MigBuster

Yeah done that so many times - but im a lot better at fuel management these days - still, there should be a tanker waiting- like in RL - so thats one excuse I use!

Thats probably about right - depends which SAMs though - in WOV for example only the SA-2F model 5 will get you most of the time without chaff unless you dive to the deck - and sticking the defence on heavy means about 20 - 30 fired at you every mission (in 1972) - even if you can avoid 1 good luck holding your ground and trying to beat 3 at a time!

It may as well not exist with the amount the so called member countries are giving support to Afganistan - unless the press are just hyping things up of course.

He was in Bill and Ted - thought I knew who he was!

The BBC normally - in an unlimited flood of information ive no idea what the most trustworthy sources are - so settle for one that may be 50% trustworthy :beta1: Havnt bought a newspaper for about 8 years either tbh

Yep you need to use AWACs a lot to declare if the target you have bugged on radar is freind or foe. You may be able to use labels for the time being until you know more about the game - although ive never used them myself. Ground targets are difficult - when you fly to your target area they have sometimes moved elsewhere - so you need to use your ground radar in both moving and static modes flicking between them - once you have something lock it up get awacs to declare it. In the non moving ground radar mode look for lines of dots which will no doubt be Army columns While you are doing this - if you have to go below 8000ft or so stay fast and drop flares - otherwise you will get a MANPAD up your A without any warning. You can use padlock to look at ground targets - useful if you cant find anything - also the 6 key can help you at first For air targets just move the cursor over the yellow square on the radar and get AWACs to declare. STT mode will sometimes give you the actual name of the locked target - if AWACs is out of range then if you do decide to fly on you can ask your wingman to attack your target - if he declines then the target is almost certainly freindly.

Moscow: Last year, the three nations with the world's biggest military expenses were the United States ($547 billion), the United Kingdom ($59.7 billion) and China ($58.3 billion). The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) published these figures in its 2008 annual report. There are other estimates, but they are not radically different. Many research organizations and the media tend to base their comparison of countries' military might on their defense budgets, although their estimates are often disputed, sometimes by the objects of their studies. Although such comparisons are very relative, they are a point of departure for analyzing the military potentialities of different countries. Reports of international institutions which study the strategy and national military potentials, such as the London-based Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) and SIPRI, are considered the most accurate. Only recently, China's defense budget was a little over $20 billion. What stands behind its leap in military expenses? What war machine will it have in the future? Many countries, above all China's next-door neighbors, are interested in answers to these questions. The growing economy is the main catalyst of China's boosting military potentialities. Its industrialized export-oriented economy (China is increasingly becoming the world's producer of absolutely everything - from man-made flowers to cars) requires adequate military protection. Despite successes in the last few decades, China's armed forces are still rather backward, which is another incentive for increasing military spending. Its ground forces are relatively numerous but it does not have enough modern military hardware; its army air defense system is weak, and its artillery is insufficiently mobile. The same is true of China's air force. Most of its combat aircraft are copies of Soviet war planes of the 1950s. The number of modern aircraft is negligible. Moreover, China's industry is not developed enough to produce modern aircraft independently. It cannot manufacture a number of important aggregates at the level of the leading aircraft-building powers. Thus, its engines for combat aircraft are still below their Western and Russian counterparts in economic fuel consumption and overhaul period. In order to close the gap, China will have to make considerable investments, primarily to modernize its industry. China's airlift force is also weak. It does not have enough medium and heavy military transport aircraft. The development of the navy in China is impeded not only by its rather backward industry but also by the fleet's second-rate role in its military potential. As distinct from the majority of industrially advanced countries, China's fleet is not an independent branch but part of its People's Liberation Army (PLA). This subordinate position, that is, orientation to army tasks, limits the Chinese fleet to coastal missions. It primarily operates in territorial waters and a 200 mile-long economic zone. For actions in the open sea, China has a very limited number of multi-purpose nuclear-powered submarines and shore-based Xian H-6 (Tu-16 licensed copy) missile-carrier aircraft. But this situation is changing, and the PLA's navy is expected to receive its first aircraft-carriers in the coming decade. Escorted by an adequate number of frigates or destroyers, they will be able to operate in far-away waters. As other nuclear powers, China's strategy is largely based on the nuclear deterrent. At present, it is equipping its nuclear forces with new DF-31A missiles, which can destroy targets at a distance of 11,000 km. It is also introducing into its fleet nuclear-powered missile carriers of the 094 type, which are harder to detect than their predecessors (092-type submarines) and equipped with JL-2 missiles capable of hitting targets on other continents. Experts believe that all in all, China now has 300-400 nuclear charges. This amount is much below the Russian or U.S. potentials but the situation is gradually changing. On the whole, China's armed forces are capable of carrying out any regional missions, but in strategic potentialities (that is, in nuclear deterrent, and ability to transfer troops over considerable distances) they are lagging behind even their Russian counterpart, which is not at its prime at the moment, to say nothing of the United States. This situation is most likely to remain the same in the next 10 to 15 years. After all, China is not going to have tough military confrontation with anyone. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti. from Article

But that leads us back to the same old question - do you prefer to just sit there and do nothing? In the past we were happy to let countries build up arms without interfering (too much) and that just ended in s**t anyway. Im not sure anyone can really make a preemptive strike on the Afghan/Pakistan border region - its been part of the war the whole time.

Did you get her number in the end? Can't comment myself - NFG may get jealous or something

That bit about the manufacturer been given worn out brakes to replicate - then making new worn out brakes cant be true surely! that could have been the inspiration for the "Stone Henge" scene in Spinal Tap

Well theres always room for optimism I guess - my moneys on the Ceasefire being a rearm and reload sort of thing though as someone else put it.

Or perhaps "Dont bomb Iran and still face Mid East Ball of Fire" - so whats the answer then msnbc?? Cant say im in the know (like the press i suppose) so lets hope the people in the know make the right choice this time Have the UN sent in Hans Blix yet?

Do you get a pilot at all? If there is one but its white only - I remember that you needed to rename Mig28mf.bmp to TIGER02.bmp to get the skin to show.

who knows - TK might

Yeah I would think Holland are the favourites for that one - they have been the best team by a mile so far. I want to see Spain do well this year personally!

:rofl: That show must have been some comedy - whens it on again btw?

Well nothing lasts forever - and most things are got round eventually - however you can guess at what the future might hold like everyone else - maybe they will, maybe they won't etc What we know is that currently there is a large force of F-22s manned by some very highly trained personnel that cant really be touched in A-A combat (if Red Flag is anything to go by).

Well you never know when the next war will be - doesnt it normally happen when you think there isnt one round the corner? For the record we are currently at war in two conflicts (Iraq and Afganistan) with air support being used every day. The F-35s are needed to plug a massive gap left by the Sea Harriers that are now retired (and no the GR7/9s cannot replace the SHARs A-A capability)

In the Weapons Editor you can select your Jamming pod to do one or either - although I suspect pods in the real world may be able to do both. Whether it works in game (like the HOJ option) Im not sure. There was a bloke who claimed to work in this area came on here a while back with some interesting things. "Most sims have a fairly decent representation of deception jamming. Noise jamming I don't think I've seen in any sim except Jane's F/A-18. Incidentally, it also has towed decoys, so if I had to choose a sim with the best EW modelling it would have to be that one. If Falcon 4 has noise jamming modelled I haven't noticed. Only played LOMAC a little bit so I really can't say there. The most modern ones are pretty simple operating wise. Turn them on when you get over Indian Country and leave them on until you fly out. They stay silent until a valid lock from a threat emitter is detected, at which point it can safely be assumed whatever cover you had is blown, and throw out some deception jamming. Done properly, deception jamming shouldn't offer a target for HOJ missiles* as the jammer is simply mimicking the threat radar's signal (hence the 'deception' part). The idea is for the jammer to 'seduce' the radar's track gate, then walk it away from the jet. Which is why you sometimes hear deception jammers referred to as 'gate stealers'. If your advantage in jamming is large enough, the missile will miss completely without any further action required. If the threat radar is particularly capable (or your jammer a POS relative to it), then you'll have to hope for a increase in miss distance while you do the missile avoidance drill. More advanced jamming systems are alleged to have an active cancellation capability, wherein they take a threat signal and broadcast an exact copy 180 degrees out of phase, cancelling it out. Of course, due to limitations just how large a transmitter a fighter could haul, it wouldn't cover every radar out there (unless we've done some real miracles in EW technology), but it could conceivably cover enough to provide a VLO-esqe penetration capability to conventional aircraft. Noise jammers are a whole different ballgame though the objective is the same. Noise jamming could be compared to blasting someone with a fire hose so they don't realize it's raining on their head. The further away the hose is, the weaker the spray and the more likely they are to notice raindrops. If the raindrops increase in size (RCS) the hose's spray needs to be stronger to cover them up. Of course that isn't a perfect analogy, because it's generally lopsided in the OTHER direction, with the hose being relatively weak while the rain is strong, but hopefully I got the point across. There are a few counters to it, frequency diversity/agility/hopping, alternate tracking methods such as IR or EO, home-on-jam missiles, but for the most part it's something you learn to work around. Frequency shifting techniques are good because it forces the jammer to either play catch-up to your freq changes or waste a lot of power covering your full operating spectrum. Dual- and multi-band radars really shine in this sort of arena, because the have a huge range of freqs compared to legacy radars. * Regarding HOJ against aircraft: You really shouldn't be happy if a missile goes HOJ, especially at long range. In real life, HOJ removes target range from the missile, creating a situation where the missile has to fly lead pursuit throughout it's flight. At longer ranges, that means that even slight variations in the target's heading equate to large variations in the predicted intercept point. And since the missile doesn't know how far away the target is, it reacts to those variations as quickly as possible, G-ing away it's energy in an effort to maintain lead pursuit on the target. In contrast, with range data available (ie not HOJ), the missile is able to fly a much smoother, more energy efficient proportional navigation course to intercept, only switching to high-G manuevering when the intercept point is suitably close. More energy in the terminal phase of flight, a better chance of getting that aircraft inside Region R and filling the sky with hair, teeth and eyeballs."

You can fly any plane just by renaming a file - pretty pointless though - in AF you can only use the F-16 pit anyway.

turning on NWS by default is SHIFT and / Dont worry loads of people ask for that one.

Thought that was the way it was supposed to be done! - when I hear mission accomplished I often keep attacking the ground targets in a suicidal manner - then when shot down sit there thinking "why did I keep attacking that gun when there was no reason to". In the YAP missions it even tells you not to stick around to long - but do I listen!

Good luck out there Zagnut

Are you adding any mods to WOE after you are reinstalling it? Are you installing the correct patches?

Just saw the second half - Croatia were the better team and deserved it overall IMO Not that im taking that much interest in Euro 08 myself - f*&%*&^ Steve Maclaren :angry2: