Flanker562

I'm sure they still go through Army (or Marine) channels for what's releasable, and if it's the Helmand operation that everybody else knows about, then it's kinda a no biggie. But it doesn't matter in any case, the Taliban has a real solid information network when patrols are going out, and which direction, and depending on the shadiness of the Afghans riding with you as well. Let's not get into the train of thought that the Taliban are stupid, they're just not.

Let's not get too involved in politics.... But nice post, my sentiments exactly.

I never quite stomached the idea of "embedding" journalists anyways. The most one I remember is a reporter talking out of the front hatch of a recovery vehicle during the invasion of Iraq, just right under the .50... Sure he could duck down when and if stuff happened, but still compromised the arc of the gunner, and would have hurt the poor guy's ear when it did go off. Plus it takes away manpower that you do need when you're on the ground because you have to give up space for the reporter and his cameraman. Not to say free press shouldn't happen, but there's a line between OPSEC and reality. Reporters often forget that sometimes because that one dumb reporter/cameraman can compromise your mission because he/she is there and naturally doesn't know what to do or expect, so it's a hassle that needs not be there.

With help from Fubar512:

Schwack!

In fairness EFPs are a killer to alot of vehicles, thank god they weren't in Afghanistan... Well also results are just as sketchy on the ground as it is, so while news coverage of one offensive is just that, a coverage of ONE offensive. There's alot of firefights where the T-ban have bit the bullet, but not much of that gets publicized. One of my Companies shut down the Korengal... and it took like almost maybe two months or so for word to get out, so there's good, but a mortar attack that went wrong was on CNN in 24 hours, so like everybody else said, they go for sensationalism, not praise. Hell during my tour in Iraq you never hear about the actual good we were doing over there while I was with Civil Affairs. Bad news sells.

Can someone post the data for the widesky ENB settings? I for the life of me still can't find the linky because those setting gave me the best values...

That is just beautiful.

True enough, but for CAS and for Armed Recon missions they worked well too. Then again if you had a targeting pod, after you destroyed the main target, and if you had some left, any target was nearly free game. And this is for 2nd Gen zmatt.

Well..... hate to bust your bubble too much, but GBU-12s are the choice when hitting moving targets.... I've been killing tanks, trucks, etc. since I started shooting them at vics... it's just a little practice it takes that's all... However... I don't trust wingnuts with LGBs anyways... so you got me on that one, I guess a CAS mission is in order to check that out.. And I don't know what it is, but the B-57's are growing on me..

Like SkipperBLT said, 50% is a bit optimistic, I would say for me 80-ish%. With the help of FC and MigBuster's tutorial... I feel more inclined towards SF2 due to the additional stuff you can do, besides skinning. It feels more fleshed out, and the ability to take real world data and apply it more... I feel it gives more of an edge compared to most sims. While alot leaves to be desired... I would say that once you get the hang of it you'll appreciate it. Such as yesterday when my comp got messed up. Reinstalled everything but decided to stick to SF2. Since most of the stuff can be imported from SF1/WoX, there's no reason to go back. The more you find and figure out, the more I look forward.

It's just how it's setup. Personally at first I was annoyed.. but really even then you are looking at terrain from miles away, and with no real zoom capability I let it go. Now when you're talking about optical or EOGBs or EOGRs (Mav, SDB) then you will get the zoom, but roughly 7 or 8 miles TW distance (roughly a 1.5 squares rule of thumb) with LGBs and Laser Mavs it works that way. Not sure why but I figure around that distance it's tolerable since targeting pods aren't as well modeled in the game as it is. I mean it would be nice to be able to move it around, a good distance out and select and do all the fun stuff real pilots, and virtual pilots have done with pods (Jane's F-18 for example), but the TW engine doesn't support it.

.

Rog, got it and updated and uploaded

Not sure what the issue is, but it is in fact an issue, as I checked it out for myself. I'll let Kowalski/FC know and see if we can't get it fixed soon. I though it was a throttle issue on your stick, but it's repeatable on my end too.

I gotta tweak it anyways, so I'll be sure to put that in the next update or tweak...

Can't find SF2:E? http://www.thirdwire.com Click on "Store"

Whoops! I think I actually may download the RB-57, it just looks cool. Sunset takeoff on my last leg of my unoficcial "Turkey Tour"

Thank you too

It's also more than likely a logical development, because there are static versions, as well as if my mind serves right, trailer versions.

That's what it was, Four Corners interview that discussed the Super Hornet versus Sukhois.. As for AESA versus non-AESA? While the F-22/Super Hornet/Eagles and maybe later model Sukhoi's.. I doubt any so far can do this: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2006/...-as-jammer.html So it's more special than most. Even the F-22. Of course that's a matter of tech transfer, but I don't see a Su-30 out radaring a Super Hornet, Raptor, or Eagle anytime soon until they develop their own. So with radars the Super Hornet is the way to go, as a 4++ will have slightly more capability than a fifth generation fighter.

Well it is... Carlo Kopp's "influence", however, I've read some articles on the Austrailian views on it and Say What?! is right, compared to a late model Sukhoi... no comparison and no way to say the Supa Bug would come out on top. But if you want to throw it against an MKM I'm sure the Bug will come out on top due to pilot proficiency versus technology, and the AESA is far more capable than any Zhuk out there. But then again the Aussies relied on the Legacy Hornet for interception and the Varks for strike... so I don't see the logic in saying the Super Bug is inferior when a Legacy Hornet doesn't have the legs of a Sukhoi. And the Rafale? Yeah it doesn't look good when the Indians boot it out of the competition and if my mind serves me right, didn't they let it back in?

Oh and due to not checking.. there is the VFA-111 beta skin in the FA-18F directory. It's actually finished pending any recommendations.

True true... those Archers? Why not use the -9X? Far more capable than that thing... And no problem... all you really have to edit on the .tga is the RGB channels, not so much the Alpha layer itself... been doing that for years. Matter of fact I'm going to apply that to my Bug skins..

An-124 and either an Afghan Army or Polish Mi-8/24 at Bagram, but then again the cosmopolitan nature of that place...