UnknownPilot

Back then, you would expect sentiments like that to be expressed more often than not. They were making it up as they went along. Think of it this way - take any flight sim "virgin" and put him behind the stick, what does he do? I've done with with friends, as well as seen the comments from other virgins and new commers on countless forums. It's always the same - they try to turn. Even if you tell them not to, they still do it. Because, afterall, the goal is to get behind the enemy and put your sights over him, and "how can you do that if you don't, or can't, turn?". So if they end up in a less agile plane, all they do is gripe about the aircraft and how much it "sucks". However, if you put them in the most agile plane and then up against someone better, in a faster plane, they will either, STILL blame their plane for not being agile enough, or, if they know they are more agile than the enemy, they are likely to accuse the enemy of cheating. The point of all that is, in 1917, all combat pilots were new commers to the field, because it was just in it's infancy, and people naturally wanted to angles fight, as energy fighting is not an intuitive concept for most. But some did figure it out and preach it early on - Boelcke, Richtofen, and Rickenbacker did ok in SPADs, as did Fonck. Give me the choice of allied aircraft, and I'll take the late SPAD - a heavy, super fast diving, powerful, tough hotrod with good armament.... a WWI Jug (P-47).

USAFMTL, regarding war being bad, you reminded me of something (something I know you know, and I'm not arguing with you or taking a shot, just keying off your comment )

Oh good lord. To paraphrase USAFMTL, the only good enemy is a dead enemy. Further, the only good commie is a dead commie. Eff him. He was on the wrong side, doing the wrong thing, and would have killed you in a heartbeat. We really don't need all the heart bleeding here.

Extra crispy with lead stuffing, eh? Indeed, the best way for any commie to be. (though I must confess to liking the way many MiGs look.... )

While the Dr.1 was really just an answer to the Tripe, the 3rd wing did provide more lift. Very few (if any) aircraft can climb or turn with a Dr.1. However, the troubles were many - massive drag, slow speed, landing difficulties (for both control and visibility), combat visibility, and dive capability. That last point was a problem as a few died in dives. There was actually a pretty significant design flaw, I remember reading about it but not clearly enough to detail it off the top of my head, but basically it ended up ballooning the fabric on the top wing, separating it, and resulting in catastrophic failure. In the end, Boelcke was right, as were the SPAD designers (even then, despite the modern romantic visions, it really was about Energy and surprise). Speed (and altitude) is life. It's great to be able to dance around in aerobatics, but the real means of winning in the air is to strike hard, from above, without warning, and escape. And if you are in an inferior position, you need to be able to disengage at will. Mostly, if you can't catch the enemy, then being able to out turn or out climb them is useless. The ultimate expression of the Dr.1 concept (in essence) was the D.VIII, which is a brilliant aircraft. Though not quite as barnstorming as the hi-po D.VII.

Go to Windows Explorer, open up "My Documents" and look for this -> C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\My Documents\ThirdWire\StrikeFighters2 Vietnam\ScreenShots

Well, I had a couple more missions I was going to post about, but there is no point now. On my 7th mission, we went DEEP into red territory, and the RWR was going off constantly, even with ECM. The SAM launch calls kept coming, and I was seeing the plumes. Even seeing the ones that were heading my way. I managed to evade them, somehow, and got engaged with smoe MiG 21s down around 4,000 or less. Tough bastards. They'd either turn to the point that I would have to climb or extend, climbing put me up into SAM-space, extending put them on my tail. They also would hit the brakes and pitch up, hard, almost like a Cobra maneuver. I tried to go high and keep position, but one of them cut back on my unexpectedly, but it was a brilliant move, and it put him right on my tail, as I was stalling out near the top. My attempt to cut back and get hte nose down only slowed me and I was really sweating. I managed to extend though as no amount of E maneuvers would work on this guy. Once I got separation he lost interest and I was able to come back around on him. Popped him with a Sparrow that I thought went stupid because it was barrel rolling. Then I checked with Red Crown, but another one much closer auto-targeted, so I went after him, very much like the previous fight, this time though I was able to keep speed up better and he was either damaged, inexperienced, or just not as determined. I actually got some gun shots, but they missed. Then, trying to line up a gun-shot, thr growlers went hot, and he turned and showed me his exhaust, right up close, I let fly, and it nailed him. At that point I decided to have everyon bug out. I hit the deck and ran for Way Point 8. I was seriously worried about my fuel state, 106 miles (plus another 20 or so for WP9 and then landing), with about 1500 lbs left. I needed to get out to sea and go high for fuel economy, but had to stay low while in-land. On my way out I saw a gun emplacement. I lined up (it was directly in my path), and fired, but the 20mm Mk4 Mod 0 pod jammed! (again), so the target was just barely intact (a few more rounds and I would have popped it), I broke right to try to avoid running right down it's barrel (was still moving at 560kts IAS at 600ft). But then the master caution light went on and I seemed to lose control. All I could do was right it and pitch up a bit and eject. Captured. F#*^*! POW. y'know.... getting shot down sucks, but it's not nearly as bad as going through hell, surviving, and then getting popped at the end of a huge ordeal, just when you think you'll make it out alive. THAT sucks balls. I had made it to my 7th mission (tieing my old campaign length record), got a purple heart, and an air medal, and 10 kills. It was April '66. I'm considering resurrecting him in current state in Linebacker - say he escaped or was liberated by some special forces or something. Truthfully I wish I could set up another Rolling Thunder with VF-84 in mid '67 (an earlier escape or something). ::: sigh :::

You know, I've heard that water is wet..... lol Of course people demonize those who get ahead, yet still want to be ahead themselves. It's BECAUSE they want to be ahead themselves that they demonize those who do it - sour grapes. It's like the story that if you put 1 lobster in a boiling pot you need to use a lid, but if you put 2 in, you don't, because they will pull each other back in any time one makes a break for it. (whether that actually happens or not isn't important, the point is, it's basically how people act) However, there's a great need to feel good about oneself too, so you need to convince yourself and all those around you that you are looking out for the "unfortunate". And hey, if you're gonna punish those evil bastards who get ahead, why not give the friuts of their labor to those same unfortunate? Now you can "help the poor" and attack those who succeeded all in one fell swoop. The reason capitalism is being attacked is NOT because it's failing in any way - it isn't. It's because it's been too successful. We have too damned many people here, and have shifted far too much toward industry and service, and now everyone ends up with time on their hands and living the good life. They have it too good. So good that they aren't content to just deal with their own issues, like USAFMTL is (I mean he's an example of how people SHOULD be), instead they have to meddle, worry about causes and start plying the system to generate more and more handouts because they themselves have nothing better to do, and nothing more to worry about. In the middle is not a better position. And it's not a perspective of wisdom. Wisdom will look at both aspects only when, and as often as necessary (generally once), and then take a stand. When it comes to rights, freedoms, and economics, there is no tenable position in the middle at all. Things will either be free, or shift inexorably toward the opposite unless opposed. It is the nature of things. The wise will see the virtues of freedom and the pitfalls of any level of socialism. I know it's considered bad form to use pictured in a debate, but it just says it so nicely.

I dunno... I think the purple chick IS kinda cute. Though not in the same league as the blonde that followed. hehe

You know, I had thought about taking you to task for your previous reply as it clearly showed you were out of ideas, but then I thought it would be better to just let this drop. But as it turns out, you were just doing some digging for some more talking points and sippin' on some Kool-aid. What you've done here is prove several points. Let's start with the first - You simply can not accept the fact of reality that not everyone can succeed. And that some people WILL, and MUST fail. Or to put it more succinctly, "s**t happens", and sometimes bad s**t happens to good people. It's just the way it is. Secondly, you view failure as a virtue. You may not realize it (or you may, doesn't change anything either way). But you make excuses for failure that always, ultimately, rest upon those who failed (or fell - either way you look at it, ended up unsuccessful in some way for some reason) being screwed by those who succeeded. Which, anyway you spin it, villainizes success and sees it as being inherently underhanded - that the mere fact of having succeeded where others have failed, is to have cheated in some way. And the only outcome of not cheating is failure. Failure is always a victim of the villainous successful. Look at how you wrote it - you state that your father "did everything right". Yet he is also painted as having been victimized AND struggling. Logic shows that had he indeed done "everything right", he would quite probably NOT have ended up "victimized" in any way, but certainly not struggling. How? Any number of ways - not having children and saving all that money he spent on you; better investments; rising through the ranks to become the decision makers, or at least have their ear, to prevent the outsourcing; getting involved with a better company that was smart enough not to do that; being in a different industry; starting his own company; whatever. Of course luck does play a part, as always. And sometimes nothing you do can ward off failure or struggle. That's exceedingly rare as careful planning can route around most any luck, but again, "s**t happens", some people are GOING to lose. But you can't accept that. None of you (liberals) can. That is precisely why competition is being removed from the school system - why we have "participation trophies" now, and musical chairs always has enough chairs for everybody, and why the old grade system is going away as well (because it's too cut and dried about success or failure and competitive comparisons to other classmates). Third point, you don't understand that the only way for there to be success is for there to be competition, freedom, and incentive. Incentive to improve, to do better, and to NOT end up penniless and homeless. Competition to improve over the other guy to become more marketable or find a better idea that will make more. Freedom to reap the rewards of your labors and not be held down or punished for it. As I already explained to you, and you promptly ignored, in every society where people are not allowed to achieve wild success over their comrades, that society stagnates and remains in a primitive state - Imperial China, Communist Russia, Communist Vietnam, Communist China are just a few examples. When Vietnam and China recently introduced more elements of free markets their economies improved. This is NOT a coincidence. Yet another example of this is Monarchic France under laissez faire. The only way to prevent any sort of failure, is to put an upper limit on success, and take that and route it back down to the bottom. What you end up with is communism, and stagnation, just like any of the real world examples that have tried. But some people are just unable to learn this. Fourth point (related, possibly considered a sub-third point) - earlier you claimed that our society is currently set up to prevent success. Part of your grand plan to "help the poor, poor, victimized people! " (wish there was a leaking heart smilie here) is to tax and steal money from the evil greedy rich bastard capitalist pig-dogs and spread the wealth around. You either do not understand what that means, OR, you do, but intentionally twist your words in order to manipulate others and put your insidous plan into effect. I will spell it out - attacking the rich IS preventing success. You are trying to implement the very sort of system you claim to hate and claim that we currently have. Fith point (again related to #3) - you don't understand just what success means, and what effects it has.

June '65 Another escort mission. Should be basic enough. Once again I loaded up with 2 outboard tanks and a center-line gun, it proved too handy before. The night before, playing cards, there were bets on my making ace the next day. As we mounted up, I heard a mixture of cheers and jeers on that feat. Couldn't help but smile. The initial part of the patrol was quiet. We ran ahead of the strike package so as to intercept and occupy any MiGs that might be in the area. As we approached the IP, the flak started looking for our range and Red Crown directed us to some bandits. I told Flight 2 (3 and 4) to split off so we could sepate, locate, and engage these MiGs. Then we started hearing calls from other flights under combined flak and enemy fighter fire. I called out to Red Crown for a heads up, got pointed in a direction where there were only bandits, Duke found a target and locked it up, I let loose a Sparrow and waited it out. It went dud. I was glad to have that gun-pod, if this start to things was any indication. Things became a bit of a blur. Bandits were all around. Radio calls from all manner of flights about location, flak, and dogfighting were non-stop. In a whirlwind of MiG-17s I really lost track of it all, focusing just on what was around me, while also trying to not think about the constant thunder and cloud-bursts of flak. Ultimately I wound up with 1 successful Sparrow shot, and 1 gun kill. Things quieted down a bit as strike packages made their way out of enemy air space and we cleared the air of MiGs. A few stragglers were hanging around and the flak had all but stopped. I saw another MiG apparently on a long landing approach. I heard Hammer flight was heading home, so I sent my flight home, 2 radioed back, but 3 and 4 had gone silent, but at the time I don't think I noticed, as I was busy lining up my shot. A quick burst sent him to the ground a bit faster than he had in mind, and a quick check showed no enemy air activity near-by, however, the lull suddenly looked more like a trap. I followed the last 2 MiGs pretty far north, and had long since blow both my tanks and was getting down to around 6000lbs of fuel, a lot less than I would like, that deep in enemy territory. The flak started picking back up a little, but not too bad. I decided to head for the clouds, obscure us from their sights, and cruise back home more efficiently. Then I heard "SAM Launch!". Without and way of knowing where the site was, and not seeing the plume or hearing a direction, I did the only thing I could do, rolled it over, pulled hard, and dove for the deck. Unfortunately, the calls kept coming! One after another, "SAM Launch!" "SAM Launch".... it was like we were in a bee hive of SAMs and they were all pissed off that we were there. Even being 1000 ft AGL or less didn't help! I was jinking and pulling heavy Gs with the burners lit, just going in random directions hoping to avoid those damned SAMs. As soon as that seemed to calm down a bit, the flak had turned the sky an even darker shade of grey and was going off like we were standing inside the intake valley of a big block. And they were getting close too. Bursts were popping just off to the sides in front, and many were right off our nose. I was sweatin' bullets. Keeping one eye slightly on the way-point indicator, I nosed it down as much as I could, and with full burner accelerated up past the mach. I was screaming just over their heads at about 700+ knots true at less than 600ft AGL. They were still too close for comfort. I couldn't risk turning too much or end up going the wrong way, I just didn't have the fuel for it. Slowing down just did not seem an option with as many gunners as there seemed to be down there and as good as they apparently were. Going up wasn't an option either as they had us pinned to the deck with SAMs. Up ahead I saw a hill, and I made for it, climbing just enough to crest it, I rolled inverted and dove down the backside and around to the right, hoping to split the flak, by blocking out much of what was already behind us, it seemed to work, but I heard an "oh s**t!" from the back. Duke later told me I gave him a heart attack with that move, he thought for sure I would hook the tail on the hill top and swing us down into the dirt. It was definitely close. But we still weren't out of it yet. Soon, as we got away from the hill, the flak started picking up again. If we could just maked it to the ocean.....! I had to ease back on the throttle, but we maintained .9 mach and were hauling ass. I kept changing course randomly to throw off the gunners, and soon we did manage to make it out to shore. As the gunfire started to fade off into the distance, I eased it up into a climb and slowly cut back on the throttle. Still over a hundred miles to go, 3000 lbs.... this was looking hairy. Fortunately with a little altitude, the lower drag allowed for reduced throttle settings and we could more-or-less coast back to the carrier. We caught up with #2 who was in the pattern, once we made it back. But we were down to less than 500lbs of fuel. I was worried that we could not afford a trip around the pattern, and that we would catch 2 before he could be cleared. I hit the brakes, cut throttle, and pulled up, then closed the brakes and eased the nose back down and cracked the throttle to keep us in the air, but still behind #2. Radioing ahead, I informed the air boss that the deck crews would have to get them out of the way in a hurry. I was nearly dry, but had no intention of ditching a perfectly good Phantom if I could possibly manage to avoid it. Fortunately I was able to delay just long enough, and they work just fast enough, that we could avoid any circling or excessive S turning, and I eased it down and trapped a 3 wire! Pulled our asses out of the fire, survived by the skin of our teeth, saved a perfectly good jet, successfully escorted Hammer flight (who successfully nailed their target), AND got 3 kills, returning as Aces in just our second mission! But the celebration was cut abruptly by news that 3 and 4 never made it back. Nobody knows what got them or where, or when. But Marines on the ground said they saw them both going down in pieces with no chutes in the air. So they are presumed dead. And those bastards almost managed to get us too with their apparent little trap of sacrificing some of their own fighters to lure us deeper in then unleash unholy hell.

This is probably a stupid question, but, since I have XP, only DX9 installed, and a DX9 (AGP) vid card, but am using Gen2 Dec 09, is the DX10 and Advanced Shader stuff automatically switched off? And if not, would doing so provide me any frames?

@ Eraser (site made me strip out quote blocks to make the post): History is not taught in school. The acceptable version of it is. It just so happens that it's a very leftist leaning version. I lost count long ago of the stuff I learned on my own about history that was not taught, OR that was simply different from what was crammed down my throat. Further, ANY indication of individuality is being rooted out with a certain ruthlesnees. As is any shred of competition, or the aggressive behavior that leads to it. BTW - human nature is such that ALL societies indoctrinate everyone. It's just how humans work. Much of it is unintentional though, and most of it is unwittingly as well. This is a large part of what I'm saying. You speak of fantasy, but THIS is it. There are 2 main groups doing all the shouting and trying to uproot everything right now. Those that want things handed to them, and those that want things handed to other people (namely the lazy leeches of the former group). Both share a common enemy, those who actually DO work hard (or smart) and manage to do well. Let me pull in another aspect here - there is no personal responsibility anymore. Since there is no right and wrong in the mind of liberal, only differing views, then clearly someone who failed or ran afoul of society is not to blame for this. They can not be, because they can not be wrong, because there is no "wrong" - so the only answer is victimization. It's not the crim's fault that he mugged you at knife-point, it's society that drove him to it, parents that touched him, classmates that teased him, employers that fired him (nevermind that he was lazy and didn't do his job), the list goes on, whatever it takes. What this means is that failure is a virtue, it means a certain level of "innocence" in this mind-set. Conversely, success means a swindle simply by it's mere existance. This is the crux of all socialism and communism. And it leads to "spreading the wealth around" - by taking it from those evil bastards who did well and earned it (or were just lucky in the genetic lottery) and giving it to every one who was incapable or unwilling to earn it for themselves. However, let's remember, Stalin didn't see himselve as evil either. The monster doesn't see the monster in the mirror, so it does not surprise me that you claim to never have met anyone like this. Is that a fact? Hmm. Well then I must be sure to tell my dad, who did his minimum in the Army as an MP, had me, then joined the USPS and is now earning a combined 6 figures with his wife who herself came from lower middle class parents and went to nursing school and is now a professional nurse. For that matter, my lack of college degree must not allow me to be a knowledge worker earning a respectable salary and own 2 vehicles and a house. Or my Grandfather who worked in a saw-mill, was an Air Force cook, and a mechanic, never graduated HS, but was a very hard worker and very personable, ran a very successful Sunoco buisness for a time, and along with his wife who worked for Chrysler managed to own a vacation home, provide for his mother with a nice house with a pool, and buy a new car every 2 years nearly like clockwork. None of us know the "right people", nor were we born into money, but we found our skills and applied them and managed to do alright. Then again, there is always a bit of luck too - how about Bill Gates? Right place at the right time with the knowledge to use it. It was not born into a buisness empire which he just took over and did nothing for. That is one hard working, smart bastard. And your point is? Not everyone CAN make it. That's how it works. That's life. That's reality. And I see I was right in my assumption afterall. Sounds like if they didn't have kids they'd be better off. Sometimes a decision backfires. However you wish to rob from me to provide for them. That is wrong in every concievable manner. And it puts you squarely in the second group above. You may not want hand outs for yourself, but you do want them for other people - even if it's as simple as forcing someone to hire them or giving them "free" healthcare. I can't imagine just how red your teeth must be from drinking all that Kool-Aid. You totally ignored everything put forth (ie, that happened) just so you can cling to your twisted fantasy (to borrow your term) They do. They just don't want to do what must be done. You see, once again, clinging to your own fantasy you can't accept that there is always a way - and if you're smart enough, and determined enough, and willing, you can recover and accomplish just about anything. That may mean coming up with some great new invention, or buisness idea, or it might mean taking several "degrading" jobs for little pay. They CHOOSE not to. YOU claim they shoudn't have to. Instead you are flat out stating here that nobody should ever be fired, and everyone should be freely given a well paying job and never have to go backwards in their lifestyle. And for that matter that everyone should be able to have as many kids as they wish. Basically the underpinning of all liberal philosphy - there should be no personal accountability, and no repercussions for ones actions, and people should be arbitrarily promoted or demoted (socially speaking) depending on if they were just unlucky or lucky when it comes to their birth. That is socialism and by definition, anti-American. Power corrupts. So does hand outs. Provide FOR people and there is no incentive for them to provide for themselves. The difference here? I'm willing to watch some fail for being unable, unwilling, or just unlucky. Even willing to take my chances on being among them. You are not. And by definition that means you are seeking a handout for them. And nothing comes from nothing, so you MUST take from those who are successful, ultimately punishing success. But you are desperately trying to sugar coat it to make it seem irresistable. They were luckier than you, or more sociable than you, or do indeed know more than you but looking from the outside you don't see all that they are dealing with. Again, facts of nature, reality and life. The attractive people will earn more and do better. "Attractive" comes in many forms - personality, and physical. Tall men earn more on average. Pretty women earn more on average. Sociable people network well and rise through the ranks more quickly on average. Suck it up and deal with it. Learn the skills (be they social networking, or technical in nature), or accept your lot. Yes, and I could have saved GM too, but nobody will listen to us because we don't have the resume. And we don't have that because we haven't worked our way into C level managment of big companies. Again, it's just the way it is. Holding down the top, the way you espouse, stymies everything. Here's some food for thought - Holodmor. 4 hour lines for bread. You know that the Chinese invented most of the modern world right? (meaning things that made it possible - paper, the rudder, the compass, gunpowder, rocketry, etc) Haven't you ever stopped to wonder why they never went anywhere with it while Europe did? Europe "cheated" somehow, right? lol No, the Chinese system was such that you could NOT move up in rank. If you were a merchant and found a way to get a leg up on your competitors, you promptly did nothing with it, because you were not allowed to profit from it and advance (I'm talking about Imperial China - though it's the same in communist China). So the free-market west took it all and ran while they stagnated and got nowhere. When China freed up some market rules in recent years, the economy boomed - something not possible under strict communism because it stifles competition and removes any incentive by it's very nature. You preach and propose hell for everyone - but I get the impression you just don't realize that and can NOT accept it. Wrong again. The argument for the Constitution was to redefine the nation as a whole into something that would last a bit more, by presenting a real frame-work for the union itself (ie, a common face to foreign powers, a common currecny, a common defence, and to settle disputes between states). The Bill of Rights was invoked because too many got over enthusastic and fell back on the only thing they ever knew (overly strong gov't). Read the words carefully, it spells out what can be done by whom, and flat out states that ANYthing not specifically spelled out as a power granted to any branch is held by the states and the people respectively. But the gov't has been overstepping it's bounds ever since the last of The Founders left office, so it's what you are used to. Why stop now, right? Not a whole lot of difference between the 2 (fascism and communism) when you get down to brass tacks. Both are about central gov't control and utterly against freedom and individual independence. You sugar coat it to try to make it it palettable, but the fact is, your ideas if put into action would not help anybody. They would HURT everybody. They are inherently "evil" in every way. You are just misguided thanks to the indoctrination of the school system, the news media, and the politicians. I can appreciate that your 'heart' is in the right place, but the trouble is that your head is nowehre near (the right place).

I don't know why it appears to have been launched from a carrier, but it's still a cool pic. I drool over the B-2. It is made of pure awesome.

Yes, enough generations have been put through the liberal indoctrination centers (public schools), lied to, and constantly told that they should "ask not what you can do for your country; ask what your country should be giving you for free", that the masses are all about notions of entitlement now. So naturally they are "angry with wall street". But once again I'm left to ask just how it is that you've managed to credit Bubba with the dot com boom (or perhaps forgot totally that it happened), and how you DON'T likewise credit him then with the inevitable crash that happened under his reign. And how it is that you don't look at what 9/11 and Katrina back to back did in the wake of that massive (and I repeat, inevitable crash). It's just too convenient to ignore those facts, and the fact that despite it all, we GREW economically and kept unemployment low until October 08 when that change forced the real estate market to collapse, I guess. Take a look through the Constitution some time. I think you will find that the very idea is to keep the singular central gov't small, and manage the necessary tasks across distance with increasingly local gov'ts - much like a military rank heirarchy (to a degree anyway). The trouble is that you clearly think that the gov't should be watching us 24/7 and providing everything, including to those who are leeches. And the idea that it's not the gov't problem if someone can't hack it is just anathema to you. EDIT - re-reading this I have to say that last sentence is an assumption and possibly an over-assumption, so if so, I apologize and it would be better to ask first just what you view on that actually is. It's a natural reflex from dealing with people who hate republicans (as you basically stated you do) that they also beleive what I added at the end there as well. And that is a major anthithesis to me (and original American values of freedom, and independence of the individual, not just the nation as a whole), and so I find it to be a bit dangerous to me, which in turn triggers me to be a bit more aggressive than maybe I should be.

Straight from the Communist News Network. lol The powers of the Office of the President of The(se) United States do not include the ability to directly control the economy. That boils down to the Federal Reserve, Congress, news media, and you (and outside inlfuences). So yes, yes, of COUSE it's W's fault. It couldn't POSSIBLY be the increased spending under Clinton followed by the dot com crash in 2000, followed by 9/11 (2001, btw), followed by Katrina, followed by the demoncrat run house finance committe and federal mortgage organizations changing how homes and mortgages are valued at a perfect time to shif things in their favor (despite the righteous indignation they put up when the Reps tried to put more oversight on those very organizations in the years and months just prior). No, how silly.

hehe, just coudln't resist when you talked about air castles, it was the first thing that popped into my mind. :)

Ensign Jesse Sinclair March 1966.... This F-4B Phantom is a beast. Great engines, and great gear, but that seems to be about it. I'm not really convinced that these new missiles are all they are cracked up to be. They say the Sidewinder can't maneuver that hard but has a very short range. The Sparrow isn't much better, except for the range, at least that increases hit probability, but what good is that if we can't tell who we are shooting out way beyond visual range? And if we wait, then that comes back to the Sidewinder. The more I think about it, the more I think maybe I should have tried to get into the F-8. Ah well. It is what it is. At least we have the power to get away if the time calls for it. And I've heard stories about gun pods. Might add excess weight and drag, but at least it's a gun. I think I'll be carrying one of those whenever I can - if I can. It flies well enough, if you are just flying it around. Landing is a bit hairy compared to the trainers though. I missed the wires on my first real attempt. That was a real pucker inducing event, both for the thought of damaging the plane, but more fear of not qualifying. Fortunately the secong shot was successful. Maybe a little heavy, but just fine. After that I had it dialed in and completing qualification wasn't all that bad. They wasted no time shipping me out to Yankee Station. Duke and I got assigned to VF-84, The Jolly Rogers. I wasn't so sure about that. I was hoping for a squadron with a little less infamy, and perhaps more prestige, like the Tophatters, or a cooler name, like the Ghost Riders. But in the end, we both are a little flamboyant, and while have the look to pull (women), it's decidedly NOT formal or dressy, so I guess we fit right in. Does make you wonder though, if we were partial to suits and fancy clothes, would they have put us in the Tophatters? ('tis a joke) The hazing has been harsh, but fun to an extent at the same time. Still, I wouldn't complain if it were to stop. First mission was an escort. Supposedly this "rolling thunder" concept hasn't been going on long, and is supposed to be a gradual build up. If that is true, then judging by what we're laying down out there, the finale must be another couple of nukes! I was able to swap out our center tank for 2 wing tanks and a gun. I'm not sure I'll ever know how I pulled that off, but I'm not gonna ask either! And it was a damned good thing too. 3 of the 5 missiled I fired missed or went dud. 2 did strike though, but the sky was so thick with NVPAF that you'd have thought it was WWIII or something. So our day was not finished. I got another 2 kills with that gun pod before we finally called it a day and headed back to the barn. (heading home from first trial by combat with 4 kills - nearly an ace!) First approach on deployment

The obvious retort. How did being a fence rider come to be seen as a virtue anymore? While you are right to a point, the thing is, the facts are there, and it's not a leap of faith to put them together. As for their intelligence, I didn't really make a claim to what they know, only what "they" (and bear in mind, there are 3 different "they"s here - the politicians, the people that vote for them, and the collective of the previous 2) are willing to accept (with regard to reality). Also, most things aren't a conspiracy, but rather pure luck of the draw which someone then recognizes and capitalizes on. I would never suggest that the groundwork for the whole process was intentionally laid and orchestrated specifically to be a bomb to be set off in case of emergency. But when you are looking for any tool at your disposal to get the job done..... it doesn't take a genius to do it.

Ensign Dusty "Nutters" Jacobs has been KIA. Only 3 missions. Racked up 2 aerial kills, and a handful of ground targets. Was known for doing crazy high-speed runs at the targets, attacking enemy aircraft, and crazy landing practices. Worst of all, it wasn't even enemy fire that got him, but pilot error. Charged with a SEAD mission, he and his wingman had successfully shut down the flak at the target sight, but there was one gun remaining (just not shooting), the target plus lack of return fire, was too great a target to resist. And in attempting to strafe with his (what I later found out was only a 7.92mm gatling IIRC) gun pod, the ground reached up and grabbed him. After that, the wind was rather gone from my sails. Had to figure out what name to use and what type of campaign to do next. Have been enjoying the absolute hell out of the Skyhawk, and in bring death and destruction from above, but after several short-lived attempts, I think it's time for a short break and a change. Last night I finally decided to start up another F-4 VF campaign. And only 2 missions in, I wound up escorting Skyhawks... and really missed it. lol More to follow....

Always easy to say that (I'm not saying you are wrong - just making a point). Is there a better version I can install? (of the C though, the G and S won't be the same thing) As for the Fang being better.... well, that seems hard to say. Again, it very well could have been, but why would it not be invesitgated further? What were the respective costs? Developtment times? Manufacturing times? Maintenance costs? etc... From what I'm seeing, it looks like they would have had similar thrust to weight, but the Fang would have been much better at turning at low speeds. At high speeds the human is the limitation anyway (and then there are control force issues, but there's no data on that that I'm seeing). The 104 should roll better (both react faster and roll at a higher absolute rate), and also probably (that is purely a guess on my part) had less drag from the study-based small wing, plus the overall lower wing area (less wing generally means less induced drag - thinner wings as well, and those things were safety hazards they were so thin lol). Hard to say without really having the 102 for actual testing. but it would be very interesting to see, that is for sure. Would make a great addition to the series (if any modellers/modders out there have the time and inspiration :) ). Edit - I just found a translation (of sorts) and it said that the weight listed on the page linked in the OP is actually maximum take-off weight. About 2,000lbs lighter than the 104. But it doesn't list the empty weight, so it's hard to really compare that. But with the same top speed, less weight, better T:W, it would furhter suggest the 104 is probably slipperier, which could be a real boon in E combat.

Actually, you can. In the first place, all the boom that happened under Bubba had nothing to do with him at all, it was all the tech sector, and previous foundations laid by Regan. He spent 8 long years slowly working to damage that boom, who's effects were really felt once the dot com crash happened.... WHICH, conveniently enough, was right when W took office, and then of course we were attacked, then Katrina hit... and through it all, the economy was fairly strong and unemployment was low. During that time, ACORN actually used threats of violence (terrorism, if we are to be blunt) to coerce banks into giving out loans to unqualified people. The banks then sold those loans to Freddy and Fannie. Who ran those orgs? House Dems. Barny and co were rubbing each others backs (well, he and his boyfriend were doing some nasty things I don't even want to contemplate) and getting well and truly indignant whenever the Republicans (including McCain [twice] and Bush himself) tried to put more oversight on those orgs and the process as a whole. Just 2 or 3 months prior to the meltdown Barny was on camera telling the press and American public how sound an investment they were right now (at that time) and how good things were looking. Then the election looms. After 1 disputed, hard fought loss, and one devestating loss that they ALL think they should have won without even trying, suddenly the economy explodes after Congress changes the way homes are valued and Mortgages instantly become seriously toxic and foreclosures start happening like the latest fad. Who do the masses associate with economic growth despite the facts of reality? Democrats. Who will look more favorable when the economy is in the tank? Democrats. Who had the reigns over setting up and controlling all that? Democrats. Who had been branded "unelectable" and were a laughing stock but absolutely DESPERATE to win an election, clearly at ANY cost (remember "Anybody but Bush"?)? Democrats. .....who stood to gain from a damaged economy? Democrats. .....who had national security issues to fear? Democrats. You know, there are some downright amazing coincidences in the universe, but then there are some things that simply aren't, no matter how much some (those who are happy with the outcome) want everyone else to ignore. Not always. Promise people enough handouts and they will fall for it, refernce FDR (the first major Socialst bastard enemy from within) Roots that the vocal wingnuts drowing everyone out are only too proud to reject and call all sorts of nasty names. No, I wish what you say was true. But more and more it really looks like there are precious few of us true Americans left. Far too many are spineless liberals that are afraid of any danger, or any actual self direction and thinking, and want the gov't to care and provide for all aspects of their lives from cradle to grave, all while preventing anyone from having any freedom or fun in the name of "safety". The schools are indoctrination camps. Have been for several generations now. Sadly, far too many stop their personal growth at kindergarten and can't accept reality, so they try to vote themselves handouts, and take all of our rights away. And if you beleive in the Constitution and the principles of The Founders, then you are a right-wing maniac and a threat to society, as far as they are concerned, and they will do anything to silence and shut you down, no matter how hypocritical they themselves will be in the process. But.... this is one case where I truly hope I am wrong. And that we are just too quiet to be heard over the barking moonbats. But if that's true, we need to freakin' step it up... it's WAAAAAAYYY past time already. On a philosphic point, I think parties should consist of people who agree on policy issues. And that party, if it's going to exist, should act in accordance with those beleifs. Afterall, that's the whole point of elections - so and so believes what I beleive, so I want him to represent me. If he then checks the political wind and takes polls always listening to the loudest, then he's going to change and actually WON'T be representing me, and I might as well have voted for the other guy anyway, as the outcome is the same. The real problem, IMO, is only having 2 parties. There should either be none at all, or a great many more. (or really, in a perfect world, we'd all be the true decendants of The Founders and all be Libertarians by default [these days - I know they used different names then, I'm referring to current political stance though])