gbnavy61

My vote and my planet go to Ming!

Well, screenies don't mean it's out. There's lots of screenies of the new F-14B and a couple of the revamped A from TMF, but neither is out yet.

Single mission carrier ops. Carrier landings that are a little more realistic (you don't have to worry about bouncing off the deck even when you make a good pass). A little better ability to see over the nose. In most jets, you have to fly approach speeds much higher than normal in order to see the landing area. If you want to fly on-speed, most of the time you have to blindly aim for the deck.

Arrow, Are you using rudder pedals, or the keyboard or joystick? The way the rudders are set up in this game is there is a slight delay before you get to full rudder deflection. If you're using the keyboard, all you can do is tap the key to get small amounts of rudder - not the best way to do it. If you have pedals or a joystick w/ twist (which I personally can't stand) you can map the rudder there for finer control. FS9 or any of those have the option of the repeat function where your rudder inputs will stay in after you stop pressing the key. WOV does not have this function. Yes, the MSFS series gives better response to rudder inputs than this series, although I'm not sure which is more accurate. I've found the rudder control in WO* to be more than adequate for taxiing, and I hardly ever use rudder on landing - not until the wheels are on the deck. If I'm not lined up on the runway, I use angle of bank to fix that. Either way, airplanes aren't designed to turn using the rudder. Like commander said, rudder is used to coordinate the turn.

That is true

All I have to say is Go Seahawks!

There's also the concepts of stability and maneuverability to consider. In general, the more stability you have, the less maneuverability you have - and vice versa. Obviously, for a fighter there is a strong desire for maneuverability, but the aircraft cannot be completely unstable - it would be too difficult for a pilot to control. For example, looking at the F-8, early models lacked the ventral fins. However, during carrier launches, those F-8s could come off the cat stroke ass-end first because of the poor directional stability - pilots had to eject or die. So, the fins were added to improve the F-8's directional stability. The F-4 has strong positive (wants to return to the starting position) directional stability. You've probably noticed, stomping on the peddals in some jets will get your nose slowly (painfully slowly) tracking in the desired direction. In the F-4, it pretty much slides 2-3 degrees in the desired direction and stops - I've never tried it for more than 10 seconds, but it takes a long time to get the nose yawing around to a new heading - much too long. Trying this in the A-1 will get a better response, although still not as good as rolling in some bank and pulling the nose around in a turn. One way in which the two aircraft differ that affects directional stability is wing design. The Spad is a straight-winged aircraft. The Phantom is a swept-wing design. The Spad's straight wing makes a small contribution to directional stability. When you press the right pedal to yaw the Spad, the left wing goes through the air faster creating more lift, and therefore more drag on that side (production of lift also produces drag), so there is a small increase in drag trying to pull the left wing back to a neutral position. In the F-4, you press on the right pedal and swing the nose to the right. Essentially, the same thing happens as with the straight wing, except that the right wing now experiences greater spanwise flow (flows down the length of the wing from root to tip - producing less lift) and the left wing experiences greater chordwise flow (from leading edge to trailing edge), so there is an even greater amount of lift (and therefore drag) produced by the left wing over the right wing of the F-4. So the overall effect is that the F-4's swept wing creates much more directional stability (resistance to yaw) than the A-1's straight wing.

I don't think the angle of the rudder hinge is any significant portion of the roll. Basic aerodynamics explains why fixed-wing aircraft roll when rudder is applied. This resultant roll is called "proverse roll" (you roll in the direction of yaw). Just remember the lift generated by your wing(s) is controlled by several factors - velocity being one of them. Let's break it down: 1. You're cruising along in your F-4D (or A-1D), fat, dumb and happy. 2. You stomp on the right rudder pedal. 3. Your nose starts to yaw right. 4. Your left wings starts to travel through the air slightly faster than the right wing. 5. Your left wing starts to produce more lift than the right wing. 6. You start to roll to the right. Arrow, The important thing to remember about an F-4 is that it's a big, honking aircraft. If you expect rapid yaw response based on your rudder input, prepare to be disappointed. There's a lot of momentum, plus a few aerodynamic design features, that want to keep you tracking in a straight line. Rudders on jets are useful, but they are not a primary means of getting your nose pointed in a different direction. They're pretty much used for three things airborne: putting the pipper on the bandit, recovering from a spin/departure, and crosswind landings. If you want to bring the nose more than 2 degrees left or right, bank and pull. Now, the A-1D is a different story. It's prop-driven which means the rudder has to give the pilot a lot of authority to counteract torque and other factors associated with a rotating propeller. The moral of the story is: don't expect an F-4 to maneuver like an A-1 - they're different animals. I don't think there's anything wrong with the config.

Venture Bros.

Uh oh, someone is not on-speed.

Disgusting.

Ditto.

Ah, I misunderstood "Javelin."

I had assumed for ideological differences that the cats and dogs would be on opposing sides. If the laser cats really are using lasers, then, range is unlimited, provided it is line of sight. The crafty eels may be able to use ballistics to their advantage and lob shells over obstructing terrain, possibly neutralizing the laser's advantage. Then, the eels may also choose to use over the horizon weapons before moving forces in closer for the amphibious operation. And, what if the eels were able to mount railguns on their naval vessels? That could be a decisive advantage - increasing range and damage from ballistic weaponry.

Damn 'shoes - always f***ing things up for the rest of us.

Sir, I believe you are mistaking your dog breeds. Basset hounds have the long ears, beagles, relatively short by comparison. Although, I do agree a beagle assault force facing laser cat landing defenses would need more modern armament than javelins. Perhaps, something of the fully-automatic weapon variety. And haven't we forgotten that in order for a successful seaborne landing, the eels would obviously prep the beach with naval gunfire.

I think we're about to get into a Pythonesque debate about weight ratios... But, wouldn't the felines be tempted to eat said bats?

It seems to me that we have a stalemate similar to France versus England in the late 18th early 19th century - the Tiger versus the Shark. On the one hand, you have a formidable land power with high technology, however, they are deathly afraid of water. They'll probably only swim to save their own lives and it would be swimming towards the nearest shore, not out to meet the enemy. Opposing them, you have the maritime power. They possess the advantage of mobility - initiative in any amphibious landing - however, once ashore, they are completely out of their element and will be repulsed by any shore defenses. Until one side or another adopts air power, I don't see any decisive advantage.

How do you make it a DME?

I think someone was working on one, but I'll be darned if I remember who, or where the thread went.

You're breakin' my barrs, Hans.

In the F-8, you can turn a little better than the F-4, but still not as good as the MiGs. So, like Crusader said, keep the speed up and avoid the flat turn. If you find a MiG on your tail, don't just try to yank the nose around on the horizon - you'll bleed off speed badly and the MiG will be inside your turn in seconds (says the voice of experience). Then, it'll be game over for you very shortly. So, stay fast, use burner liberally (it's your "ass" on the line) but keep an eye on the fuel gauge. If you need to put speed on, with a MiG on your tail, go to full burner, jink a lot, then unload to put some knots back on (unload = push forward stick to get near 0G - you accelerate better near 0G because you're essentially "fooling" physics into thinking your jet has no weight - therefore your wings don't have to produce much lift and as a result they produce less drag). A couple other things, depending on the difficulty settings: 1. If you've got sidewinders, try to shoot when the MiG has broken off a maneuver - he's probably lowest on energy at this point and will have the most difficulty evading. The more you fight them, you can be a better judge of their energy state. Also, as many F-8 pilots did in the war, you may want to think about firing off 2 sidewinders per target - just make sure you have a good lock. 2. To make your cannon ammo last (if it's limited) map the "gun group" function. If you're on full realism, the Mk 12's will jam a lot. It's most likely when firing and pulling higher G. So, if you use the gun group function, you can switch between 2/2/4 cannons selected. This makes your ammo last longer and will stop you from jamming all 4 cannon at once. 3. Since you will be trying to keep your speed higher, the MiGs will most likely be slower. Sometimes you'll be lining up a shot and the MiG will try to force an overshoot by going to idle and throwing the boards out. Since he's now only slightly more aerodynamic than a barn door, he's gonna bleed speed in a hurry. If you've got a sidewinder tone, smoke his ass here. Otherwise, be prepared to blow past him and get out of the fight. You can decide whether or not to reengage. The voice of experience says, if you're kill hungry (the MiG was probably just shooting at you or one of your buddies) you will try to slow down with him - you'll probably chop throttle and throw the boards out as well. Now, you'll probably realize you're still going to overshoot so, in a vain effort to stay behind him you might try a rolling pull to further bleed your speed. At this point you'll probably see the MiG start to slide to the side of your cockpit (opposite your roll) and then up the canopy. Then, you should see the ground going around and around out of the front. Time to recover from your spin - forget about the MiG, the ground is trying to kill you now. It's happened to me twice so far (always with the boards out) and the first time I was so low that all I could do was go for the handle. If you want, take a single mission - recon - and get your F-8 up above 10K and try spinning it and recovering (opposite rudder).

That would be a cool addition.

That about what I was thinking. Of course, there's other long-nosed props out there. You just do those clearing turns while taxiing - or look out the sides.

You know, I had noticed that, but didn't think the two were related. That's probably it.