|
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Quote:
To be double sure, save the text editor copy as a disk file like "tmp.txt" (in case of a power outage, say). Then if it barfs, you can re-reply to the original post, and copy and paste the text into the edit box. Naturally the time you don't follow this procedure is the time it will go off into the ether ... :) Cheers Andy |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Don and Andy,
Thank You! Good information is never a waste of anyones time. Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Any time I write up something long for the forums I do so in Outlook express first saving every couple of paragraphs to the drafts folder, then when it's done paste it into the forum post but, as Andy says, it's the time you forget is the time it craps out......... Murphys Law
Don |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Well as reported on the previous page, the UK has sold it's HARRIER fleet the U.S. for the USMC on the 25th.
http://www.defpro.com/news/details/30159/ Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Finnish CASA 295 seems to be missing from the OOB 5.5:
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...nsports-02232/ http://web.archive.org/web/200906260...tteet/2884.dsp First one received March 6th 2007. Second one received March 30th 2007. Fokker F-27's will be phased out of service. (12/2014?) |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Just wanted to put this information where it belongs. These videos show why the bomber/fighter bomber issue should see some improvement in the game primarily in the area of vision and to some degree targeting as these systems are tied into the on board weapons systems. I'm not all about air, though I have my favorites such as SPOOKY etc., as much as trying to improve elements of the game as much as my (Others) supporting refs will allow the developers to do so with the game architecture.
The newest version of LITENING is now pretty much on par with SNIPER and you will hear the comparison made in the first video. The key here is the range the video shot from an adjusted 11NM out on what appears to be an air museum as you'll see an SR-1 just above and to the left of the B-52. 1. http://www.lockheedmartin.com/produc...ATPVideo2.html 2. Next is an overview of it's capabilities, platforms to include helos (AH-1Z w/TSS shown.) and targeting video scenes. The portion I described as 25NM is actually 35NM, it's been awhile since I last looked, as indicated in the MBT Post #183 most recently, I've had some of this for awhile now as noted. http://www.lockheedmartin.com/produc...perVideo1.html 3. The last shows it's air to air capabilities, point being nothing on the ground or water will get away. Also at an extended range. http://www.lockheedmartin.com/produc...perVideo3.html This is my direction with the air issue though there are some EW improvements to be made on a handful of units such as the B-52 also. I acknowledge the MALD-J answer here as well-thank you! Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Between this and laser guided bombs maybe the Air Force can finally live up to it's claims.
|
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
My point exactly, if memory serves JDAM and other guided aerial weapons are already in the game. These pods just put the Precision back into the Precision weapons already in the game if you catch "my drift" here. But I have armor and helo issues to address first so unfortunately I will have to put this off a third year, besides Don is up to "a..es and elbows" with work as is anyway. There is some good work being done in other areas that we all might benefit from. But Jets... will be pri one for next year starting shortly after the holidays. I really feel this could be a pivot point for air in the game, we'll see.
Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Only if Andy is up for some significant work.
While it's, of course, impossible for me to know exactly how game results were generated without seeing the source code ... I do have a BS in Comp Sci, so I have a fair idea what it must look like based on the data the games uses and the observable results in-game. And it's going to involve significant work to the aircraft target selection, hit probability, anti-aircraft, and blue-on-blue code. |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Quote:
Don't forget it should also get some kind of CB Air vs Air thing going on. |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
The code, as is. works pretty well for WW II, Korea, or Vietnam. But it was never written with modern air capabilities in mind. For the simple reason they did not exist then the code was written :angel
|
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
On the contrary..... the base code for this was SP2 which was the "modern" game............ that is, unless you only count "modern" as being after 1996.
Don |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Quote:
|
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Then I shall proceed with Patch Post #1 for the 2012/2013 campaign. :cool: Well after the holidays and a game or two, I know those AI Chinese are plotting against my Thai troops! ;)
Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
1 Attachment(s)
Well as I try to stay on topic as much as possible, it would be embarrassing not to on a thread I started, with that in mind I'll start with the following first before I get to a highly rumored and classified USAF asset that will make the F-22 or F-35 look like well...I just can't make a reasonable comparison it's just that much faster, longer flying (No aerial refueling required.) and carries a much bigger payload. I'm surprised this picture even leaked out! It might be meant to keep the Chinese off balance after the embarrassment suffered by the U.S. earlier in the year over the J-20 unveiling while former SECDEF Gates was in China. Anyway here's the first...
1. This caused some confusion last year as to "who" is NAVAIR and what do they do. The air and weapons sections might be most useful as a "quick-look" tool in modeling these for game purposes. http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm The next came off the Defence Industry Daily site. 2. Now this USAF asset fell under the classified program name of "SLEIGHER" but after some further discussion to include NORAD they dropped the "ER". The new name is Survivable Laser-guided Express Integrated Gift Handling SYSTEM or SLEIGH for short. Pic: Attachment 11592 Amazing isn't it!?! ;) I hope however you celebrate it...Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!!!! Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
:doh:
LOL Yup I fell for it Merry *insert holiday* |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Quote:
In many respects USMC aviation is a component of NAVAIR. |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Quote:
|
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
The UK is concerned about the future of the F-35. Originally plans were for the UK to purchase the F-35B, however, with the longer delays in that part of the program to include a 2yr probation on the project imposed by the Pentagon last summer, the UK has now opted for the F-35C version for the new Queen Elisabeth Class carriers now under construction. And to an earlier question asked the current per unit cost stands at ~113 million dollars. Article is taken from the "DID" site.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...c7a078863d.4f1 I don't think it unreasonable for background to post this companion article on the carriers. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...updated-01630/ A change of pace or distraction seems to be in order about now!?! ;) Regards, Pat :capt: |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Jan 11, 2012
First production F-35B's delivered to USMC. Marine Corps student pilots will probably start flying the Lightning II around August 2012. News Article |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
What the average time from training on a new aircraft to deployment ?
Don |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Saw your post as I was ready to post on something different that surprised me which will follow...based on the info I provided concerning the Thai acquisition of the GRIPEN, about one year. See Page #3 Post #21 Item A3. this thread from last years Patch Post input.
Now for the surprise...we'll need to extend the service life of the German F-4 by 13 years as it stands right now. Current end game time is 2000. Before my time, here's a couple of refs. We cannot just increase end time unless it's done as a stop gap. The F-4 in Germany has undergone several upgrades since that need proper evaluation that the Patch Post provides or someone else's version thereof. Right now I have already plenty to support Dec. 2013 or 2014 as the best end date. Here's what got the ball rolling on this, because I thought they went away myself a handful of years ago from the LUFTWAFFE. The last ref is one of the most famous units in the LUFTWAFFE and the CO said for this article 2014, they are the last SDQ. to have and are a little plane heavy. As a side note 20 F-4 have been offered to CROTIA for free to replace their older MiG-21 fighters. http://www.defpro.com/news/details/31107/ http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123009465 http://www.touchdown-aviation.com/re...richthofen.php http://www.touchdown-aviation.com/re...richthofen.php The pictures are great and I like the idea if possible to at least offer country prototypical photos of equipment where practical and without causing undue stress. Have to get dinner going, I'm just a multi talented guy and CINCLANTHOME can use the break. ;) Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Sorry forgot to post the German F-4 UNITS are #293 & #294 for possible immediate or other life extension, sorry for the oversight.
Regards, Pat |
Quote:
A/ A German F-4's and B/ only used by the German OOB Don |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Quote:
"In far bigger trouble is the F-35A or JSF. It was once scheduled to begin training pilots and maintainers at the 33rd Fighter Wing the 'Nomads' at Elgin AFB, Florida in November 2009 but is still not doing so." "The F-35As belatedly started to arrive at Elgin last July, beginning with aircraft 08-0747. The base had half a dozen F-35As by mid-October, the sixth being aircraft 08-0751. But Michael Gilmore the Pentagon's test and evaluation boss, decreed that no one but a qualified test pilot could safely operate the fighters. Not a single F-35A sortie has been flown at Elgin." "The Marine Corps F-35B is in greater jeopardy than the Air Force F-35A. General Norton Schwartz USAF chief of staff has hinted strongly that the latter is a proven commodity- despite the paralysis at Elgin - and that he would gladly save the the F-35A, even if the F-35B is offered up on the altar of defence cuts." Regards, Warwick |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Quote:
Everyone "knows" the USAF "should" have total control over all aircraft assets in the USA. Heck, the US Navy may even like the new 5x larger aircraft carriers "essential" for air operations since there is no way USAF pilots could "safely" land on the current ones. |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
In my further efforts to provide timely information you'll be glad to know in regards to the F-35 the NAVY is leading the way-no surprise, did we not give you "An Officer and a Gentleman", "Top Gun", "TORA TORA" or "The Bridges at Toko-Rei(?)" anyway the program had a decent year in testing however many major issues were identified as well such as airframe cracks at 2000 hrs. vs. design at 8000 hrs. This document talks of delays from 2-15 yrs. for the programs covered. So I offer some med. to heavy reading. I recommend the Directors Intro, DOD programs for F-35 and others, USAF Programs you might find the
F-22 section most interesting, on the surface of it they seem "to be all in" on the F-22 and other U.S. programs of interest to you under the service headings. I think under the USA section was some mention of the successful TRUCK programs some might find interesting. :smirk:. And this is as official as it gets... http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2011/ And these next few provide some interesting analysis, of course, if you have been paying attention you'll already realize what the outcome was of the first issue brought up here... http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...-Taiwan-07106/ If not... http://www.defpro.com/news/details/31242/ Next... http://defense-update.com/20111213_d...r_defense.html Bombs Away!... http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...II-Bombs-07017/ Ahhh the Maple Leaf... http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...n-fighter-jets Well that should keep you busy for awhile it did me anyway and CINCLANTHOME says I have a "Big Storage Unit" on my shoulders though that could be interpreted many ways and all so true!?! Regards, Pat Don, A bonus for you and the rest of you designers this program is moving forward... http://defense-update.com/20111216_a...beersheba.html |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
This is the addendum to the last post. The ref is the SUN article concerning the shipping out of the UK HARRIERS and as noted earlier the GR.7 was RESET to the GR.9 standard. For as much as I hate to say it as we (The U.S.) benefited from the sale and given the recent UK events surrounding the F-35B (Dropped for the for the F-35C.) and the Billions of Pounds spent to RESET the GR.7 & GR.9 HARRIERS (We paid 110 million Pounds all 72 jets.), you have to wonder if there's not some second guessing going on there over the whole situation. Well you know what they say "Hindsight is 20/20" and again might apply here.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...cle4049164.ece For the CORPS they'll keep them flying until 2025+. But airframes are spares as well so by definition so will the UK versions because of the RESET completed in 2010 which is newer to the last such upgrades done to the AV-8 (Though electronic upgrades are on going at this time I believe.) unless my "learnard" friend from the CORPS has other info. Anyway as Gen. Sherman or his staff referring to him would say "I'm in high feather." today as Hi Ho Hi Ho it's off to work I go with a ...this is where you whistle...Hi Ho Hi Ho!! I really like those guys!?! Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Here's more then any sane person would want to know.
All USMC AV-8's upgraded to AV-8B Harrier II+ by 2003. Vertical takeoff Operational range 90 nautical miles with 3,062 kg of ordnance Short takeoff (366 m) Operational range 163 nautical miles with 14,061 kg of ordnance, 1 hour loiter APG-65 radar system Tracor ALE-39 countermeasures dispensers (x4) 7 hardpoints (6 underwing, 1 centerline, 13,200# of ordnance) AGM-65 Maverick AGM-84 Harpoon AIM-9 Sidewinder (max 4) AIM-120 AMRAAM (max 4) Conventional bombs (Mk 83, GBU-12, GBU-16, CBU-99/100, napalm) Boeing Aircraft Data AN/AAQ-28V LITENING targeting pod (FLIR, CCD camera, laser designator, automatic target tracker) LITENING II (1999, third generation FLIR) LITENING ER (2001, extended the target detection range) LITENING AT (2003, further extends target detection range, improved targeting accuracy) LITENING G4 (2008, new sensors, advanced target recognition, available in a kit form that allows upgrade of currently fielded pods) November 2007 Upgrade wiring and software to employ MIL-STD-1760 bus-based smart weapons, such as Joint Direct Attack Munitions. JDAM Upgrade Not sure if this can (or should) be incorporated into WinSPMBT. Intrepid Tiger II is the Corps’ homegrown jammer meant to disrupt IED radio detonators and intercept enemy communications. The Marines hope to put on UH-1 and AH-1 helos and are even testing a smaller version of the device on the RQ-7 Shadow UAV. Marine Corps Times Defense Tech |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Suhiir,
This is overdue, great info here especially on the LITENING Pods. The LITENING G4 was the advance needed to fully bring it up to par with SNIPER. Thanks again! If 2011 is any indication I'll starting on the 2012/2013 campaign sooner then planned. Time to "Troop Up" as pops used to say or code for you better get off your "as" before well you know!?! :rolleyes: Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
AGM-88E AARGM
Initial Operational Capability: Nov 2010 Weight: 795 pounds (361 kg) Speed: Mach 2+ Range: 60+ nm Guidance System: Millimeter Wave (MMW) transceiver, advanced digital Anti-Radiation Homing (ARH), and a tightly coupled GPS/INS, is capable of selectively engaging air defense targets even after radar emissions are shut down. Warhead: WAU-7/B (150 lb/68 kg) Platforms: F-16 C/J, F/A-18C/D, FA-18E/F, EA-18G, Tornado IDS/ECR, F-35 Defense Industry Daily NavAir Deagel |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb (SDB)
Employed in combat: October 5, 2006 Used by: United States, Israel, Italy Initial integration: F-15E, follow-on integration may occur with the F/A-22, F-35, UCAV, F-16, F-117, A-10, MQ-9, B-52, B-1, B-2 (the B-2 is set to carry between 64 and 216 SDBs on one mission) Weight: 285 lbs (129 kg) Fuse: Cockpit selectable functions, including air burst and delayed options Warhead: 206 lbs (93 kg) blast fragmentation The cited blast radius: 26 ft (cf 82 ft with 2,000-lb JDAM) Standoff range: More than 60 nm/69 miles (111 km) Most USAF aircraft will be able to carry (using the BRU-61/A rack) a pack of four SDBs in place of a single 2,000 pound (910 kg) bomb. The SDB has the same penetration capabilities as a 2000lb BLU-109, but with only 50 pounds of explosive. The warhead that has demonstrated penetration of more than 6 feet of reinforced concrete. The INS/GPS guidance in conjunction with differential GPS (using all 12 channel receivers, instead of only 5) and improved Target Location Error (TLE) it can achieve a 5-8m CEP. The munition, with a smart fuze, has been extensively tested against multi-layered targets by Wright Laboratory under the Hard Target Ordnance Program and Miniature Munitions Technology Program. The length to diameter ratio and nose shape are designed to optimize penetration for a 50lb charge. This weapon is also a potential payload for standoff carrier vehicles such as Tomahawk, JSOW, JASSM, Conventional ICBM, etc. Most effective in urban close air support, battlefield interdiction, Destruction of Enemy Air Defences (DEAD) lethal suppression and counter-air strike airfield attack roles. Against soft skinned vehicles and structures, armour, point emplacements, runways, aircraft shelters and SAM/SPAAG systems this weapon will be highly lethal. Less than effective is against deep/hardened bunkers, large infrastructure targets, large buildings, industrial plant, bridges, large trench systems, vehicle parks, infantry on the move and other area or large point targets. These remain the domain of larger specialized bunker busting weapons, or large explosive bombs such as the Mk.83/BLU-110 (1,000 lb), Mk.84/BLU-117/BLU-119 (2,000 lb), BLU-109/116/118 (2,000 lb), BLU-113/122 (5,000 lb). The USAF is planning to acquire 12,000 fixed-target versions and a like number of the moving-target version. The USN/USMC is likely to wait for SDB II when the F-35 enters service. Boeing Global Security Australia Air Power |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
1 Attachment(s)
Just a couple of interesting stories for some. The first is simply a milestone story. The C-17 GLOBEMASTER like most programs started as being a controversial but ended up working out pretty well as a medium lift, short takeoff transport. Next year will mark the end of production of them. The programs turned out so well they ordered more then planned for which with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was an opportune decision in maintaining lower flight hours across the board.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...-Orders-05283/Pic: Attachment 11626 C-17 GLOBEMASTERS heading in from sea and beyond flying past the new Cooper River Bridge connecting Charleston to Mt Pleasant S.C. to Chaleston AFB. Charleston is in the background left side. I used sail under the old bridge that was in the shadow of the new one to get into Charleston harbor from the NAVBASE with all it's history with Ft. Sumter, CSA HUNLEY (Not found then and still under water.) and the Battery. And the night life...well that was a little before CINCLANTHOME's time...just chalk it up to the mid 80's and in the NAV!?! ;) Next up a couple of USAF generals think the F-22 and F-35 would make a good team in the tactical and strategic air enviroment of the future. YOU THINK!?! http://www.defpro.com/news/details/31638/ Finally the NAVY has concluded tests on a revamped missile, so coming soon from the sky somewhere to your living room if you've been bad, the 4 for 4 Laser Guided MAVERICK!! :ahh: http://www.defpro.com/news/details/31611/ Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Posted in the APC & Green White paper threads. JSF is to be delayed under the new DOD Defence budget click on the PDF links withn the JSF para.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...preview-07285/ Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
5 Attachment(s)
Don,
Another answer to your earlier ? in this thread on how long it takes to train pilots until they get fielded in their planes. If you remember I responded by using the RTAF and their GRIPENS at one year. The below from Iraq supports that when you include their prop training as well in Iraq, just a little follow up from a different part of the world. From DID full article immediately below. Jan 20/12: Training begins. Gannett’s Military Times reports that: “The first of the Iraqi pilots that will learn how to fly F-16s recently arrived in Tucson with the 162nd Fighter Wing, an Air National Guard unit that specializes in training foreign pilots to fly F-16s, said wing spokesman Maj. Gabe Johnson. The Iraqi pilot is slated to start the academic part of his training on Jan. 23 followed by hands-on flying from February through September, Johnson said" http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...ighters-05057/ Early fallout from the US defence budget $500 Billion cutbacks: 1) The immediate effects for the USAF. http://www.militarytimes.com/news/20...ns-cut-013012/ 2) Australia to review it's F-35 but timetable as the F-35 gets pushed back again here. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nati...-1226257503229 Swiss and the F-5 TIGER II replacement. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...ts-f-5s-04624/Pics: Attachment 11645 Attachment 11646 Don you might or might not find the Swiss F-18C useful. Swedens GRIPEN on the move. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...ld-card-02401/ Pics: Attachment 11647 Attachment 11648 Hungrian GRIPEN C/D. SAAF GRIPEN D. Attachment 11649 Czech GRIPEN C/D. Again these might be useful or not. But are easy on the eyes!?! The GRIPEN D is the advanced two-seat air to ground attack version. See Post # Item . for further details on this fighter (C), fighter bomber (D)it has really come on in the last couple of years as the cheaper, stealthier but highly reliable alternative to the EUROFIGHTER and RAFALE. All articles from DID. Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
:doh: For the last post; Pg. 3, Post #21, and Item A3. Focus on the SAAB Group refs. for GRIPEN.
Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Pat. this is frigging nonsense
BE CLEAR OR STOP POSTING. if you screwed up the info correct it don't send me on a wild goose chase back to "Pg. 3, Post #21, and Item A3". AM I CLEAR ? I AM NOT HAPPY. What is wrong in the last post. I am NOT interested in playing guessing games. Don |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Don,
Only the first part dealing with the training issue was really meant for you in particular as indicated in the lead to your earlier question on aircraft training. The rest were general articles of interest for anyone interested. In the last para I forgot to enter the information as to where someone who wanted could find more information on the GRIPEN C and D without getting deeply involved with a web search as I had already provided this in dealing with the Thai GRIPEN last year for 5.5. Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Couldn't get this in with the last Post in time but this is big news...and as this will be one of the largest fighter buys of the last 20 years, Indias M-MRCA competion has chosed a winner-finally-well maybe-given their history thus far-could be-if and when the contract gets formaly signed-then again-yes that's how things can happen; remember 30 years to get the ARJUN program going. Anyway RAFALE beats EUROFIGHTER and all others, so far anyway.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...changes-01989/ Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
This will be one of the largest fighter buys of the last 20 years, India's M-MRCA competition has chosen a winner-finally-well maybe-given their history thus far-could be-when the contract gets formally signed-then again-yes that's how things can happen, remember it took 30 years to get the ARJUN program completed. Anyway RAFALE beats the EUROFIGHTER and all others, so far anyway.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...changes-01989/ Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
I've posted some articles concerning the issues with the F-22 over the last year with has cost a pilot his life. Several pilots are now refusing to fly the F-22 over the hypoxia issues amongst others. Some in congress and in the field are openly questioning if the plane is simply too advanced. The ref below covers the pilot issues from the 60 Minutes news program airing this Sunday @ 7pm EST. This is for FYI...
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_16...;videoMetaInfo And a little news on the F-35 front which is indicative of the current overall situation in delaying buys or reducing them to include both which is the case for the U.S. where it's looking more life late 2016 to 2018. Some are already saying the Russian/Indian PAK-FA is looking like it'll be a better fifth gen fighter overall. http://www.defensenews.com/article/2...text|FRONTPAGE Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
We all know there are problems with the F-22,and thats no surprise when the design is so out of the box.
I doubt a few test pilots biting the dust will kill a program thats been in development for so long and billions,dare i trillions,spent thus far. Remember the P-38 was considered a death trap(seems it tend to be unstable) until Lindberg flew it,then the problem was fixed. Don't listen to the talking heads who don't know,the F-22 would and will be an excellent state of the art jet when they get the bugs worked out,if the sheer cost of it does not make it not feasable,and congress kills the program,what a shame that would be! That said doubt we be seeing the F-22 in this game for awhile. |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Well life and two weeks of poison ivy (AND CONTINUEING.:cold: ) has served to push my cut off of 1 Jun to the "line in the sand" starting now with the last of the news posts to ready my inputs for the 2012/2013 Campaign. All newspaper stories are from DID unless noted. So by the first topic I came to we start...
1. UK reverses it's 3020 SDSR decision of which this was the "linchpin" for it, MOD will go back to the F-35B vice F-35C. this will save 2BPds QE carrier modifications and get the fleet air arm operational 5yrs. sooner by 2018-2020 vice 2023. Just follow the "bouncing" ref dates. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ter-plane.html http://www.defpro.com/news/details/31773/ TRACK. 2. With India's MMRCA program settled (Sort of.) Brazil's F-X2 Program restarts again...slowly. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...program-04179/ TRACK PROGRAM. 3. PAK-FA could be pushed out of the game, at least for India, Russia is still up in the air. http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2012/...ussian_16.html http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...fighter-03133/ TRACK. 4. Afghanistan gets the C222/C-27A. Paras will be the issue game wise. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...r-Force-05094/ VERIFY Paras/ADD. 5. Future of Canada's CF-16s future tied into it's decisions about the F-35. You will note issues like these will have a significant bearing on who gets the F-35 and who doesn't by games end. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...n-fighter-jets http://www.defpro.com/news/details/34200/ TRACK. 6. Chile looking to replace it's F-5E by 2015. Or will it? See what another country is doing with theirs in the Patch Page in the Fall. http://www.dmilt.com/index.php?optio...rica&Itemid=58 TRACK. 7. Israel has questions about the F-35, this made for interesting reading. http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/958/ FYI. 8. Asian U.S. partmers need fighter upgrades to counter growing threats to the region. http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/1003/ http://defense-update.com/20111213_d...r_defense.html FYI. 9. Finnish F-18 to get new weapon in 2016. Let's call this the weapons section as well. http://www.defpro.com/news/details/32980/ 9A. U.S. tests JSOW-ER successfully. http://www.defpro.com/news/details/32405/9.B. USN/USMC complete LG MAVERICK testing 4 for 4. http://www.defpro.com/news/details/31611/ 9.C. India orders PGM from Israel for MIRAGE 2000. http://www.dmilt.com/index.php?optio...asia&Itemid=569.D. USAF B1B conducts it's first op using the new LJDAM. What's useful here also is the table showing current aircraft capable/using the JDAM and current country users as well. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...rstrikes-03313/ 9.E. Korea orders CBU-1050/B Sensor fuzed weapons. http://www.dmilt.com/index.php?optio...asia&Itemid=56 9.F. To get to Irans Nuc Facilities the USAF has a new MOP for "deeper" cleaning. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...172/#more-3172 9.G. PAVEWAY IV ready for the RAF. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...ritiain-03644/ 9.H. Philippine OV-10 now armed with LG bombs. http://www.dmilt.com/index.php?optio...asia&Itemid=56 FYI/TRACK/ADD? INPUT WOULD HELP HERE FOR THIS STUFF-THANKS! 10. Italy has officially replaced it's last F-16's. http://www.defpro.com/news/details/35789/ MODIFY ALL ACTIVE F-16 END DATES TO JUNE 2012. 11. Czech Republic likely to extend GRIPEN lease...they did recently. http://www.dmilt.com/index.php?optio...rope&Itemid=57 FYI. 12. Japan offered the F/A-18E SH BLOCK II in it's F/X Program. http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/889/ TRACK PROGRAM. 13. India's MMRCA Program selection. http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/951/ http://www.dmilt.com/index.php?optio...asia&Itemid=56 http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...changes-01989/ TRACK/ADD. 14. Russia linked to the Chinese J-20? http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...77H1AZ20110818 FYI. I have more but the "PI" is bothering me. Will hopefully finish this well...later today. Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Pat, don't play in the poison ivy and Canada doesn't have "CF-16s" :)
Don |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Well I think as much as I really like the "complete package" the game offers (And I wouldn't want it changed.) maybe the modification of culling out the fighters for some countries is looking real good to me right now. It's really hard to get around the "vision" issue that these targeting pods such as Sniper, Litening, Raptor and DB-110 to name a few would have on the game. It's almost like the discussion that was brought up a couple of years ago concerning the Excalibur PGM in the SPA/SPAA Thread when some felt it was too expensive, it wouldn't be used and if it was in a limited capacity. Well now it seems with the realities in the field the only "dumb" round being used is a "broken" Excalibur round. Now these PGM rounds are being used down to the 81mm levels (Though more recently.) as a matter of routine. I won't do it, but if "you" want to it's posted and you where to find it. So we have the same situation with the Pods, Russia already and as far as I can determine is the only one, that has planes with a TI/GSR of greater then 40. I think the number was 5, 4 are what would be considered Fighter-Bombers and 1 or 2 Recon jets whose vision was at 60. These Pods can "see" beyond that as again I've already posted. We've built in very good to excellent AA capabilities so the game is good there, my concern is the number of planes that would conversion to the Pods.
Just taking the USAF and three plane types the F-15/16 and F-15E. I understand the following...many smaller countries would have to keep the F-16 as it's in some cases their most advanced plane and the backbone of their AF, and the USAF does use them for COIN/SEAD roles so in these cases they should stay. But the F-15/16 PRIMARY ROLE is that of a Interceptor Fighter. Let them fly CAP and be removed as an FB. Let the F-15E do what it's designed for and be the Fighter-Bomber. You'd clear at least 50+ slots (And no I haven't counted them, but can.) easy from about the mid to late sixties to the present just in the USA OOB. But otherwise I'm prepared to do the work. But first what's it take to train in the use of these Pods? Well for the DB-110 a little over 6 months for the Greek AF. https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&m...=core&_cview=0 More on the DB-110... http://defense-update.com/products/d/db110pod.htm http://www.paffalcons.com/news/2011/...ds_1212011.php More from the USAF... http://www.af.mil/information/factsh...t.asp?fsID=101 http://www.af.mil/information/factsh...t.asp?fsID=103 http://www.af.mil/information/factsh...t.asp?fsID=102 The Poison Ivy isn't looking so bad now!?! Just trying to reduce the over crowding, redundancy and the workload to get these issues up to date and in the game like any other piece of equipment we put in. It's gotta be a level playing field all the way around if it's going to be in the game. Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
If you've been following along on Don's Mi-8 and Mi-24 Thread what I've done is take out the MiG issue and copied them to here. These are items 1-7. Why? If new please follow the progression, if not new to this discussion go directly to item 8 below.
1. Luftwaffe JG 73 flew the MiG-29G (NATO standard.) until ~2004 when they were sold to Poland. JG 73 flew them as an aggressor squadron but was also assigned an air defence role as well. Many of the former DDR aircraft flew with the Luftwaffe for years especially the transport aircraft that filled a deficiency in the Luftwaffe capabilities at the time. Germany just about RESET the MiG-29s to get them to the NATO "G" Standard, Hinds, Transport to even improve the depot level maintenance of the older MiGs they got. All DDR aircraft were serialized, painted and marked into the Luftwaffe system. MiG 29 and later MiG 29G as upgraded along with the larger Transport aircraft are a definite yes. The MiG 24/or 25 (Can't remember now.), MiG-21 & 17 and other aircraft though maintained were either sold off or scraped with no record that I have found to indicate they were actually ever used by the Luftwaffe. 2. To set the record straight on the DDR fighters that transitioned into the Luftwaffe they would be the MiG-21, 23 & 29 also the export version of the Su- 17UM3/Ex Su-22UM3/UM3K (FITTER-G) primarily used as a trainer and also the final version Su-17M4/Ex Su-22M4 (FITTER K). Don't know if they processed the Recon Su-22M4R. Sorry for any confusion, I'll blame it on catching up on the OGs after work!?! Now to figure out what to blame it on when I start submitting the Patch Posts, but it'll have to be good though!?! Found none of these jets (Except the MiG-29) in Luftwaffe colors on the net to include museums in country. 3. Alright German reunification is officially marked on Oct. 3 1990 after the DDR signed treaties with W. Germany and a separate one with England, France, Russia and the U.S. as required by treaty after WWII. We know the DDR NVA transport planes and LSK/LV MiG-29 (MiG-29G until Dec. 2003.) were fully operational w/Luftwaffe. This is worth it just for the DDR in flight pics alone throughout the thread as I couldn't find any good ones on Bing or Google. http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...=mig-29&page=4 These guys seem "serious" (Sounds familiar!?!) and might provide some useful info from the Wehrmacht, DDR to present. 4. For those that are interested, earlier this evening I asked the key questions that might have some impact on both the East Germany and Germany OOB's. Link provided below so as not to violate any one's possible Forum rules. By way of info RAMJET/Steve was a MiG-29pilot for both the Luftverteidigung/Luftwaffe after unification. I won't be hard to find, currently on Pg. 7. 5. By way of an update... As the DDR/German MiGs were the MiG-29A it's becoming clear that they were purely used as interceptors as designed. The MiG-29S had some very limited Air Ground capabilities, but it was the MiG-29SM which was designed to fulfill this role. It was this version that is the only one that could be called an F/B though again it's primary role still was to be an interceptor. Also before the MiG-29S all previous versions had very limited range, think earlier Bf-109s, you didn't want to get in a dogfight with it but it wasn't going to hang around long either. So here's where I'm at for my list... 1. Germany OOB delete both the MiG-29 and Mil-8T. It is now clear the Luftwaffe MiG-29A/G was only used as an interceptor. Also it was the ONLY aircraft from the DDR to fly in the Luftwaffe beyond the evaluation phase. 2. East Germany OOB the same issue as above with the following possible exception of the SEAD version for which I'm awaiting conformation. This one in my mind is possible though not likely. This is why after all the Russians gave the DDR the very good MiG-23ground attack aircraft, also the DDR flew the most advanced versions of it as well which might be an issue of it's own in the OOB. I of course have other data but the site given in the previous post is confirming all of it thus far and they've been very helpful to my requests. 6. Also several East German units will need to be deleted to include all MiG-29A and MiG-29M (Which as now known they never had.) which like the MiG-29M includes the Mil-24W HIND. Below is the response I recieved concerning the East German use of the MiG-29A as a possible SEAD unit as posted in the previous post as well. Note: A little tone change which is my fault as I should've indicated "configurations offered" or some such as my wording caused the response. "Pat, What you say here about four East German MiG 29s being used for SEAD doesn't sound reasonable. As an air superiority aircraft designed for air defence why would the East Germans use four for SEAD purposes? That role would be better suited to a unit armed with the SU 25 and probably assigned to a Soviet unit rather than divert four MiG 29s from their basic role. Just my thoughts. Regards, Gordon" And another response I just got from "RAMJET"/Steve LSK/LV(DDR)/LUFTWAFFE MiG-29A pilot... "The LSK/LV as well as the Luftwaffe used the MiG-29 only as a fighter aircraft. There were some trials in the air-to-ground role with unguided rockets in the DDR times if I remember right, but these were just trials." If you again wish to follow along... http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...=354756&page=7 Bottom-line... GERMANY OOB... DELETE UNITS 307 MiG-29 & 327 Mi-8T East Germany OOB... DELETE UNITS 580, 910 & 911 MiG-29M & 125/927 Mi-24W HIND (Never had either in service.) Now to fix the confusion "next door" I caused. One OOB at a time next the MiG-23, if they feel like it. 7. The MiG-29 issue is dead to me at this point as far as the Germany's are concerned. The only useful variant in the F/B version again was the MiG-29SM that for now it seems, only Russia flew. Interceptors are not good fighter bombers normally, as is already posted in this thread by the guys that flew them. The MiG-23 and it's dedicated full time mostly F/B offshoot the MiG-27 filled that role and were contemporaries to the MiG-29. In the first ref you'll notice the MiG-29A in Luftwaffe colors. http://www.military-today.com/aircra...29_fulcrum.htm http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/mig27/ So far the MiG-23 issue for East Germany looks good and they've already responded "next door" though I've seen some German info to suggust only the MiG-23BN might have been used as F/B and M versions as dedicated interceptors. Will get clarification. Seems the Soviets didn't trust them much for some roles as already pointed out concerning the SEAD issue. Kind of makes me wonder how many MiG-29 slots could be cut out of the Russian OOB. 8. A couple of times above I mentioned that the first somewhat ground capable MiG-29 was the MiG-29S. So what? Well to get "here" I established "linkage" or a "chain of custody" for those of us who've handled sensitive materials. So for whom do I speak of now is this "linkage"? Poland. Poland was already in possession of about 12 MiG-29A interceptors then Germany leased/sold their 22 MiG-29A (As noted already NATO "G" standard.) giving Poland a total of let's just call it 35 MiG-29A Interceptors. You'll note the banner from where the following ref. is from. Also you'll note that East Germany, Germany and Poland do not get mentioned beyond the MiG-29A sections. You will further note (Again.) that MiG-29S is the first bomb carrying MiG. http://toad-design.com/migalley/inde...ig29-variants/A. A. I don't know the source of these bomb carrying MiGs and don't care, but these three countries didn't have them period!! But two of these countries share a common "bond" they were under the "guidance" of the Soviet Union who maintained a large military presence in both countries and I know for sure ICO East Germany there were at least I believe it to be 2 Regiments (Above ref and a couple of German refs I have as well.) of the MiG-29S. It's my theory that these are Soviet units in these OOBs. B. Poland did get all glass cockpits and are either looking into or have recently signed a contract to further update the Polish MiG-29 jets to the MiG-29 SNIPER Standard but again this ONLY improves it's interceptor capabilities. C. Poland DELETE UNITS 148 and 556-558. Look at the bright side, at least the ANDERS is back on track if they ever get that contract signed. Also speaking of Polish contracts, earlier this past week the contract was signed for an additional 200 ROSOMAKS, but that's for another thread. D. One of my favorite killing time games "Connect the Dots" has turned into my other favorite game here "Going Down the Rabbit Hole Again!" 2020 PLEASE get here!?! Only kidding. ;) Now you know why I've been wanting to "type" this equipment for consistency sake. E. You designers might find the last ref very useful on all MiG types offered especially on weapons for each type. Further the Weapons Tab seems to have very useful info in it as well. Regards, Pat |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
As I just got home and we have an early start in the morning for wedding, I'll be brief.
1. It is now known that the DDR wasn't assigned a ground support role until the 1980's. When asked if 1980 was viable it generated no response next door and considering the back and forth, trust me, they would've indicated if there was a problem there. This then by definition means the LSK/LV only ground attack capable aircraft were the MiG-23BN and Su-22M-4. I have an LSK/LV OOB that has been verified as good dating to the early mid eighties. See below... http://www.topedge.com/panels/aircra.../kraft/nva.htm 2. What's it wash on this info? Basically I see every jet type going back to the MiG-15 being deleted with the above two being the exception for the basically last ten years the DDR was around. 3. Based on the weapons available to both the MiG-23BN and Su-22M-4 we most certainly and increase the ground attack configurations of both types to at least five or six different UNIT types each. 4. The MiG-21M/UM RECON question (Again refer to the above ref.) I'll leave to Don, however based on the game turn cycle etc. I feel these wouldn't be added since they were photo recon birds and I believe that topic was addressed once before anyway. 5. Clearly now it should be apparent to everyone (Nationalistic feelings aside.) that if every country in the Warsaw Pact was submitted to the same treatment the DDR is now getting most would see the same things happen to their Air Forces of the Soviet era to include some NATO countries as well during that time period. Simply the Soviets ran the show to what equipment it got and how it would be used. All of the above has been discussed next door, I've already posted the sight a couple of times so have at it if you want. I will tie all this up in a neat bundle hopefully early next week and yes of course there are all those "pesky" refs. But this weekend is about old shipmates, families, CINCLANTHOME and certainly not work. For those celebrating it have a great and SAFE Labor Day weekend and don't burn the steaks!! To everyone else HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND!! Regards, Pat P.S. I guess I missed on the brief part again!?! :shock: |
Quote:
OK, I'm going to save Alice from a L O N G trip down the rabbit hole digging up info on all the warsaw pact nations and their ground attack aircraft NO we are NOT going to deleted every jet before the MiG-23BN and Su-22M-4 in the DDR OOB because in theory the DDR wasn't assigned a ground support role until the 1980's. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. If this game was set up strictly Human vs Human we could, theoretically, tell people that in the case of Warsaw pact nations, if no aircraft are available then they should buy some from the Soviet OOB as they would actually be the ones supplying ground attack support to whatever nation needed it ( if they were lucky.....). But the AI cannot do that. The AI cannot decide it needs aircraft then buy them from the appropriate OOB so there has to be aircraft available in the OOB for it to buy and if you need to rationaliize that, rationalize it as them being Russian aircraft on loan or on call. Don |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
The other problem, as YOU, Mr. Former-Squid, should know, is since about WW II almost every "fighter" aircraft made can carry at least a couple bombs. And the few designs that couldn't (the origional F4U-1 Corsair comes to mind) were soon modified to do so.
Aircraft are to few, to expensive, and too (potentially) useful to just sit on the deck because they have no ground support capability (other then their guns). That said... I'd like to see the ordnance loads on "fighter" type aircraft reduced to make them less bang for the buck then dedicated ground support models. But I know that ain't gonna happen because it would be WAY WAY WAY too much work. |
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:49 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.