stuff ever worked properly to begin with...interesting enough, ground troops and FAC are still talking to each other...

Nice one! It should be interesting to see how the AI pilots would use the Defiant...

Happy B-day!

Happy holidays/Easter/Passover!