Righteous26

The US Army and USAF did something like this to open Operation Desert Storm in 1991 in Operation Normandy. Several Army AH-64As guided by a USAF MH-53 PAVE Low attacked an Iraqi EW radar site and made a large hole in their EW radar coverage through which the first coalition attack aircraft flew to strike targets in Iraq. The mission pretty much made then LTC Richard Cody's career. The US Army tried this again on 24 March 2003 and attacked an Iraqi tank brigade that was in a marshaling yard. This turned into a disaster when the AH-64Ds flew through a 40km long flak trap set by the Iraqis in an area that turned out to be their equivalent of the National Training Center and an AAA school. The tanks were bait. The US Army lost one AH-64D outright and had two battalions (6/6 Cav and 1-227th AVN) put out of the rest of the war because they were so badly damaged. In fact, some of the 1-227 aircraft were transferred to 2/6 Cav later in 2003 and still had bullets in the airframes.

Just punching out a few dozen pilots won't change much anyway. There is no chance for them to do collective training and learn the tactics, techniques and procedures that would allow them to make the most of the new aircraft. This is the big advantage the US has. The US can conduct large scale training events such as Red Flag in the desert outside of Las Vegas. Other nations show up to these events and everyone gets to see what the others are doing and work with them. This allows the US and other participants to develop planning and operational requirements for a conflict of almost any scale involving a large number of participants. This sort of thing doesn't just happen because you can field a lot of very good pilots. You have to train together in realistic circumstances to get it right.

There is a way to mitigate this if you take a flight of four to eight aircraft. Arm half your aircraft for air to air and half for air to ground. Be sure to keep your two flights with you until the enemy planes show up and then order the flight armed for air to air to attack them while the other flight attacks SAMs and AAA units that you target.

Check their weapons loadouts with the external object viewer. If they are loaded with ARMs, rockets and bombs then they are on a SEAD mission as well. They are likely following their mission orders. You may not be the only flight tasked to provide SEAD escort. You could order your wingmen to attack enemy aircraft at which time they will likely jettison all their air to ground weapons. Regardless, escort missions are a dicey affair as you will be ordered to intercept enemy fighters or destroy enemy AA units, but not both and will fail the mission even if you are able to destroy several enemy units because the escorted aircraft must generally survive the mission until a specific waypoint, usually waypoint five, they are not under your control and they tend to act suicidal. I avoid escort missions wherever possible because they are so easy to fail despite your best efforts.

I have the complete installer. It does it automatically. However, posts in other threads indicate that SF2 can be installed in any order so long as you have the July 2013 patch executables.

It seems the majority of the patches on this site are tested for the fully merged July 2013 version of the game. It is the version I run.

These are mission 7, 8 & 9.

These are several storyboards from my attempt at the Easter Offensive Campaign in the B-57G TROPIC MOON. I will post more as I continue the campaign.

Is there a way to adjust the gun effectiveness in SF2? The <=30mm guns all seem to be much too powerful.

As I stated above I got hit by two 14.5mm rounds according to the debriefing at the end of the mission. I fire at the vehicles from a much lower angle. The rounds should not be going through the top. Keep in mind that muzzle energy estimates assume that the round imparts all of its kinetic energy to the target and that may be a game engine issue as a round that passes through a sheet metal structure can not impart all of its energy to said structure. Simply adjusting the velocity or mass of the round opens up a new set of issues but adjusting the mass is likely the way to go as it should have less impact on accuracy. Here's something from 1977 on the issue of penetration. https://medium.com/war-is-boring/cold-war-coloring-book-taught-a-10-pilots-to-kill-soviet-tanks-a26385113bf0 The T-62 has less armor than the T-72.

I use the numbers the computer gives me in the post mission summary to determine how many times I hit the enemy and how many times they hit me. Those numbers are for all hits not just tracers. Ball rounds just punch holes in sheet metal. A 14.5mm round will not take a large component with it. The warheads are usually shock resistant and not armed on the pylons anyway. It takes at least a 10g acceleration to arm a missile warhead. Shooting it won't detonate it. If the motor is hit the missile will just leave the rail. This happened to an A-10 pilot in Desert Storm. The pilot indicates there were 378 holes in the plane. He also states that the ordnance he was carrying had at least 40 holes in it. He lost part of the hydraulics but no major assemblies appear to have detached. 14.5mm rounds just don't do that to aircraft especially those designed to survive 23mm rounds which was the Warsaw Pact standard for AAA systems supporting tank units when the A-10 was designed. Several of the holes shown in the video are 20mm plus. Here is the video link: That plane has far more than two holes in it. The pilot indicates there were 378 holes in the plane. He also states that the ordnance he was carrying had at least 40 holes in it. He lost part of the hydraulics but no major assemblies appear to have detached. 14.5mm rounds just don't do that to aircraft especially those designed to survive 23mm rounds which was the Warsaw Pact standard for AA systems supporting tank units when the A-10 was designed. Several of the holes shown in the video are 20mm plus.

Not at all. Two 14.5mm rounds do not tear the flaps off an A-10 and knock the AIM-9s off. A-10s have been hit with missiles and 57mm+ guns and had less damage than what I saw in the game. The GAU-8 30mm can't penetrate a T-72 from the front or sides at any range yet it takes only one or two hits to reliably destroy one regardless of angle.

Nevermind. I got it placed properly.

I have the CITYPORT1.bmp tile in my texture list but it does not display in the tile list in the TE. How do I use this tile? It is already sized to 256x256.

Irfanview allows you to batch process several files at once to resample, reformat and rename them. It is free for non commercial use and is available at irfanview.com.

Has anyone done a Red Sea terrain set?

Here is the map for F-22 TAW. This is the area I am looking for. Map_zps65dd12bf.bmp

Is there any way to move the text boxes in the campaign start screens? They are shaded blue in the attached picture.

Thanks. I made the changes I wanted to the basescreen.ini file and it shows the text boxes where I want them.

I looked at that file but it appears to relate to the campaign selection and setup screen that appears just before the screen in the original post. I see another file called campaignendscreen.ini but that appears to be for the end screen when the campaign is over. Is there a campaignstartscreen.ini that I am unaware of?

I have been testing blue side Hawk batteries in the desert map and have noticed that the location seems to have something to do with whether the missile launchers, radar and supporting AAA guns will show up in a mission. I believe that a large, static site like a SAM battery must be located near a logistics node such as a city or some of the vehicles may not appear in a mission. Further, the computer seems to prioritize inert, static objects such as the ICC, then the radars, then the AAA guns and finally the launchers if the entire system is not present during the mission. My Hawk batteries consist of two separate locations in the Desert_targets.ini file and consist of three launchers, one ICWAR, one HIPIR, one ICC and one supporting AAA gun of the computer's choice. The radius of each location is 200 meters, the centers are 100 meters from each other and the batteries are arranged in two half circles that complement each other.

I did not direct call the active units. I only forced it to put in the ICC as it appears to do nothing the PAR, ICWAR and HIPIR don't do already. The PARs, HIPIRs and ICWARs show up on the RWRs. My post is not about getting a specific unit to show up. I simplified that by using only Hawk B and associated equipment. The computer has no other choice. The point is that there seems to be some radius around the operational and strategic nodes on the map that may be linked to a supply route and these ranges aren't readily apparent.

I have two different packs that include the MIM-23B HAWK missile in them. There are significant differences in the _data.ini files between the two versions. I have included parts of the _data.ini files below. It seems the GKABS missile is much better across the board based on the numbers. Is there any way to rectify this or can the _data.ini files be used interchangeably? MIM-23B (GKABS HAWK 1.0.3) HAWK B (SF2 SAMS Pack) GuidanceType=12 GuidanceType=12 Accuracy=80 Accuracy=70 MaxTurnRate=15.000000 MaxTurnRate=15.000000 MaxLaunchG=6.000000 MaxLaunchG=3.000000 LockonChance=85 LockonChance=80 LaunchReliability=95 LaunchReliability=85 ArmingTime=0.400000 ArmingTime=2.000000 SeekerFOV=120.000000 SeekerFOV=60.000000 SeekerGimbleLimit=180.000000 SeekerGimbleLimit=135.000000 SeekerTrackRate=13.000000 SeekerTrackRate=13.000000 SeekerRange=55000.000000 SeekerRange=40000.000000 // MinLaunchRange=1500.000000 MinLaunchRange=1500.000000 MaxLaunchRange=39357.337000 MaxLaunchRange=40000.00000 Duration=60.000000 Duration=183.000000 CounterCountermeasure=50.000000 CounterCountermeasure=40.000000 NoiseRejection=60.000000 NoiseRejection=40.000000 CapabilityFlags=0x10000003 CapabilityFlags=0x10000000 // BoosterDuration=5.000000 BoosterDuration=5.000000 BoosterAccel=30.000000 BoosterAccel=16.722000 // SustainerDuration=21.000000 SustainerDuration=21.000000 SustainerAccel=10.000000 SustainerAccel=1.429000

Thank you for the simulator file. I have determined that there is a problem with the drag coefficients as well as they are too low. Also, the GKABS missile burns out at M6.75 and can travel 177km before its speed drops back below M1 in the range simulator. I made some adjustments and got this. The burnout velocity matches available information (M2.7) and the range is much reduced (40.8km).