Ok, here it's, the first time I convert a Word doc in PDF!

 

Like a cinch! Thanks!

Could you also edit out the botched table? My finger got tired while I was passing down by that post.

Another basic issue I don't see very clear in this topic:

Usual DATA is the reflected in the DB

Example:

F-16C/D Blk50/52 CCIP, entry #10415

ATA=45

DATA=25

 

with the loadouts:

#55899 Intercept, DATA=45 (the same value as basic ATA value).

#55888 to 55894, with air-to-ground ordnance, DATA=25 (the same value as basic DATA value).

 

In case the F-16 is with air-to-ground ordnance and forced to jettison, DATA is reverted from 25 to 25? other examplas of planes I see in the DB are with the same DATA value issue: DATA (if works so) don't change after you eject the air-to-ground load!

Probably something escapes to me in this question ...

 

I think that at the root of this is that the DATA value is not just about maneuverability,

but incorporates all defensive factors like active and passive countermeasures too.

(I think I read this somewhere around here.)

 

The Aircraft annex DATA is for a clean configuration, e.g. no ECM pod,

while it has good maneuverability the overall defensive value is only similar to a

sluggish a/g loadout which comes with good ECM.

 

The proposal is anyway to use the best DATA of the plane after jettisoning, if we accept that

ECM is not jettisoned and self defence armament is retained then that could be about right

and the F-16 could get DATA 45 after dumping a/g ordnance.

 

This also prompts a wish that it would be great to consider ATA+DATA for the turn delay.

I'm new to this site, but not new to the game. Jettisoning ordnance doesn't actually improve the plane's performance, does it? The the various cruise/military/afterburner speeds remain the same, from what I can tell. To me the issue is not about getting rid of weapons, but about a decision to abort the mission and turning back, as an entirely separate question from jettisoning. It would also be fun to play with the idea of the AI selecting an alternate target, but really I have no clue how that would be implemented.

 

However, if a plane does jettison, then give it a measurable performance improvement, say 10% faster cruising or something.

 

If I'm wrong in my assumptions, feel free to ignore. I never even bothered to try to jettison any of my own ordnance, and I never noticed if the AI enemy did. Sometimes bombers turned back, sometimes they didn't, but in neither case did they get any faster.

I'm new to this site, but not new to the game. Jettisoning ordnance doesn't actually improve the plane's performance, does it? The the various cruise/military/afterburner speeds remain the same, from what I can tell. To me the issue is not about getting rid of weapons, but about a decision to abort the mission and turning back, as an entirely separate question from jettisoning. It would also be fun to play with the idea of the AI selecting an alternate target, but really I have no clue how that would be implemented. However, if a plane does jettison, then give it a measurable performance improvement, say 10% faster cruising or something. If I'm wrong in my assumptions, feel free to ignore.

That's what we're hashing out here. Whether jettisoning should be re-introduced, and what its effects would be. Improving the performance of the aircraft, not necessarily its speed (which is treated the same regardless of loadout, and which is a bigger issue) but by improvement of the ATA/DATA values.

I'm new to this site, but not new to the game. Jettisoning ordnance doesn't actually improve the plane's performance, does it? The the various cruise/military/afterburner speeds remain the same, from what I can tell.

 

Currently jettison is not implemented in HCE, it was in the DOS versions from v1.32 to v1.54A but then it was disabled for some reason. This topic turned out to be a discussion on how to reintroduce it when Tony asked for inputs.

 

To me the issue is not about getting rid of weapons, but about a decision to abort the mission and turning back, as an entirely separate question from jettisoning.

 

Yes, aborting a mission is a decision the theater commander=player has to make.

Jettisoning is the pilot's decision and happens independently from the player, those who want jettisoning back are convinced that this improves realism and reduces need for micro management of a/c-s.

This has become a long topic, who decides about jettisoning were discussed in some more details in posts #6,#7,#8.

 

However, if a plane does jettison, then give it a measurable performance improvement, say 10% faster cruising or something.

 

The current proposal is to grant a DATA (defensive ATA) bonus to planes after jettisoning, like allow them to use the best DATA of the plane. This would improve their chance to evade missiles and (with modification of the ATA enforced turn delay) to turn faster.

See also post #17, "After Jettisoning".