UnknownPilot

Or... a known and unrepentant traitor (Kerry) [giving aid and comfort to the enemy during a time of war is treason - that bastard technically should have been put to the squad, but at the very least, should be denied ANY public office - EVER]

I am sooooo with you there. I'd even go for simply not having player calls when there are no other planes in your flight (if they are shot down or you went solo). But a step nicer would be to take that, and add for when you tell them to go home - even if you are in formation and getting shot at, it's a small price to pay for not having them call out when they are in the pattern and you are in the thick of it (9 times out of 10 when I send them home, we all get separated fast, so that would have the desired effect anyway). And in both cases there is no monitoring code needed, just a simple flag.

Given the RADAR simplification, and calls of bandits, SAM launches, and incoming fire (AAA or airborne), the RIO basically is simulated. What more could be done with that? (other than maybe some more specific voice chatter)

+1 I love that last part. Very similar to a philosphy I've long held, even though nothing I've ever been through can compare to what he went through.

Cool little thing. I agree, would be great to have. But I know I can't 3D model worth a crap, so I can't even offer to help, sadly. Regarding performance though... that page, even though I can't read it, the #s are readable, and it says it's about 2300 kg heavier than the 104G, which I'm guessing is itself heavier than the 104C. I remember reading that the 104s visually disturbing lack of wing was a result of studies to find the optimal supersonic wing shape and design, and that that trapesoid was actually it. Which would suggest that the delta Fang would probably have a little less range at those speeds, and/or have a lower absolute limit. (the 104C was M2 limited by it's materials, but in that trim was actually good for 2.2. With improved engine performance... who's to say where it would top out (skin temp thresholds not withstanding)) As for turning..... who needs to turn? lol With enough thrust and speed, you just dictate the fight, come in high, keep the E advantage, and yo-yo as necessary to keep him in front of you. I do wonder a bit about the FM in SF2:V for the F-104C, but one thing I can say, with it's FM, it's my favorite MiG killer, no matter which MiG. If you try to turn with them, it's hopeless. But keeping speed up, and going vertical rather than horizontal and use that thrust and acceleration and climb and roll, and MiGs end up as just meat on the table.

Just saw an episode of Great Planes on demand last night on the B-52. Impressive. I've never been one for 18-wheelers of the skies (of any flavor), but there is definitely something imposing and impressive about that one. Especially the fact that it just won't die. Gotta love that! They mentioned speeds of all the bombers leading up to it, it, and a few after. Turns out it's a few mph faster than the B-2. Clocking in around 610 or something like that. Like a few have said here, definitely not what one would call "slow".

For the F-14 fans (not strictly TW related, but cool) -

Sorry exhausted, maybe I shouldn't have tried to help your cause by getting involved. lol Seems I have the reverse midas touch.

True enough. But remember, all games are made with growth in mind. They are made to overpower the current mass market systems in multiple ways, firstly being outright graphics settings, the other being in easy patch-upgradability of the engine to support more and more complexity in FM, DM, and AI. Virtually nobody will run that new DCS game or SoW at max settings out of the box. But over time as they upgrade their systems they will slowly turn more and more stuff on, and/or run at a higher res. (btw, Oleg himself has said it will be impossible for any currently existing machine to play SoW at the settings levels shown in his preview screenies - this is by design) Plus, this is a flight-sim afterall, not Quake. Eye-candy eats into processor time that could be given to flight modeling, damage modeling, systems modeling, or AI. Granted, you see the graphics, and the other stuff is sometimes harder to detect, but that other stuff is actually more important, especially today - as while visuals are most certainly an important component of immersion, which itself is integral to a simulation of an experience, they are already so good that it's more than enough, so those unseen areas could be focused on instead. As for terrain.... I'll grant you that too, but mostly just in texturing, trees, and collidable buildings. And I'm betting those are easily added without a complete re-write (depending, of course, on how it's currently set up internally) - it would just mean a further frame rate hit.

Pentium 4 3.2GHz, 2GB of DDR RAM, and a GeForce 6600 (w/256MB), running XP Pro SP3. I'd be quite happy to accept any donations you, or anyone else, would like to send my way (since it's not expensive to upgrade for you). The mortgage is killing me, and I don't qualify for any breaks (not to get political, but you see, I work for a living, rather than soaking up wellfare, and... well, I suppose my ancestors are from the wrong part of the planet as well), so as it stands I simply can not spend even a mere dime on a new computer. And because of the state of my computer, I can't simply upgrade just a component or 2, I'd have to build a new machine from scratch (motherboard, processor, RAM, vid card, and possibly even power supply). However, it's all relative. Among the Orbiter crowd, I apparently have a power-house rig. They are all die-hard Linux nutballs because they want to run on (as I put it just to get on their cases) a 286 with 64K of RAM without needing to even plug it in and get 100fps with graphics better than DX10 capabilities. lol (but seriously, that place is awash in 1GHz machines) I would be willing to bet that a very large part of the market is still on old hardware, or with OS's so badly clogged and cluttered with cheap integrated video, that it might as well be an ancient system. Right now, the one thing I can do is replace 2 of my 4 512MB sticks wth 2 1GB sticks of DDR. That would bring me to 3GB total (the 16bit OS limit), and hopefully buy me some frames. Even one or 2 would be nice. [when I am flying on my own on a light map, I can get as high as the low 50s, with a game "frame rate" in the upper 170s. But when I fly an Expansion Pack 2.0 campaign mission, it's in the low 30s and low 140s (vid/game). Once I get to the target area and the flak is shooting, and the MiGs are tangling with the friendly AI, and there are about 40 planes in the air, the game rate drops to 40, while the video frame rate drops to 8. And that is with the afforementioned graphics settings on low or off (excepting cockpit and lens flare), and my nVidia 3D settings set to max performance, running the 195.(62 is it?), with ENBseries (which really did help btw). The game rate drop makes me think it's really processor bound, so that even an extra gig of RAM probably won't help much, but short of finding a 512MB AGP video card, there is nothing else I can do. And since those cards cost just as much as a PCIe card, there is no point in buying one (with money I can't afford to spend anyway)]

Um..... what? Are you rich or something? Playing on some multi-million dollar ultra-rig? I still can't play IL2 1946 on max settings (at 1024x768). When I last played LOMAC, it looked stunning on my system, but wasn't close to what people post in screen shots, and not close to max settings there. Here, I play with everything set to low (except cockpit res) or off (except lens flare, since the sun doesn't really blind you like it ought to), and I'm STILL struggling for frame rates. Some of the screen shots people post here are just mind blowing. The visual capabilities this series has are simply incredible. If anything needed to be added, I would say it would be complex systems modeling (if the trend is to move toward more modern things, as it stands, if I want to fly modern I have LOMAC for that), and improved FM (overall) with torque, propwash, and p-factor (for F.E., WWII, and things like the Skyraider) [because as it stands, I use IL2 if I want to play with props]. There is so much eye candy in this series that it's probably good for another 10 years as it stands. [not that I advocate stagnation, just that we could keep turning it up and experiencing more and more as that time goes on]

My losses are mounting. When I was looking at this thread, I decided to take it that extra step (often in IL2, I would re-start a campaign, but never create new pilots, they were all nameless, or just my online name and I was flying all manner of campaign, but this felt different somehow - partly I think because the ranks and medals and scores are all based on the pilot itself here, whereas in IL2 they are linked with the campaigns only). So my first pilot - LtJg Anon "UnknownPilot" Ymous, which used the tinted visor+02 mask for a pic, which was perfect for that whole name idea. lol He was a Navy F4 pilot. Things were going well until one day, chasing a MiG, flak got him and the fire warning light went on and then I saw the flames in my mirrors. I throttled back and tried to keep up speed to get to shore, but no good, the fire spread and detonated the plane. Ejecting would have been just as much a death sentence I think, so he was toast either way. My second pilot, D. "Metal" Wolf, was a USAF Starfighter pilot. Cocky, but not arrogant, and fun-loving, he loved the thrill of the chase and the challenge of the fight, but most of all loved riding that missile. Wingmen didn't always listen or help, but there is only so much a flight leader can do in that regard. They should have listened though, as 16 kills were racked up in a mere 7 missions. The worst expereince was when one of the more dundering squadron members landed ahead of Metal and hit the brakes and just stopped in the runway for no apparent reason. By the time the nose wheel of Metal's plane touched the runway, the windscreen was quickly filling up with parked Starfighter exhaust nozzle. A full boot of rudder and brakes didn't help, and the razor-like wing sliced through the parked 104. Embarassingly, this was credited as a kill, which made his actual finally tally 17. Sadly, on his 7th mission, despite taking off and landing on a runway about 3,000 ft up in the mountains, bookended by a mountain on either side and always blanketed in fog so think you couldn't see one end of the runway from the other (always a freaky experience to land - trying to find the base in that pea-soup and not hit a mountain, which ran up to 9,000 ft and into the solid overcast that always seemed to be hanging aroung), he was flying low to avoid the SAMs, seeing plumes all around. Red Crown made a Bandit call, and he got a RADAR lock. While flying to intercept, straining to get visual ID, suddenly... he blew up without warning. A SAM got him at less than 10,000 ft. My third pilot, James "Daredevil" O'Dunabhra, was a Naval Aviator flying A-4 Skyhawks with the VA-155 Silverfoxes, that got his name while doing some crazy (and very frowned upon) stuff during his carrier qualifications. Over time, his adrenaline rush craving and gung-ho nature seemed to bear out his callsign. His first 4 missions were rather successful. Always going in in a group of four, sending 3 and 4 off to deal with flak while he took 2 in for backup on the target. Not only were targets getting hit, but some bonus hits were being made as well. And then it happened.... SEAD. 2 planes were tasked with taking out a few air defense targets deep in enemy territory. About the worst possible set up for a mission like that. And as one would expect, Daredevil met his end at the hands of some flak. So, on to #4 - this is bad, I'm really running out of names here. Aidan "Extreme" Quinlan. Started off with the Marauders attack squadron flying A-7 Corsairs, but that campaign ended up bieng 1 mission long. So I reset the character (delete and recreate) and went with the Gladiators Flying A-4E(67)s. Took a while to get a callsign for this one. I was trying to see if some habit would manifest itself and be a good callsign. Since he was very much a fan of the "one pass, haul ass" school of thought, and because accuracy was less than perfect, he would load up with WAY more ordnance than was, strictly speaking, necessary for destruction of the target. Once the target was killed, anything else in the immediate area was always attacked as well. Once when coming back from a successful warehouse bombing, Ensign Quinlan happened to spot a bi-plane off to his 1 o clock, about a mile out. Was an An-2 Colt. So he went into a large barrell roll, came in underneath it, switched to guns, and filled that kite full of 20mm. Knocked off the lower wing entirely (both sides) and perforated the cabin, and it went down like a rock. Upon his return, this feat, plus the habit of carrying so much explosive on every mission, he was dubbed Extreme. Sadly, Just 2 missions later, on his 5th, Extreme was sent on one of those god-forsaken stupidly set up SEAD missions. And while trying to accomplish the objective, and coordinate with his (only) wingman, a flak burst caug the bottom of the nose of the Skyhawk. Extreme was KIA instantly. And finally.... now my 5th pilot. ::: sigh ::: I had been changing plane and mission types from campaign to campaign, but I've been having fun with Heinemanns Hotrod, and partly because of that and partly out of stubborn spite, I've been keeping at the Navy Attack campaigns. And so it is that I've gone back yet again. I picked up some bad landing habits in IL2 (barrell rolls and hard scissors to bleed off speed to get down ASAP, landing somewhat steeply so I can see the runway, etc.), and they carry with me here. This time I've been less concerned about that than I have been. So because of that (from an "in game" perspective) and because of the fact that I'm actually hungry for AAA blood, I went with the callsign Nutters for Ensign Dusty Jacobs. Flying the A-4E(65) with the Warhorses, Ens Jacobs worried and amused instructor and cadet alike during his carrier qualification, and has taken that flying style with him to Asia. He is also rather gung-ho to get out into the thick of it, and is usually found telling jokes with a decidedly silly bent. On his very first mission, sent to take out a storage shed, Nutters coordinated with his wing, sending 3 and 4 after AAA, missed the objective but got 2 other buildings in the complex, sent #2 after the objective, who got it, and then he dropped a cluster bomb on a AAA radar at the target site. After that everyone was reeled in. 3 and 4 were sent home, 2 was told to rejoin. But then the call went out "You got one right behind you!", realizing it was not possible to run, Ens. Jacobs rolled 450* and broke hard left and got a visual. It was a black smoke trail, heading away, but was the only thing there. Following it, he discovered a sleeping commie at the stick of his MiG-17. Edgeing into gun range, the 20mm cannons barked briefly and the tail of the MiG was clipped, and it tumbled over into a plummet. Rolling back hard, suddenly once again very much aware of the flak around him, Dusty nosed it down and headed for home with all speed, releasing #2 to help ensure his safety as well. The flight home ran directly over a 12.7mm gun emplacement, unfortuantely the cannon rounds just couldn't find their mark, but fortunately, neither did those green tracers. Back aboard, he was the toast of the VAs and everyone decided his callsign was perfect for him. Here's hoping that he lasts more than 4 missions.

I just saw the Mirage Factory A-7A (and B) model. It's for Gen 1, but last updated June 09. I currently have Gen 2 (SF2:V) and am playing with the Expansion Pack 2.0 add-on. Which A-7A/B should I use if I am seeking the most accurate FM?

I didn't think to get one in the hilarity, sorry. :) It's really long, shaped like a ski, and called RA-5C. From what I could find at wikipedia, it looks like it's associated with the RA-5C Vigilante aircraft and is some sort of electronics sweet. It's a very heavy beast though, as it caused the A-7A to just fall over. And it's not jettisonable either. I'm curious if it does anything. Had I put it in the center, or in pairs, it would have been ok (balance-wise). I just didn't know what it was and was trying different things out on the range.

I just tried the A and B out a minute ago. They look rather different (the intake seems flatter and wider - not sure if it's my imagination or not), but man... it's like an aerobatic plane with a rocket shoved up it's ass. I don't honestly know what an A-7 should fly like, but the difference does leave me wondering. Also.... what the hell is that "canoe"? I put one on the outer most pylon and it wanted to invert the plane on the runway.

Cliff, I've not flown the G, but I love the C. What I would suggest is, use full afterburner on take-off, and do not pull up on the stick to take off. Just let it take off on it's own. (In fact, I used to hold the nose down a bit to prevent a tail strike, but it won't get off that way, and when left alone it does just fine) As soon as you're up, pull gear, then flaps, gently nose down a bit if you can (that is, if there's no mountains in your way) to build up some speed, then climb out. For landing, keep your speed higher, and don't do more than a gentle flair. I don't have exact figures for you as I do it more by feel, but I would say around 200/220 kts for landing, a very gentle flair, then when your rears touch, hit the wheel brakes and speed brakes, and start easing the nose down to get the front wheel braking and reign in that speed. For combat, keep your speed up. If you start to hear buffeting while not blacking out, and see your speed drop below 300, roll out, hit full burner, and pick up speed. In time you will start to develop a sense for when you will run out of speed or a target will turn too hard too long for you to catch him, and in that case you can pull up into a steep, high yo-yo, cutting off his turn, shortening your turn, and trading air speed for altitude, which you will then cash in as you dive back down on him. And don't hit the brakes to avoid an overshoot - blow past him if you need to, just pull up and to the side with full throttle to prevent his shot, but keep your speed and alt advantage. Finally, for me personally, I never take Sidewinders. As you see, they are dead weight. I take fuel tanks whenever possible, 4 of them even (as long as reserve quantities allow). This way I can use more throttle for longer, which comes in VERY handy in the 104. (oh, and super short bursts from the gun, this way you can avoid risk of jamming [if that one can jam, I'm not sure] but also so that you don't waste ammo. Takes very little to down an enemy plane)

http://www.column5.us/aircraft.shtml They have one dated Jun 2009.

I finally survived an entire campaign!! .....it was one mission long. Started Rolling Thunder in the Marauders (forget the #) with the A-7A, and struck a factory (which was a cool target), cleaned up some AAA (seems I can survive better in the A-7 than in the A-4, but it might have been just luck too), got back to the carrier, (bounced a few times), and when I finally landed, hit escape and saw a message that there was a halt placed on all aerial attacks, and the campaign was over. I really didn't think it was that late in the campaign, but I guess it was.

I was getting ready to ask what AAR was and feeling quite sheepish and n00bish, but this tipped me off (After Action Report, right?). :) I was thinking, "well, they're cool cars, but a whole forum, here? seems out of place" lol Not mine, though I wish it was....

I don't know how they even managed to become "old timers" lol I can't survive more than a few missions. I'm really starting think that it is impossible (or at least for me) to survive Rolling Thunder. I can't even imagine how bad Linebacker II must be. 7 missions as a fighter (well, 6.5) is my record. 3 as A2G. Inevitably they send me in SEAD. And there is no way to approach a gun emplacement that will prevent it from shooting at you. It's basically suicide. It's so damned frustrating to put so much time and effort into coming up with a name, flying the missions, being as careful as possible, and then when doing what you are tasked with, seeing a gun swivel and put green tracers through the wind screen. And only 2 SEAD planes? Deep into a AAA nest? Why....? If I were calling a war... well, let's say an all out war, which I know that wasn't, I'd send up squadrons of attack planes with fighter cover, to start from the shore and move slowly inland picking every gun, sam, and target of opportunity off possible, then I'd send the marines in to get a beach-head, rinse, repeat as often as is necessary. This way no planes are caught deep inland in hostile AAA infested territory, nor more or less alone as a shooting gallery for hundreds of little bastard gunners. Now I'm off to find a new name and figure out which campaign angle to try next. ::: sigh :::

I love how someone gave me a "-1", some people here are so sensitive. lol Anyway, that's what I was saying (in my 2 entirely seperate statements in one post) - the way to cure the speed differential between escort and bomber is to use the B-70, and just have it throttle back for the escorts to keep up, and then it can hit it when trouble brews while the escorts stay behind to tangle (increasing the effectiveness since the bomber won't be slow to egress remaining a threat). Although.... AIM-120s on a B-1 is still missiles on a bomber, so I still think a turret or several would be funny (-1s and all) [just not as cool as an acutal escort, and the B-1R is pretty badass looking]

Depends... if the missile quantity, range, and accuracy is good enough, I guess it wouldn't matter. But then, you could just mount them on the bomber and not need the escort. lol Ressurect the Valkyrie! Yeah boy!

But that wouldn't be an AMRAAM - it would be an ALRAAM. lol In all seriousness though, sounds badass. I would like to see an AIM-54 upgraded similarly though. I mean, it's like taking a 427 Cobra - some modern things can outdo it, but drop in an all aluminum, EFI 427 with a T-56, modern rubber, Koni Single Adjustables, and some stiff sways, then it's a different story.

Interesting stuff. When I looked at it my first thought was parts for my Cougar. That paddle looks cool. The Cougar hats and buttons are indeed all metal. If that paddle of yours is more realistic and also metal, I might consider switching (for purely aesthetic reasons). Your controller, you say 8 axes and 32 buttons. Sounds good, but am I right in assuming it's all going to be DirectX assignable only? (that's the impression I got from how it was worded)

James, what did you end up going with? I have heard great things about CH, but mostly from people who have their nose in the air about Thrustmaster in general. Likewise, some seem to like their Saiteks as well. Personally, my hand won't fit inside the X-45 (the pinky is crushed by that odd slider thing-y they have, it could be removed for a decent fit, but that cuts down on functionality). I bought a TM Cougar HOTAS when it was first released. It must be said that I am something of a Thrustmaster "fan", having had several Mk1's and a WCS and their game card/controller. I never did get the FLCS but wanted it, and when the Cougar came out, I was simply drooling. The timing was perfect too since I was heavy into IL2 very recently at that point. So I'm guessing it was late '01-ish? I'm still using my Cougar to this very day. I did pay $270 with free shipping on it from Amazon, AND an additional hundred when I bought a second-hand mod, BUT, I have to say that all in all it's really been a good investment. That's a lot of years, a heck of a lot of stick time and abuse, and it's held up and still going. I'm planning to mod it to remove some of the center play, but for jets that play is less of an issue than it is for props. People never want to hear about spending big bucks on something, to then have to spend more money or time modifying it to suit their tastes afterward, and perhaps you can find one used for a good price, but... I will say this if I had to buy something new today, I'd more than likely get another one, even for that price. It's THAT good. Saiteks are crazy sci-fi stuff. Does that really belong on your desk when you're trimming the trees in your A-1 Skyhawk over NV in '66? Also, if you're a larger guy, you may have fittment issues with the X45. The X52 is better all around, EXCEPT it has that damnable evil twisty stick. That is the worst thing ever foisted on the simming public. Ever! CH stuff was always light weight and separate components with a bit of a dance to incorporate and configre, not sure if that's true today. That Logitech is damned fine though. IF I didn't go Cougar, then it would be that Logitech rig. The Split thottle is really cool. And in terms of raw physical buttons, it trumps even my Cougar (mainly because of the 8 odd-ball buttons at the base of the throttle). Also the fact that the LEDs in those buttons (base of throttle) are multi-colored and progammable is very nice. If their software allows for virtual buttons (logical flags in Cougar-speak), they could trigger a color change and act as a form of feedback. The mounting holes are another nice touch as well. The downside is the overall layout. Those 8 buttons are rather arbitrary, and the festooned top of the stick will be hard to reach in many situations, and it just looks odd. Plus... it's plastic. You may be used to that currently. But trust me on this, once you use a Cougar.... everything else is cheap plastic crap. So that aspect would be a major knock against the Logitech for me. Either way - stay away from the twisty sticks and definitely get real rudder pedals. You will never go back to anything else.