|
Ooh this game looks pretty fun, shame I've never heard of it before. Though I do like flying modern fighters a lot more than old ones. That said the P-51 vs Early jet fighter setting for this first campaign is very interesting to watch. I eagerly await further missions.
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2013 16:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
The messages you get from GCI are pretty weirdly formatted, in that it's BRAA (Bearing Range Altitude Aspect), except they give a clock heading rather than a bearing. Doesn't it get confusing if you're in a turn when the message comes in? Also what did you do in that last picture? Is that an Egyptian naval force shooting SAMs at you?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2013 07:29
|
|
|
Attacking a Kiev in 1979 in a P-51. There's brave and then there's suicidal, you know 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2013 08:13
|
|
|
Hunter F.4 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
F-105D
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
This campaign is set in 1962 right? Trivia: Prior to 1963 the AIM-9B Sidewinder was designated the AAM-N-7 Sidewinder IA. Yea that's a mouthful. The 9B was, as demonstrated in the video, a very limited weapon system. It used a non-cooled, non-slewing IR seeker that frequently decided to shoot for the sun or the sun's ground reflection. And it was really only able to hit non-manoeuvring targets from within about 5 kilometres, if you were lucky (unlike SelenicMartian). Despite all that, the 9B actually has some confirmed kills against MiG-15s back in 1958. (I hope this isn't what the [REDACTED] above was saying as well.) VKing fucked around with this message at 12:33 on Nov 23, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2013 12:31
|
|
|
That circle on the radar is weird. At first I thought it was an aspect indicator, but it didn't move when the aspect of your target changed, so I'm stumped. Can the radar tell the altitude of whatever you have locked up?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2013 11:29
|
|
|
Tossing bombs, or "lofting" them as it's also called is still used today, but it's considerably easier when you have a CCRP system. I'm surprised the F-105D doesn't have any computed bombsights.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2013 11:23
|
|
|
SelenicMartian posted:It had something of the sort, it's just that the developer can't be arsed to model those. He considers it "more fun", when people manually release ordnance using unadjustable sights.  Does any plane in this game have CCIP or CCRP sights?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
Tracers are almost never fired in all-tracer belts. I've read somewhere that during world war II pilots would aim using the tracers, but they found that because the ballistics are subtly different from the regular rounds only the tracers would actually hit. Some squadrons stopped using tracers in their ammunition belts and recorded a much better hit rate.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
How the heck did you get two hits with your Sidewinders? Are they counting the ground a valid target now?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2014 09:31
|
|
|
Looks like the Matra ceased guidance because your radar lost lock, and those Shafrirs are starting to make AIM-9Bs look reliable.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
Use the Fire Tops yourself and give your wingmen the Fire Streaks. They can waste them all they want and seem to hit better with bad missiles anyway. Then smack your crew chief around until he jury-rigs some guns on your plane as well.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2014 15:36
|
|
|
There's actually a pretty cool post on the history of the Tu-128 in the Aeronautical Insanity thread over at AI. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3276654&pagenumber=395&perpage=40#post422385629
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2014 11:02
|
|
|
Triggerhappypilot posted:Also, is that Paveway targeting pod feed on the radar console accurate, or just a simplification that Third wire made so that you could see what you were targeting? Well, the F-4 really could carry a targeting pod, so that part is true. If the pilot could see the image/control the pod, or if that task was fully the domain of the WSO, I can't find any info on.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:F-15As with ground weapons? What happened to "Not a pound of air to ground"? RWS and TWS  :(Range While Search and Track While Scan) As others have mentioned, there are different advantages to both. TWS acquires contacts much slower because it has to track the target for several sweeps in order to calculate it's vector and build a "track file" on it before it's displayed on the screen. In some radars (didn't notice if SF2 did it or not), TWS shows regular RWS blips until the track file has the vector data for the contact. Once the track file for the contact is in the system the radar updates its vector with every sweep, but in between sweeps the speed and vector is extrapolated from the target's earlier motion. So if the target makes a very sudden movement just after it's been swept, the track will either suddenly be in a completely different place and aspect on the scope, or the track will be lost completely and a new one created for the "new" target. Where TWS really shines, though, is with AMRAAMs and other active-seeker AAMs. (Are AMRAAMs a thing in this game? If so I'll wait with doing a  post on the subject.)As for the RWS vs TWS debate, being an avid Falcon BMS player, I can tell you that in that game I use RWS much much more often than I use TWS. RWS is faster, shows more contacts, and has a wider field of view (technically TWS can have the same FoV, but only while searching). Though it helps that, in Falcon, RWS shows rate of closure on all the blips, so that sortof get some of the vector information in that mode as well.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2014 09:56
|
|
|
Obligatory crosslink to yet another glorious effortpost by MrChips in the Aeronautical Insanity thread.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
The GAU-8 in this game seems a bit overpowered. It's still only 30mm, and tanks (even back then) have a lot of armour. Refer to this handy A-10 colouring book. Also, from what I've heard people say of them (and how they're modelled in DCS), Mavericks are way way more temperamental about targeting and locking onto targets in reality than it shows in this game. I'd be surprised if you could get more than one or two off in one attack run. The gun barrels not rotating is just sad 
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:So I did a quick google search and, yeah, A-10s with drop tanks. The A-10 can indeed carry an external fuel tank, but it's only a ferry tank. It obviously can be dropped, but IIRC it's not self-sealing and is never used in for any combat mission. Unrelated: Weird nose probe thing on that top picture.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2014 15:24
|
|