MigBuster

You can even take the F-35 to the Golf Course from the NATO summit in Wales today I think

Nicknamed Delta Dagger, the Convair F-102, which was referred to as “The Deuce” by its aircrew, entered service in 1954. The F-102A spent most of its career operating out of Alaska, Greenland, Iceland and in other NATO and SEATO (South East Asia Treaty Organization) countries to defend their airspace from possible raids conducted by the heavily armed Tu-16 Badger, Tu-95 Bear or Myasishchev M-4 Bison aircraft, three types of Soviet bombers introduced between 1954 and 1956 . Several accounts of the pilots involved in this kind of QRA (Quick Reaction Alert) service, are reported in Ted Spitzmiller’s book Century Series The USAF Quest for air supremacy 1950-1960. As the one in which George Andre, a former F-102 pilot, explains a typical alert base: “Most featured an alert hangar at the end of the longest runway with high-speed taxiways leading on to the runway for immediate scramble. […] Generally a pilot stood alert for 8, 12 or sometimes 24 hour period. We slept with our boots on, and always could make a less than 5 minute airborne time from the sound of the scramble horn.” Even if the interceptors were guided to the target by SAGE (Semi-Automatic Ground Environment, the system that coordinated the NORAD response to a Soviet air attack by providing command guidance for ground controlled interception by air defense aircraft) or by GCI (Ground Control Intercept) Radars, obviously the pilots remained responsible for flying the aircraft and for the weapon launch, as said by Roger Pile, another former Deuce driver: “On-board radar searched for the target, but it was up to the pilot to locate it, select the appropriate armament, lock on to it and fly the plane to the release point […] The pilot was also responsible to retain the attack in spite of radar jamming, dispensing chaff and to switch to alternative modes should it be necessary.” One of these “alternatives modes” was the installation on The Deuce of a passive infrared search and track (IRST) equipment, that could be selected by the pilot to avoid the enemy bombers counter-measures. Moreover the IRST could also be used to fire the Falcon missiles against the target as explained again by Pile: “It was a softball sized sensor-head located immediately in front of the center of the windshield. […] The pilot could select IR dominant with the radar in standby, search or slaved to the IR tracker after lock-on to the target. If the radar was in standby, the target might never know you were locked on to him as the IRST was a passive receptor only and did not emit any signals. If in “search mode”, he might think you were still searching for him. If the radar was slaved to the IR head, you might get “burn-through” (pick him up on the radar) to give you an accurate distance from him and lock on to him with the radar. This would also allow the radar-guided (AIM-4A) missiles to also lock on to him and be guided to the target as well as the heat seekers (AIM-4Ds).” But even if the Delta Dagger was basically a bomber interceptor, pilots discovered that, thanks to F-102’s lower wing loading, The Deuce had an advantage (in certain parts of its flight envelope) in dogfight against its opponents. “I flew the F-102 transitioning into the F-106. I was very impressed with its turning ability. Many pilots claim their aircraft turns better than other. Of course, aerial combat will prove this, but short of that, I found another way to measure the turning capability of different aircraft and used that for comparison. That is to take the aircraft to 10,000’ at initial approach airspeed and perform a split-S as tight as possible. The F-102 would do it under 2,500’. The T-33 about 3,300’. The F-106 at 3,100’ and the F-4 at about 7,000’. I repeat the F-4 at 7,000,” pilot Bill Jowett recalled. http://theaviationist.com/2014/08/17/pilots-explain-how-the-convair-f-102-delta-dagger-intercepted-soviet-bombers-in-the-1950s/

One of the most dangerous types of Cougars shown there - will be interesting to see how they live.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29075307 The Royal Navy's second new aircraft carrier, the Prince of Wales, is to be brought into service rather than sold off or mothballed, Prime Minister David Cameron has announced.

Thats any F-16C Block 40/42/50/52s that were upgraded with CCIP (Common Config Implementation Program) from about 2002.

Appreciate its stuck out of the way - but anyone wishing to do some modding for a fantastic Vietnam SF2 project should get involved in this. http://combatace.com/topic/83768-poll-creation-of-a-restricted-wtr-development-forum/

1. Whats this the AIM-7D? - what are you firing at? 2. AIM-54A/C & AIM-120 / R-77 are some active missiles - they are all in certain packs - the 54A comes with SF2NA for the F-14 3. Anything that doesn't have CCIP then you need to manual dive bomb old but still useful by Andy Bush - http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_055a.html

It all sounds good - be interesting to a have a game that uses DX11.

Too many variables to compare really. For a start no sim models modern weapon system performance accurately - the sub variants are rarely considered and even if you get the Aero correct there are just too many unknowns regarding the algorithms used and effect of countermeasures. The initial AIM-7M came in about 1982/3? - I am not sure what iteration of the 7M was used in 1991 - which is pretty much the only performance indicators to go on. However the accounts I have tell us that (like the Skyflash) the seeker was the only improvement over earlier AIM-7s - because they were certainly not reliable and a lot of them even failed to leave the rail. There is also evidence in those accounts that using clutter to beat the F-15C radar at the time was a simple formality. The APG-68v5 is simulated in BMS AKAIK - but that is based on mid 90s information - however it is far more accurate than anything in SF - and should be a fair indicator of that era. Yes there have no doubt been software upgrades (v9 kits?) that have improved the performance since then against clutter as I have also seen mentioned. TK did a few years ago make it easier for Jets to beat pulse Doppler radars in a more realistic manner (IMO) - however I suspect everybody complained - thus you now have gamey missiles. Is there a source on the AIM-7M seeker performance - note even if it didnt go balistic doesnt mean that its still in a position to get to the target. Its also likely BMS still just models a 90s AIM-7M - for want of better info - or the fact its not a primary USAF F-16C B50/52 consideration. Now the FMS listed AIM-7M-F1/H SPARROW for Iraqs new F-16IQs this year - that to me looks like a possible upgrade - hope so for their sakes.

Expect they have a few things to talk about - am losing count of all the current disasters.

Seem to get better results by designating a target with this one.

delete or cut out options.ini and version.ini run the game again to recreate them

[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML4WP4XEvhE[/media]

Hi End What you running Russ? i7 5930K + Geforce 12GB GTX TITAN Z

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28969069 HMS Illustrious was decommissioned in a ceremony at Portsmouth naval base. The aircraft carrier was in service for 32 years and travelled over 900,000 miles.

Amazing program that - had no idea on how the deck is kept level or how magnetic mines were avoided.

This is available for pre purchase http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2159646#post2159646

If you wanted a Mach 2 interceptor - then you may as well have stuck with the F-104C - M2 was never a realistic or practical combat speed for the F-16. At high alt and high Mach pure turbojets should be better but this is offset by fuel endurance somewhat - at usable combat speeds it was inferior. The following link also gives a thrust output figure for M2 - but outside of the F4 HDFM manual I dont have the dynamic thrust tables to compare. http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article12.html Even with Combat Plus, performance of this new version of the J79 was significantly inferior to the F100, and Combat Plus could only be used for short periods of time when specific operating conditions were met: the engine had to be running in full AB, compressor inlet temperature should not exceed 15°F (-9°C) and certain combinations of high speed / low altitude would result in excessive internal pressure build-up (due to high airflow involved) and would place extremely high strain on the engine casing. Combat Plus was eventually fitted to Israeli Kfir C-7 aircraft, which were powered by a J79 variant. .......... The main drawback of the uprated J79-GE-17X, however, is its military power fuel consumption, which is far higher than that of the F100. This was not considered to be a mission-critical factor, as the FX requirement restrained the range of the export fighter (limited strike capability). Another modification was the mating of the engine to the fuselage-mounted gearbox in the F-16, driving generators and hydraulically pumps. This problem was solved by adding a transfer gearbox to the powerplant. ........ However, most air arms were less than enthusiastic about the F-16/79. Not only was the F-16/79 less powerful than the standard F-16A/B, it was also significantly heavier because of the additional thermal shielding that had to be carried. This made the performance of the F-16/79 distinctly inferior to that of the F-16A/B.

Even if they fixed the smoke issue and not looking at the likely poorer fuel consumption ( thus shorter range ) - the lower T/W coupled with the fact that it's a turbo jet means far worse acceleration/performance in vital parts of the envelope.

I'd rather not

On a dry, clear summer morning, Michael Macwilliam readied the QF-16 aerial target for its first live fire test...... http://www.boeing.com/boeing/Features/2014/08/bds_qf16_08_26_14.page

I ditched FE1 as soon as FE2 came out - main advantage for me would be the newer code base.

JHCMS A-10 - check out the speed of slow

Flippin A-10 experts! Don't worry - its the same solid state tech that has kept everything from the A-10 to the F-16 in the air all these years.