|
Your bombing run looked actually like it was right on target, except you hadn't accounted for the tanks continuing to move forward. You hit spot on where they WERE, but they just scooted past the edge of your bomblet pattern by the time of impact.
|
# ? Feb 12, 2014 09:48 |
|
|
# ? Apr 17, 2024 22:29 |
|
In regards to the Phantom and f-104, here's a chapter from an interesting book I found on-line with a lot of cool info on what it was like to be an RAF pilot at the tail of the Cold War. http://www.projectoceanvision.com/vox-06.htm Apparently, you shouldn't try to take the A5 pass near Snowdonia in an f-104 piloted by a crazy german. Also included: Chasing Bears, playing with Aardvarks in NATO training, and pigs in squadron t-shirts. I'm still reading through the whole thing, it seems like an interesting resource.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2014 17:02 |
|
Well, I'll be. They managed to make a gun as effective as Not-Sidewinders. Though they were all pretty awful.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2014 17:54 |
|
I'm not sure what to be more bemused by: the Falcon's ridiculously unforgiving window for launching it or the fact that its seeker cover is at risk of shattering. How can you get missile design so horribly wrong? How?! As for the roll indicator on the HUD, the only time I can see it being useful is if you're flying in cloud and you're attempting to avoid entering an unintended turn. By the way, I apologise if this was already mentioned or answered, but to whom are the yellow messages addressed? I know red is for the player, and blue is for friendlies, but I don't think yellow's ever come up. Regardless, have the tale of Wing Commander Walter 'Taffy' Holden and his accidental ride in a Lightning: In 1966 at RAF Lyneham, one of the Lightnings stationed there was suffering a mysterious electrical problem on take-off. In an attempt to ascertain what was wrong, Taffy (the commander of the maintenance unit based at Lyneham) tried to reproduce the issue. The aircraft had safeties installed on its ejection seat to prevent accidental ejection, the canopy had been removed, and the undercarriage was locked in position. The Wing Commander was not wearing a helmet, either. This will all become important in just a short moment. Taxying up and down the spare runway failed to reveal the issue, so Walter tried moving the throttle more forcefully and accidentally put the Lightning's engines into reheat, causing the jet to streak forward. Walter attempted to get the engines out of afterburner, but for whatever reason he could not. As if this wasn't bad enough, up ahead there was a fuel bowser crossing the runway (and futher along there was a large transport preparing for take-off on the main runway). Luckily, the wing commander managed to miss both of them, but he was starting to run out of room (the perimeter fence was getting uncomfortably close). Pulling back on the controls he took to the air. The good news: he had undertaken some flight training. The bad news: it was in Chipmunks and Harvards (the RAF version of the T-6 Texan). So he had ended up taking a massive leap from elderly machines that could only barely kill you at worst to what was frequently described as the "Ferrari of the Skies". And he had no choice but to attempt to land it. He decided to test the controls (having remembered how to remove the throttle from the military power setting), and found that it was controllable even for a complete novice like himself. Flying it in the circuit the wrong way around (though he could hardly be blamed for it), he tried landing but was too fast and high. His second shot ended just as poorly. On the third go he managed to land, albeit cutting the braking parachute because he tried to land it like a tail-dragger. The Lightning came to a stop 100 feet away from the end of the runway, and the wing commander promptly fainted after shutting down the engines. Unsurprisingly his nerves were shot to pieces afterwards for quite some time. As for the aircraft, it's now on display at Duxford. So the moral of the story is as follows: you too can fly the English Electric Lightning (if you have some rudimentary flight training and an intimate understanding of its systems).
|
# ? Feb 14, 2014 22:48 |
|
Soup Inspector posted:Regardless, have the tale of Wing Commander Walter 'Taffy' Holden and his accidental ride in a Lightning: The radio interview about the accident is a short but great listen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfeN3FoZYj0&hd=1
|
# ? Feb 14, 2014 23:18 |
|
Cooked Auto posted:The radio interview about the accident is a short but great listen: Nice find! I wasn't aware of this radio interview.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2014 23:50 |
|
Soup Inspector posted:Nice find! I wasn't aware of this radio interview. I remembered it from, I think it was, the Cold War Air thread on TFR. Which is almost a thread I recommend reading parts off if you like this LP.
|
# ? Feb 15, 2014 00:26 |
|
S09E02: 1968.08.23-24 (Laser Pointer of Doom) 1968.08.23 Farmers are coming, did you bring your CAP? The mission video? The mission video In which I'm not really sure, where I was going with all that rambling That's how you do it! More or less... 1968.08.24 I forgot to screenshot the map. We're sent to stop some tanks squeaking their way towards Hamburg. The mission video In which the episode earns its title We could've done it better, and with fewer losses. As things stand, however, our roster has gaps No prisoners, no wounded. If someone got shot down during these four missions, they're either perfectly fine, or dead. Now for a little side episode, and off to... another Phantom. There's always another Phantom. P.S.: Soup Inspector posted:Anyway, another difference between the Air Force and Navy Phantom was that the latter had an extendable nose gear to ensure it was at the correct angle for take off. The Royal Navy's Phantom had a double extendable nose gear because RN carriers were smaller (and I imagine the RN Phantom - being powered by the Rolls Royce Spey and hence on the underpowered side - probably needed the extra boost). I'm not sure if this counts as a "generic" difference, though. Triggerhappypilot posted:Oh yeah, another difference between the Air Force and Navy phantoms is that the early Air Force Phantoms had a second set of basic aircraft controls for the backseater so that he could do simple things like landing the plane or holding a course. Of course, with better autopilot systems, this role became entirely unnecessary and he was then replaced with a WSO just like in the Navy phantoms. SelenicMartian fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Feb 18, 2014 |
# ? Feb 15, 2014 10:28 |
|
It's kind of weird how this game can seem either completely unfair or laughably easy, depending on whether your missiles are worth a drat or not.
|
# ? Feb 15, 2014 12:10 |
|
It was kind of neat seeing air to ground guided weapons that appeared to be worth the investment. How does the Paveway in SF2 compare to the Walleye we used earlier? Anyway, another difference between the Air Force and Navy Phantom was that the latter had an extendable nose gear to ensure it was at the correct angle for take off. The Royal Navy's Phantom had a double extendable nose gear because RN carriers were smaller (and I imagine the RN Phantom - being powered by the Rolls Royce Spey and hence on the underpowered side - probably needed the extra boost). I'm not sure if this counts as a "generic" difference, though. Gothsheep posted:It's kind of weird how this game can seem either completely unfair or laughably easy, depending on whether your missiles are worth a drat or not. I think it's because a lot of the air combat in this game looks like it relies upon setting up good missile shots early and frequently. That's something that's a lot more challenging if your missile of choice is prone to unreliability. Soup Inspector fucked around with this message at 01:59 on Feb 16, 2014 |
# ? Feb 15, 2014 20:31 |
|
Soup Inspector posted:It was kind of neat seeing air to ground guided weapons that appeared to be worth the investment. How does the Paveway in SF2 compare to the Walleye we used earlier? I added the only important piece of info from the video 0 to the second post, the subtitle colour coding. Yellow's for the player's squadron.
|
# ? Feb 15, 2014 20:50 |
|
SelenicMartian posted:If you don't screw up the launch, the Paveway's lock is rock-solid. Walleyes, and even Mavericks, get distracted sometimes. Oh, I see! I'm kind of surprised the Maverick can get distracted (at least in SF2, where "later" seems to equal "100% operability"), but nothing is perfect I guess. I can't believe I managed to forget something you mentioned in a video already (though this is something that happens to me a lot ). Soup Inspector fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Feb 15, 2014 |
# ? Feb 15, 2014 21:07 |
|
Oh yeah, another difference between the Air Force and Navy phantoms is that the early Air Force Phantoms had a second set of basic aircraft controls for the backseater so that he could do simple things like landing the plane or holding a course. Of course, with better autopilot systems, this role became entirely unnecessary and he was then replaced with a WSO just like in the Navy phantoms. 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?
|
# ? Feb 15, 2014 22:15 |
|
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 |
|
I imagine that much like the Walleye, everything would be handled by the WSO. Nowadays with the advent of MFCDs both the pilot and WSO can share most if not all workload as needed, but back then due to the nature of how the systems worked you couldn't just hook the pilot's radar scope up to the wing pylon's output and expect it to function - radar screens were often just a simple electron gun taking electromechanical inputs rather than the sophisticated digital systems they are today. Even if you had a proper TV display for the pilot's radar in order to save cost and weight it'd generally be monochromatic. Some images I've seen of F-4 cockpits show that the pilot's radar scopes are reddish-brown with orange blips, while others are grey with green blips, both of which seem to be electron gun displays. So yeah I'd guess the Walleye and Paveway imaging feed - in the F-4 Phantom at least - is just a simplification. Which is fine, although being able to access the WSO station would be a much more fun solution in twin-seaters.
|
# ? Feb 16, 2014 09:06 |
|
How did the screen work on the Skyhawk?
|
# ? Feb 16, 2014 09:40 |
|
The short answer is: hosed if I know. To actually answer your question, I think the A-4E and later received a small TV display in the cockpit that was linked to the wing pylons and received the input from the Walleye's/Maverick's inbuilt camera. What this actually would have looked like is beyond me, though I envision it as being a black and white image the same as Mavericks, with some black lines overlaid on the image. Sometimes TV displays were monochromatic however, with the image being sickeningly green, and the A-4 may have had one of these. Not that I don't enjoy answering these questions, but it's important to realise that I'm just some jackass on the internet who finds this stuff interesting, so it's very possible I've gotten/will get a lot of things wrong. Particularly with how cockpits function, there's a crushing dearth of info out there unless you want to dig through 40+ year old manuals, so I'm limited to just kind of looking at some dusty cockpit from some plane sitting in a museum and guessing how it works based on aircraft I do have experience with in simulators. edit: and I guess I should point out that the main difference between the simpler radar displays and a TV display isn't as much as you'd expect. They both use the same underlying CRT technology, and it might be theoretically possible to capture and draw an image to a radar scope but I doubt it has the same precision that later magnetically-deflected CRTs have. Makrond fucked around with this message at 10:26 on Feb 16, 2014 |
# ? Feb 16, 2014 10:12 |
|
I'm sure a lot of us have heard this story, but in the case of recovering and landing a plane on 'a wing and a prayer', as i'm sure some of us hoped would happen in video 1, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LveSc8Lp0ZE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Negev_mid-air_collision quote:On 1 May 1983, during an Israeli Air Force dissimilar air combat training session in the Negev, an F-15D collided with an A-4 Skyhawk. The pilot of the Skyhawk ejected and his aircraft disintegrated. The right wing of the Eagle was sheared off roughly two feet (60 cm) from the fuselage. This was unknown to the crew of the aircraft, pilot Ziv Nedivi and navigator Yehoar Gal,[2] as leaking fuel and vapors along the wing had prevented both from seeing what had happened to the wing.[3][4] Suspect Bucket fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Feb 17, 2014 |
# ? Feb 16, 2014 23:52 |
|
Bonus 1: A Floral Arrangement Alternate titles: "Flipping Off the Guns" or "Plane Dismemberment Special". A few AI-only planes added with DLC packs did not make an appearance in the earlier campaigns. Mission editor to the rescue! I have to warn, though, that if you for some reason prefer hearing me talk about stuff to guns firing and things exploding, there isn't much commentary. There's some, but there isn't a lot in terms of new tech to speak of. Dogfight 1 In which guns are everywhere Dogfight 2 In which the guns go out with a bang Now, someone here *wink-wink, nudge-nudge* wanted to say something interesting about the hardships of A2A radar development. That'd be a very handy addition after the next episode.
|
# ? Feb 17, 2014 09:13 |
|
Hehe. Reminds me a bit of when i'd play effin CHUCK YEAGER AIR COMBAT as a kid, and just make missions where I'd cream YAK-9's and ME's with a Phantom. Good times. edit: I like the Fighter Olympics idea Suspect Bucket fucked around with this message at 19:22 on Feb 18, 2014 |
# ? Feb 18, 2014 19:15 |
|
Speaking of Chuck Yeager, someone posted this at CombatAce forums a couple of weeks ago. "Chuck Yeager Sued by California Homeowners Group"
|
# ? Feb 18, 2014 19:39 |
|
Yeager is a complete rear end in a top hat (he and his family have been hyper aggressive about their Wikipedia article, and I wish I was allowed to copy the emails from them here, they're batshit-Sovereign Citizen levels of insane.) He is always suing someone or being sued by someone. He sued Virgin Atlantic for using his name as an example of a revolutionary aviator, because he didn't "permit" it. In other words, gently caress that guy.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2014 20:41 |
|
That's a shame. I always kind of looked up to him as one of the ultimate examples of talented pilots. Anyway, in regards to the latest video, I'm most familiar with the Flora - well okay, the Flora's predecessor, the Yak-15 Feather - from IL-2 (ditto the Me-109), so it was slightly surreal in some senses seeing them in Strike Fighters 2. A bit of trivia regarding the Feather: they just slapped a jet engine on a Yak-3 and more or less hoped for the best.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2014 22:34 |
|
Soup Inspector posted:A bit of trivia regarding the Feather: they just slapped a jet engine on a Yak-3 and more or less hoped for the best.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2014 22:55 |
|
That's sad, I always saw him as uncle grandpa sonic boom. Well, I enjoyed the video game. Not endorsing the namesake's batshittery. That game was also my first 'adult game', that was not a kiddie edutainment game. Also got me interested in fighter planes at an early age. Good times.
|
# ? Feb 19, 2014 02:40 |
|
Leif. posted:Yeager is a complete rear end in a top hat (he and his family have been hyper aggressive about their Wikipedia article, and I wish I was allowed to copy the emails from them here, they're batshit-Sovereign Citizen levels of insane.) At least his autobiography is pretty good
|
# ? Feb 19, 2014 03:34 |
|
Leif. posted:In other words, gently caress that guy. This makes me wonder if he knows about Charlotte and Japan's terrible (TERRIBLE ) revenge.
|
# ? Feb 19, 2014 04:28 |
|
Season 10. Linebacker I - Across Her Nose, Not Up It! (F-4J Phantom II) Linebacker I (and II) offer the same old Nam campaign routine, only both sides have slightly upgraded their arsenals. S10E01: 1972.05.08-10 (Jesus AIM-9H Christ) 1972.05.08 Escorting a few Intruders into the thick of it. Ah, another round of upgrades for familiar weapons. We shall sample the new arrivals. Let's see, how far I can take these jokers in four missions. It's peculiar, that the lowest ranks have the most kills here. The mission video In which there's a massive lecture The ultimate pure-bred USN Sidewinder enjoys slaughter. 1972.05.10 Recon, aka "reach the waypoint", can be exciting, right? The mission video In which everyone keeps whining about that Sam chap Meh. But it's not like we were supposed to kill anyone at all. P.S.: Our first case of fanart Galaga Galaxian posted:One more and you're an ace! And some Navy humour The Casualty posted:This update pleases me immensely SelenicMartian fucked around with this message at 07:32 on Feb 22, 2014 |
# ? Feb 19, 2014 06:54 |
|
One more and you're an ace! Selenic isn't kidding about some Chinese variants/derivatives of the J-6 barely looking like MiG-19s anymore. MiG-19 Nanchang Q-5 "Fantan" Galaga Galaxian fucked around with this message at 08:25 on Feb 19, 2014 |
# ? Feb 19, 2014 08:20 |
|
This update pleases me immensely I didn't mention it when I threw this pilot name in the pile, but Don "Dingle" Berry was my first CO when I was in the Navy. Just for the record, virtually nobody in the Navy has an intimidating or cool-sounding callsign like in the movies. Every pilot gets their callsign assigned to them, usually for something embarrassing. Callsigns like: - Itchy (got crabs in Bangkok) - Beavis/ Butthead (Pilot/ WSO team known for their taste in thrash metal, annoying laughter) - Bunyan (once ejected over a forest, his aircraft chopped down many trees) - Upchuck (use your imagination!) - Meat (accused of "meat-gazing" in the ready room) - Juarren (Mr. Warren once came about 5 seconds from accidentally dropping a bomb on Mexican soil, so his callsign got some Latin flare) - Fudd (a wascawwy West Virginian) - Snap (broke his leg in a "training incident" involving a sixer of beer and a Vespa) - Ninofor (pronounced 904, the error code for a Hornet which has landed too hard and needs maintenance. He 904'd four times in one month, which takes practice.) These are just some of the ones I remember! There were other pretty absurd ones.
|
# ? Feb 19, 2014 09:43 |
|
Wait, the guy's callsign actually was Dingle? drat, here I thought I was being witty/original.
|
# ? Feb 19, 2014 09:55 |
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:One more and you're an ace! Meh, he was clearly a spy for the North Vietnamese. We were doing the Air Force a favour. I'm wondering how on Earth Western observers figured out the Fantan was just a heavily modified Farmer, though. The Casualty posted:Interesting callsign stuff That's really cool! If you manage to remember any other callsigns, I'd like to hear about it. As for the update, perhaps I missed it in all the pretty explosions (and the cacophony of SAM launch warnings), but Selenic Martian didn't really go into much detail about why the SA-2s are suddenly more deadly. Are they just more accurate now by Act of Third Wire so that they don't just make a vaguely ballistic arc and call it a day?
|
# ? Feb 19, 2014 16:22 |
|
Soup Inspector posted:As for the update, perhaps I missed it in all the pretty explosions (and the cacophony of SAM launch warnings), but Selenic Martian didn't really go into much detail about why the SA-2s are suddenly more deadly. Are they just more accurate now by Act of Third Wire so that they don't just make a vaguely ballistic arc and call it a day?
|
# ? Feb 19, 2014 17:03 |
|
S10E02: 1972.05.12-14 (Hungry For Jam) 1972.05.12 There's a bridge we need to turn back into a LEGO kit. The mission video In which some things insist on never changing Wait, what did I hit? Not the mission video In which SA-2F's dirty secret is revealed 1972.05.14 Escort for a coastal strike? Whatever gets me away from SAM. Actually, the game really wanted us to fly to that target area on this day. I re-rolled the mission at least ten times. The mission video In which frigging ninjas are everywhere You can't say I didn't try. With all that our 4-mission roster looks like this: Enough of the Phantom. Here's the ending. The campaign reuses the screens we saw at the end of the Rolling Thunder. The text, not affected by the player's performance is: The last paragraph gives me the strangest feeling of deja vu. And yes, if you're playing this, you're expected to endure constant SA-2F bombardment from May to October. If you're lucky, you might dodge a hundred launches each month. Now imagine doing the the same on F-105 with the MFers on your tail.
|
# ? Feb 22, 2014 07:29 |
|
A campaign featuring a mercenary F-8 Crusader fighting a Democracy vs Communism proxy war in a fictional middle eastern nation you say? Fascinating.
|
# ? Feb 22, 2014 08:13 |
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:A campaign featuring a mercenary F-8 Crusader fighting a Democracy vs Communism proxy war in a fictional middle eastern nation you say? Fascinating.
|
# ? Feb 22, 2014 08:33 |
|
Oh, that is pretty cool. Mercenary mode is what first got me interested in SF2 a while back, but you saying it was kind of lousy was probably the biggest nail in the coffin in whether or not I actually picked up SF2. Still, it'll be nice to see just how terrible it is. A shame really, the whole mercenary fighter squadron idea is a great concept, even leaving Area 88/UN Squadron aside.
|
# ? Feb 22, 2014 09:02 |
|
Wait. Isn't the A6 unflyable? And yet they have them on the flight deck for you to crash into.
|
# ? Feb 22, 2014 12:31 |
|
Veloxyll posted:Wait. Isn't the A6 unflyable? And yet they have them on the flight deck for you to crash into.
|
# ? Feb 22, 2014 12:48 |
|
|
# ? Apr 17, 2024 22:29 |
|
SelenicMartian posted:Better. The Campaign Customizer DLC lets you easily insert mercs into any campaign, on any side. I didn't say I'm not doing Linebacker 2. One man, alone, betrayed by the country he loves. In his darkest hour, will he sell his services to the commies to get by?
|
# ? Feb 23, 2014 01:15 |