-
Posts
9,146 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
27
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Everything posted by MigBuster
-
Right so fly in low in the far more lethal AAA /MANPAD range...when quite frankly even a flight of F-16s or A-10Cs would be pretty safe up high with jamming support. If this theoretical radar coverage can pinpoint a stealth jet - why is everyone building stealth jets today if thats such a threat? The reason is because it changes nothing in reality. And these ancient low flying jets will have to actually climb quite above any mountains that will be detected long before they got in any kind of missile range -and what exactly makes you think their GCI will have any contact with the jets? or will the jets be transmitting their positions due to having ancient tech transponders?
-
Already 2 threads on this - didnt think the news was that exciting myself. The iOS game got a new F-5A/C, CF5, NF-5, Spitfire F.22, MiG-25, F-15C, F-4S, Egypt Mirage III/5 etc - would be nice to get them just as AIs in the PC version!
-
1979 vid on the F-16/F-17/Viggen/Mirage F-1 sales proposals to Europe Entertaining just to see them trying to get round the "Not To Exceed price" - and overall the makers were very skeptical of the F-16
-
Well they need to know its coming via radar, get to 60,000ft in view of every radar out there to intercept a target going near M1.8 in Mil! - good luck even detecting it - let alone getting a MiG-21/29 up there in time - im not sure why you think all tactical jets must fly along at 4kft at 300KIAS in a war zone - is this some kind of 1978 throwback? I would be dubious whether ground clutter is going to hide them at all - the red flag exercises would suggest that there is nowhere to hide from AESA radars - so could happen - but less likely when you know how kinematically superior the F-22 is over pretty much everything else. (although on the same note Cruise Missiles might be as good for known coordinates)
-
-
upload progress indicator
MigBuster replied to ravenclaw_007's topic in Site Support / Bug Reports / Suggestions
on comodo dragon (chrome offshoot) I do get a percentage in the bottom left hand corner Is there a view you can switch on for your browser? -
oh wow check out those new grafix!
-
WOV - Target Object Placement Interface Tool WIP
MigBuster replied to swambast's topic in General Discussion
What by some miracle he has decided to use the tool and future patches / games will have more than 1 ground object? -
Supposedly from South Korea last week - I can only think that the flight leads F-16 broke down before take off and he had to borrow a B-2
-
Main headline news on the BBC as well - it still aint gonna happen surely.........
-
Any DLCs that need a new pit you probably wont see. Not to worry though because you wont need a cockpit for the mobile SF2 game when its ported to Win 8...............
-
-
I wasn't going to suggest that in case you got the sack :) Does the place have a WiFi Guest network? - might be less restrictive - but you would need to use your phone or a tablet instead.
-
WOV - Target Object Placement Interface Tool WIP
MigBuster replied to swambast's topic in General Discussion
Unbelievable - what amazing work - even TK would kill for this capability I bet! -
Is at the app store........downloading to see if there's anything new
-
I'm interested to know where this comes from - currently the F-22A doesn't have AIM-9X and HMCS - this would put it at a disadvantage up close compared to something that had sure - but a lot of the time the legacy jets don't get a chance to use the HMCS because the Raptor is entering the fight wherever it likes. The F-22A is supposed to be getting HMCS/ AIM-9X with subsequent upgrades. Then there is this comment from a Structures Engineer for GD in the 1970s for the F-16 (John Will): In comparing the Raptor and Viper, instantaneous turn capability at higher airspeeds is limited by load factor (g). If both airplanes are 9g, then their instantaneous turn capability is the same. With its higher thrust to weight and lower wing loading, the Raptor has higher sustained turn capability at most conditions. At lower airspeeds, the Raptor wins due to its higher angle of attack capability and TV. Remember, instantaneous turn means speed may drop during the turn and sustained turn means constant speed during the turn, with both turns at constant altitude. And this: I'm a Viper driver and I've had the opportunity to fight one (well, a couple really.) Without going where I can't go, I have to say that the Raptor beat up on me, my formation, the Eagles, and the other red air without me ever seeing him until he rolled in on my 6 and gunned the tar out of me. Wasn't much I could do about it! I have fought many other jets in the world - Eagles, Hornets, Hogs (for what that's worth), MiGs, Mirages (2000 & F1), and several other types & nationalities I'm forgetting about I'm sure - I have lost some, but won most fights. The Raptor changed the way I thought about fighting - I have never felt so defenseless before, I'm just glad I am on their side. The earlier posts about it not being about the Raptor's maneuverability are right on -between how high, fast, and how amazing his technology was we (the many red air) were dead about as fast as the controller could pass the words. I am used to a rhythm in air-air engagements and they just destroyed the tempo - their tune was over before we had really even started. The bottom line: I was a skeptic and thought it should be done away and replaced with new Bl #60 Vipers - now . . . well, to repeat myself, I'm just glad I'm on their side. Now can I have one too? If not, then I'd be happy to jump on the second line in a new Bl60 or F-35. Oh yeah, it is a hell of a lot more maneuverable than a Viper. Based on this analysis you have to say it aint bad at traditional nose pointing either. Although - it not the end of the story for sure - back the 80s F-16As shot down 80+ aircraft at a single competition in Lossiemouth and bombed ground targets - and im sure Busdriver posted a story of his F-16 Aggressors getting wiped out by F-15s. Modern warfare seems to be about networked systems all sharing information and working as a team to form absolute battlespace dominance (in concept) - the F-22 is just a single node. Anyone basing their air force on individual kinematic capabilities might as well bury the jets in the sand.
-
Some great points JM Even when people are getting the games / add on's for free they are picky and want this / that / the other. honestly give a flight simmer a gun he'd shoot himself in the foot!
-
Are you copying over an old options.ini or versions .ini into the new install - might be the cause
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk...d-asia-21930280 China 'buys fighter jets and submarines from Russia' China has agreed to buy 24 fighter jets and four submarines from Russia, Chinese state media report. It is reported to be the first time in a decade that China has made a large-scale military purchase from Russia. Two of the submarines will be built in Russia and two in China. The deal, signed just before last weekend's visit to Moscow by the Chinese President, Xi Jinping, comes as both sides increase military co-operation. Correspondents say Moscow and Beijing are trying to counterbalance what they see as American military dominance. China is buying 24 Su-35 fighters and four Lada-class submarines, reported the Communist Party organ the People's Daily and China Central Television (CCTV).
-
Typical - no wonder shes laughing!
-
WW1 and WW2/Korea guns only sims have always sold well - the concept of blasting away guns only in a massive slow furball has always appealed. So where is the F-4K with fully clickable pit and all the switches and avionics simulated....................considering that would probably take as long to dev as the entire War Thunder game did - how many millions would be waiting to snap that up with the 1000 page PDF.....................
-
Well the Taliban, Iraq (2003) etc have not had any air power to throw up - but there are air forces with such threat aircraft (and many other types) in existence - its not a hypothetical threat If you read the thread its totally irrelevant what is being faced now - its whats required in the future that matters. The Battleship was rendered obsolete by the aircraft carrier (even more technically advanced) - the last being built in the 40s then the concept was scrapped When something comes along and renders stealth obsolete then you can that analogy - but I don't see how you can use it here.
-
Same here - some weather front is bringing in arctic winds from northern Europe - bloody freezing with snow everywhere nice pics
