Jump to content

Dragoon47

Members
  • Content Count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dragoon47

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday 10/24/1990

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS, F:AF/BMS, IL-2 1946/Blitz/BoX, FSX, RoF, WOFF.
  • Occupation
    Student
  1. Ah, so you're trying to get the ADF on a 0-180 radial during a runway course overfly? That might have been what confused me when it told me to reference the RMI. For some reason I thought the ADF and the RMI were connected.
  2. The manual mentions using the RMI on approaches using solely the RKL-41 ADF. I know I can use the RSBN for approaches, and that repeats on the RMI, and the RKL-41 is doing its thing when I'm in the pattern, but I was wondering what the priority is for the RMI. When RSBN and ADF are both on and tuned to the correct frequencies for an airfield that has both, does the RMI pointer point to the RSBN station, or one of the NDBs? Does the RMI pointer point to an NDB in the absence of an RSBN input?
  3. Thanks, looking forward to playing that mission through.
  4. That would seem to be the case, since changing it in the options had no effect. As a note I'm using Open Beta.
  5. I had this one as well, same deal, only in that particular training mission.
  6. Can't seem to figure out how to get this to work, any tips? Is it implemented?
  7. Easiest for level flight is the VVI on the aircraft. Another way is to match the AOA from the top right to your HSI by putting the aircraft on the correct position on the heading tape. I'd use the forst method, and confirm with the latter, though. This becomes more of an issue at night than anything else.
  8. Well, of course it is biased. As for cheap and low cost, and things like that aren't typically things I'd see a US fighter pilot hearing without cynicism (Ex-F-14 pilots come to mind, possibly). Alas, he doesn't seem to spend time on that, so moving on. He apparently didn't like the IRST. I'd imagine it would be more effective as a system with GCI, but GCI isn't something I'd see a NATO pilot appreciating (A fighter pilot, in their eyes, is probably akin to a captain on a ship; they get all the info, and call all the shots as mission commander). NATO pilots are given information by vari
  9. The Su-27's handling when fly-by-wire is bypassed is awful (It's a pain to control). Its maneuverability gets a boost (When you manage to control it, it gives certain advantages). A plane that is difficult to control, can still move through the sky well, just with pains taken by the pilot. That section you bolded taken as a whole instead of sound-byte'd gets you the meaning.
  10. Article uses AMRAAM Block 40 and Alamo 29A. One of the first things there.
  11. Well, having having read the article, I'd say he's either unsure or making a bad joke (Presuming of course, that he has 500 hours, and in those hours, he was able to test it properly). Quoting another on 12G stress also isn't surprising; I doubt they'd let him risk a perfectly good airframe if a test was already done on it. Most of the other stuff is rather standard fare though. Never been a big fan of GCI doctrine, and without doing due research on that aircraft beyond looking at Wikipedia once in a while, I've seen mentions of the idiosyncratic (Though I've also seen the word "tiring") av
  12. Not going to comment on the validity of the article, but "those are his words" doesn't cut it as an argument, really. "Probably" can also mean "stands a decent chance" at something happening, that it is probable, or at the least, intermittent. That happens to be the way everyone I know uses the word. I'd focus on things other than the altogether subjective and artsy usage of language to disprove an article, especially seeing how easy it is to disagree over the meaning of a word meant to express some uncertainty.
  13. Well that's disappointing. Not altogether missed, really, but disappointing.
×
×
  • Create New...