Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Canfield

Profile Information

  • Gender


  • Website
  1. The Person Below Me

    False, they are for barbeque-purposes. The person below me enjoys long walks on the beach, in revealing PVC swimwear.
  2. OMG! F-13s outperform F-35s!

    "You're not real. The spiders crawling down your forehead are not real. I do not exist." (Sorry, the voices in my head forced me to get that off my chest.) It's quite peculiar that someone should say "This is not real", as if anyone entitled to an opinion on this should understand that western governments don't send their own pilots up in the air to fight eachother like gladiators. Although many would probably believe this (you know the type. The sort of people who, after an episode of Spooks, sends a letter to the BBC complaining not about the 15 people brutally murdered during those 50 minutes, but about one scene where a character spoke on a mobile phone whilst driving.) I should probably go stab a pillow before my head explodes with anger from thinking about the analogy above, and then have my assorted flavours of pills to make me agreeable again. Au revoir, lads!
  3. OMG! F-13s outperform F-35s!

    This may be a silly question, but what exactly makes everyone think the JSF is unbeatable? Stealth-technology? The various other high-tech bits? I mean, it's happened before that advanced aircraft thought to be superior have come a cropper. So I have to admit that I'm not going to dismiss the article as bogus. Not sure what is meant by "F-13", but I guess the MiG-21F-13 is a plausible foe in the simulation. JSF_Aggie wrote: I agree with you here, Aggie. But if it was all computer controlled, the pilots would be equally skilled, thus giving a more balanced view of the aircrafts capabilities, so if the JSF lost more scenarios than the "F-13", the JSF would technically be inferior. In real life another key factor is, as you pointed out, "the man in the cockpit", then again, modern US fighters rely heavily on computers. So one could, perhaps, argue if they rely too much on it. Nice discussion, chaps :) Cheerio!
  4. I've managed several victories with them, though I agree that their performance is subpar. The trick is to fire from a good position. Goes for any missile, really. Still, the AIM-9 wasn't really good until the -L came along. The missiles of the 1960's would often "RUN FOR THE SUNGODS!", or just refrain from locking altogether.
  5. My hovercraft is full of them. Just had a brainwave; future renewable source of electricity (electric eels). Good idea? Who's with me? I'm looking forward to the release of the Su-25, and firing a Vikhr's at convoys, and dropping a few FAB's on fueltanks.
  6. Looking absolutely outstanding, bobrock! I'm very much looking forward to the release of this aircraft.
  7. Logitech joystick

    I had a Logitech stick not too long ago (can't remember the model). It broke down after 2 weeks. It was also too light to be used without having to hold it down. I then bought the Thrustmaster "Top Gun Fox 2 Pro USB" (simple name, isn't it? Oh well, it has Top Gun in it.), which has a built-in rudder, it heavy enough to be stable, and it works. It's ferocity is adjustable, but you will need to install prettymuch every Thrustmaster tool to make it work properly. It can be a little unprecise. But, I got it through Amazon.co.uk at a reasonable price, and it's comfy and reliable, so I'm pleased with it. If you want to go all-out, you can buy an expensive one, the Thrustmaster HOTAS Cougar. It looks pretty sweet, replica of the stick of an F-16 (comes with a separate throttle aswell). Good luck in the hunt for a replacement stick ;)

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..