Jump to content

Pappystein

HUD3
  • Posts

    314
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Pappystein last won the day on January 17 2013

Pappystein had the most liked content!

Pappystein's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

4

Reputation

  1. Oh, I should add the DATA rating for the YF-12A Blackbird would be 0.5/0.0 in Paper Rules. Meaning if it can't out run the missile or gun it is D.E.D. dead. As far as maneuverability? How about taking the state of Wisconsin to turn 180 degrees? Most any fighter could turn inside of that. The ONLY advantage the Blackbird would have had was the near 100nm launch range vs closing targets of the AIM-47 Falcon. BTW the AIM-47 was developed into..... The AIM-54 Phoenix. In-Fact, Snoopy (The B-58 modified to test the AN/ASG-18 Radar and AIM-47 Falcon missile for the YF-12A, was also used to test the later AN/AWG-9 Weapon system and the AIM-54 Phoenix.
  2. It really depends on this question. What are you using the platform for? If it is just to clutter the airspace then no, they are dimensionally similar and while not the EXACT same performance they are close enough to serve as clutter. If you are trying to use them in Scenarios where the player will be controlling them then yes they will probably need atleast 2 entries. IIRC the CH-146 Griffon is used in armed rolls where as the civilian Bell 412/414 would be just that purely Civilian.
  3. Photo-reconnaissance is severely DEAD in the CH2/CH3 family. The Game does not attach much importance to Poto-int due to the fact the developers thought you would spend most of your time dueling it out on the high seas. AKA there is little reason to create a ton of entries. Most of these aircraft types can be lumped together data entry wise. Just unique country.dat entries for each of the sub designations.
  4. Ok I don't have the Database in front of me ATM but I thought the F-15S was already in. I KNOW I made it at one point. Wikipeda is mostly wrong on the -15S however. Yes the Synthetic Aperature mode was not initially shipped (No Classification Flag for the APG-70 in this case) HOWEVER just two years later it was added in as part of the deal that lead to the F-16I. The MAIN difference is the substitution of LANTRIN with a less capable export system (AN/AAQ-19/20 Sharpshooter / Pathfinder combination) Oh not that it matters much with the F-15 but the AGM-65 capability is deleted from the Sharpshooter/Pathfinder pods.
  5. First off; "Shortly before December 2012, the Army decided they would recommend proceeding with the AAS program" That statement means the Block II has to win a competition before it will be purchased by the US Army. At this point Gunny, would be doing a bit of work for no gain and the possiblity of MORE work down the line. The Sikorsky entry and the EADS entry will likely be the First choices for the US Army. I think it is safe to wait this one out for at least a few months to get a feel or more importantly a look at the actual RFP from the US Army to see what way they are leaning. Given Bell's shoddy work on the ARH-70 I doubt we will see Bell win this contract. Oh And Secondly, It is close enough to the OH-58D+ Kiowa Warrior to not need a new entry (it would be a simple sensor swap once we know what new sensors will be used.)
  6. There are so many variants of the Fletchers in service right up to the new century. Gunny would almost have to devote a couple months to making them all. Almost every Fletcher is going to be unique from the waterline up. Some even have various different sonars. I can't help much with the moder side (no sources) but again I can create a propulsion file if I have not already done so based on Stock WWII data.
  7. Also Contrary to what Wikipedia says the class is NOT the Cannon class. it is the "Destroyer Escort" class. Or more commonly the DET sub-class or flight of the Destroyer Escort Class. Cannon was the first ship taken into US Navy service, it was NOT the class lead, nor was it one of the first of class finished. Cannon is poorly attributed as the class name by the lay person who did not pay attention to how the US Navy was handling "Disposable" ships. These ships were designed to last ~5 years max of wartime level of usage before being scrapped. It is a miracle that they lasted as long as they did. All have a basic common hull form (in two lengths) but various weapon combinations, sensor combinations and propulsive combinations. The Sub classes (Flights) are; 5" armed WWII DEs Destroyer Escort DET or Diesel Electric Tandem drive on long hull (commonly associated with "Cannon") Destroyer Escort GMT or General Motors Tandem Diesel on a short hull (commonly associated with "Evarts") Destroyer Escort TE or Turbo-Electric on a Long hull (commonly associated with "Buckley") Destroyer Escort FMR or Fairbanks-Morse Reduction geared in a Long hull (commonly associated with "Edsal") 3" Armed WWII DEs (have a lower bridge and better stability) Destroyer Escort TEV or Turbo-Electric 3": armament on a Long hull (commonly associated with "Rudderow") and lastly Destroyer Escort WGT or Westinghouse-geared Turbine (commonly associated with "John C. Butler") Sorry to jump on this but to call these boats the "Cannon" Class is to do a disservice to the other 5 flights of the Destroyer Escort Class. It would be like calling your entire family by your first name. Kind of insulting to the other family members who's name wasn't picked. Oh and If I knew more about re-structuring a wiki page wikipedia would have already been changed. Gunny I do not remember if I already shipped your propulsion files for the entire class. If I have not let me know I have the fuel load/engine performance all from Norman Friedman's epoch book "US Destroyers Revised ed" published a couple years ago. Likewise I have the same book for both WWII fleet submarines and Battleships. I am trying to find the modern version of the submarine book but no one wants to sell it under $300. Or if they do they refuse to answer e-mails.
  8. Communications issue actually causes several others. For example if a platform detects a target, but is out of range of the target, there is no reporting of the target when it gets back in range. I am still working on my WWII database and this is the major issue thusfar. Most aircraft radios in WWII had a range of 150-250 miles at most. Berlin is a lot longer distance away from England than 150 miles
  9. I have not yet seen an IOC for the derby with The IAF. Currently Every Loadout I see has either AIM-120 or AIM-7 still. It appears to date that the Derby is an export only missile since the IAF can purchase AIM-120Cs just fine. F-15s can carry a total of 2 Python 4 or Python 5 Missiles (Outer shoulder pylon only.) That means the other two shoulder Pylons need to have AIM-9L/M Onboard. Hope that helps
  10. Ducting always slows airflow down. I have a formula for calculating it here somewhere. This formula PREDATES the design of the XFV-12 fighter.... It is AMAZING to me that no one ran the numbers or made THAT big of a mistake with the numbers. I It is a beautiful airplane but since the cockpit is that of an A-4 Skyhawk, the Avionics level should be that of an F-16A not an F-4 Phantom. The APG-53 radar of the earlier HHRs (Heinemann's Hot Rod for you not knowing the history of the Skyhawk) were significantly smaller than any of the APQ-50 based radars in any variant of the Phantom II. If this aircraft is to be added suggest the following. FLAGS: Short takeoff and landing (STOL) NOT VTOL! Size, Small Fly By Wire Range Avionics: AN/APG-66 Radar no ESM as built. Loadouts: 4 AIM-9H/L/M Sidewinder, 1 300 USG Jetfuel Droptank. 2 AIM-9HLM, 2 GBU-12A, 1 Pavespike. OR 1 GBU-12A, 1 PAVESPIKE, and 1 300 USG Jetfuel Droptank. 2 AIM-9HLM, 3 Mk82 (any) OR 2 Mk82 (Any) and 1 300 USG Jetfuel Droptank. 2 AIM-9HLM, 2 AIM-7F/M, 1 300USG Jetfuel Droptank. Incidently the engine used in the XFV-12 is a naval version of the PW F100-PW-100 engine for the USAF. Changes include larger first stage, and different metals to reduce issues of corrosion. This engine was also to power the F-14B and F-14C Tomcats (first use of both designations.) Incidently the Correct designation for the XFV-12 should have been F401-PW-410. The Engine for the F-14 Tomcat was the F401-PW-400 engine. The Afterburner was different on the -410 for the XVF-12 fighter and the -410 denotes that. The Prototype engines actually fitted were converted for use "at depot maintenance" and thus were designated -400.
  11. Japan and Italy fly it. In game terms they are almost identical (radios and ESM being different only.) The USAF Version is based on the 767-300 family with improvements from other aircraft as well. The KC-767 is the designation for the Italian version only. I am not 100% certain on Japan's designation.
  12. J-5/F-5 are almost identical. It is the J-6/F-6/MiG-19 that you have to worry about. China made some interesting versions of the MiG-19.... eg the J-6-III which has a fixed shock cone instead of the blunt air splitter of a standard MiG-19. Man-Rtg is up by ~0.25 (computer only not a table top change.) However Max sped is cut by almost 100Kts and max altitude by almost 1500meters. This version was still in service just 10 years ago and it was considered a failure. I will try to get some info to Gunny if he dose not already have it but it is a low priority. I have 9 higher priority reaserch projects for various Computer/Tabletop people in front of this.
  13. YF-12A Blackbird (that is the offical name.) was a Real dog, just like the SR-71 and the even faster A-12. YF-12A topped out at ~1760kts vs the SR-71A's ~1824Kts. The A-12 single seat Recon plane had a sped of ~1950kts. Please note that no offical sped has ever been reported for either the A-12 or YF-12A. The SR-71A Speed records of note are likely lowballed to hide acutal performance of the aircraft. Hope that is heplfull.
  14. Ain't that the way of the interwebz? I no sooner than post the previous post and viola, I found DE-1. DE-1, the First of the War Production Board Destroyer Escort Class, was the USS Bayntun. Bayntun however is a Royal Navy name, not a name that would have been used in the US.
  15. I just picked up the revised edition of US destroyers, an illustrated design history by Norman Friedman. I already have the propulsion made for the entire class of DEs. For the Record there is no Buckley class, is actually a SUB-CLASS of what would be called erroneously Evarts class, DE-1 to DE-4 were Lend Leased to the United Kingdom, DE-5 is the Evarts, the class name should be DE-1's name but I find no record online of what that ship name was. The Destroyer Escort class was made with what ever propulsion and armament available at the time. The Sub-Classes are denoted by their propulsion, not the name of the first ship made so it starts with GMT (General Motors Tandem Diesel) AKA Evarts, TE (Turbo Electric Steam) aka Buckley, DET (Diesel Electric Tandem) aka Cannon, FMR (Fairbanks-Morse Reduction) aka Edsall, the TEV (Turbo Electric Fast) aka Ruddrow, and WGT (Westinghouse Geared Turbine) aka John C . Butler. Note that there were two hull sizes based upon propulsion, (Short hull and Long Hull.) Confusing huh? That is what I thought too, I had to re-read the chapter 4 times before it sank in that these were not ordered by the US Navy, rather they were ordered by the War Production board FOR the US Navy, thus different class naming nomenclature.
×
×
  • Create New...