Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About CAPT_Kirkpatrick

  • Birthday July 11

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
  • Location
    United Kingdom
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I agree the balance of fighters was tipped heavily to the red side, however where were situations where pilots of the 14's such as the Tau would rock up, destroy or cripple 4 or 5 fighters over the island and provide a window of clear skies. The only fault to blue on this mission was some pretty poor coordination; The harriers that should have been attacking the island were doing CAP against the Helo's - Sure its needed but completing the objective might have been a better move, especially if you could then spawn the MC-2000's and -15's from Saipan which could do a much better job. Some of the -18's went to do SEAD against the 2nd or third island which was an odd choice when the first island was still up. The viggens were by far the most annoying for 2 reasons, the fact that they could deal major damage to our shipping if they coordinated correctly, flying as a 2 or three ship rather than 3 singles, forcing us to move fighters to the fleet rather than the island. But also because there were reports some would try to outrun the fighters and then simply DC when they realised they couldn't escape. Overall, Blue managed to complete 95% of the first island inside about 1 and a half hours, its just that no one went to look for that last damaged site to finish it off and thus the objectives never progressed.
  2. Some kills are not counted/attributed due to death after weapons release. First Kill Blue: Tau kills j-11 First Kill Red: Sword kills harrier Total kills A2A blue: 55 (not including AI kills) 1 F-18; 1 F-14 7 KA-50; 2 viggens, 3 Harrier, 1 F-14, 1 f-18 3 Hinds; 2 Harrier, 1 Gazelle 12 MIG-21; 3 Harriers, 9 f-14 8 MIG-29S; 1 Harrier, 7 F-14 11 J-11A; 1 Harrier, 5 F-14, 5 F-18 2 SU-25T; 1 Harrier, 1 F-14 AI Kills: 18 1 KA-50 4 MI-24 6 MIG-21 4 MIG-29S 3 SU-33 Total Kills A2G blue: 1 EWR; Harrier 5 HQ-7; 3 F-18 2 HAWK; 1 Harrier 1 MOSKVA; 1 Viggen 2 SA-13, 1 Harrier 1 SA-15, 1 Harrier 1 SA-6; F-18 1 SA-8; F-18 1 URAL; Harrier 4 Shilka, 1 Harrier Total kills A2A Red: 48 (not including AI kills) 8 Viggen; 4 MIG-29, 1 J-11, 3 SU-33 16 Harriers; 2 MIG-21, 8 MIG-29S, 1 J-11, 5 SU-33 11 F-14; 6 MIG-29S, 2 J-11, 3 SU-33 12 F-18; 1 MIG-21, 3 MIG-29, 5 J-11, 3 SU-33 AI KILLS: 11 7 Viggen; 5 Moskva, 2 SA-13 1 Harrier, SA-13 3 F-14; 2 SA-6, 1 SA-13 Total Kills A2G Red: 36 23 AAV-7; 22 MI-24, 1 MIG-21 3 Avenger; 1 MI-24 4 Vulcan; 2 MI-24, 1 KA-50, 1 MIG-21 1 M818; KA-50 5 HAWK; 2 SU-25T, 3 KA-50 Weapons, 947 weapons used, 182 occurrences of cannon fire vs 765 missiles 18 Vikhrs launched, 9 kills; 50% 13 TOR's fired, 4 hits, 30.7% 9 Mavs fired; 9 hits, one mig-29 included, 100% 29 HARMS fired, 17 hits, 58.6% 57 AIM-54C launched; 17 Hits, 29.8% 51 AIM-7M launched; 11 Hits, 21.6% 38 AIM-9m; 16 Hits, 42.1% 9 AT-6 Fired; 5 Hits, 55.6% 2 FAB 250; No hits, 0% 5 FAB-500; 4 Hits, 80% 91 Stingers; 29 hits, 31.9% 16 HAWKS; No hits, 0% 14 HQ-7; 3 hits, 21.4% 1 HYDRA salvo; 7 hits, 100% 1 Harrier gun run, 2 hits, 100% 4 Mistral, 1 hit, 25% 1 MK-82; 2 hits on friendlies, -100%? 51 R-27R; 13 Hits, 25.4% 57 R-27ER; 10 hits, 17.5% 30 R-27T; 6 Hits, 20% 11 R-60; 3 Hits, 27.3% 45 R-73; 19 Hits, 42.2% 2 RB-74; 2 hits, 100% 16 R-04E; 9 hits, 56.3% 4 S-13; 3 Hits, 25% 10 S-5; 18 Hits, 100% 1 S-8OFP2 Salvo; 1 Hit, 100% 15 SA3M9M; 2 hits, 13.3% 118 SA-5B55; 9 Hits, 7.6% 12 SA9M33; 2 hits, 16.7% 27 SA9M333; 8 hits, 29.6% 3 SM-2; 1 hit, 33.3% 4 S-25MP; 4 Hits, 100% you technically didn't; You dealt 90% damage to the last SA-6 radar, causing it to shut down. However it was not killed and should have been spotted by the AV-8's striking the trucks in the same group
  3. Don't feel like you need to be forgiven for that. As long as you tried to get them to stop first I think most of us would agree it's completely justified. On red we try to get them on SRS then the chat. If they don't respond and keep on hitting friendlies either damage/destroy them with the friendly air defences or get a friendly aircraft on comms to do the same. The idea is that if we damage them first they'll RTB and possibly read the chat on the runway, else its just taking them out of a position to keep attacking the ground units Most of the time the RTB to the road base is second choice, we only really use it if someone got stuck up in a dog fight and no longer has enough fuel to RTB and we're trying to save the airframe. In that scenario there is a lot of pressure about getting the correct position first time as there may not be enough fuel to get turned around. The point about driving around is fair, I'll see if there is any ability to do this from static units or if there is a way to prevent the vehicle moving.
  4. I.E when there is a road base in an area where the description I can create from the f-10 view could easily be mistaken depending on peoples interpretations. This can lead to people landing on roads only a few 100m away but getting stuck in the mud. Smoke is not ideal, I agree a giant marker on your base is probably not the greatest idea. Ground vehicles have the option to launch an infinite amount of flares that last about 10 seconds and are easily visible to pilots within 10km. The ideal use is to get the pilot close and looking in the right direction then launch a few flares to easily confirm the exact position
  5. Low priority request: Can we get some form of unarmed but controllable vehicles on the road bases? This is purely so as a GCI I can direct pilots towards the road base then fire off some flares/smoke to ensure we're looking at the same area
  6. Knowledge passed on from a friend who is much more knowledgeable than myself: Active countermeasures: Sites keep their radars off and rely upon a central search radar to acquire the target (IADS) They first turn on smaller decoy radars to try to bait a HARM/ARM shot on those rather than the main tracking radar, which comes on shortly after And as said above, just shooting the missile down Passive, Sidelobe reflectors: Some tech that uses Radio waves in the same frequency band to cancel out emissions to the side of the main array or passive structures that just reflect the emitted wave itself, making it harder if not impossible to shoot at the site unless its targeting/looking directly at you. This also harms use of ELINT like a HTS as you cannot triangulate an accurate position easily without being the one they are firing upon/in the bleed through.
  7. well yes, the idea is currently to make it possibly workable for those who might wish to use it in its limited extent, rather than discard it completely for an unknown time frame. I'm not saying it's not broken or that "it works fine for me so you must be wrong", but for anyone who is trying to struggle along with it it gives them something that helps rather than nothing at all.
  8. Not giving any direct capabilities as I don't accurately know how or where they are implemented; but best guesses based on what I have heard and what seems logical: HTS performs pretty much the same with or without HARMS (?) It is able to generate a set of fairly accurate GPS coords for a guided munition attack on an emitter. this is subject to the emitter being active and "tracked" by the HTS for some time for it to refine the accuracy of its data points and thus target point. I don't have any knowledge of the accuracy of this generation, I'm expecting it to be good enough to be within a TPOD field of view for the coords, but not accurate to dump a JDAM onto it without manual refinement. (DEPENDS ON THE VERSION OF THE POD) With the HARM, I have no knowledge of how it directly interfaces but I'm expecting it to just function like a PB mode, the HTS offloads the target point and emitter type to the HARM which then performs as if it had just been launched in PB mode. Without weapons, the -16 with the HTS can work as an ELINT platform to an extent, gathering different emitters and producing target points you can pass onto other flights or simply share via LINK-16 if we get that capacity. There will be no need to extract the data, the HTS itself will be taking the recorded points to generate a mark. If the pod cant generate the mark, there probably isn't any hope using the recorded data anyways as it probably means the data points are too few in number to make a good prediction.
  9. Works fine here, put up a track if you want them to properly check else it is assumed to be user error as others cant directly replicate it.
  10. Yeah, I've noticed it in the MBT's to an extent, but I always passed that off as being a IRL function of the computer systems
  11. Fair enough that, I only thought you actually got a piper for the radar enabled systems, the rest you just got a visual lock square but no further info. (anti air this is, not sure I've ever locked from ground to ground)
  12. Can you post the Tac view file? Looking at the top down, it looks like you do notch the missile, but in the last few seconds exit while still right inside the seeker cone, causing the missile to correct slightly right for you. I cant say for sure that's what happened, but I'd love to take a peek at the tacView to confirm it.
  13. Here's the update: each hornet is carrying 2x120B, 2x9m, 4x7-m you are up against 4-27's with -27ET and ER Fight starts at about 17000ft Hornets waste literally every 120B; they fire at 27 miles at 18 thousand at mach around 0.9. The shots all go to the lead -27 group, who just turn, defend and drop chaff. These missiles all miss because of bad parameter shots. Either the 27's bleed the speed out of the missile by flanking or going cold, or are lucky enough to evade with chaff + notching. Next the -27's respond with the ET's and ER's, which have slightly better performance than the -7M in the now sub 20 mile range. They score quick kills due to having the now superior missile with the 120's wasted, and many hornets don't detect the ET launches and get smacked. Surviving -18's are firing back the -7M, but these are not fast enough inside the lofting parameters to beat the -77 and -27E's fired from the Russian jets, which are also flying significantly faster most of the time and thus have even better performance. The -29's join around this point and mop up with their -77's I flew this about 4 times and lost each time. I don't think it's unrealistic either, given the Ai performance and missile quirks. I could get 3-4 kills before the remaining reds swarmed me, 2 with the 120B for sure, the other 2 being a toss up between the -7 and -9. A tip for using the -7 at those ranges is to set its mode to NORM, so it flies straight to the target instead of trying to loft which does more harm than good at 10 miles. Simply put, the scenario here favours the Red side due to the Ai quirks. If blue didn't waste their missiles in bad parameter shots, they probably would get a good few kills. If the fight was higher, the Loft of the -7 would do more good, The 120's would have better range and possibly give them a chance.
  14. just a heads up, you can improve the path finding by swapping the formation ever time it gets stuck. That seems to prevent the path from shrinking far ahead of your vehicle when I used it in MP the other day
  15. Can someone explain #6 to me? not entirely sure what is meant #7, seconded, having an proper loiter would be lovely, having a TPOD view so you can actually search and manually laze for other pilots/your own runs would be brilliant
  • Create New...