37. Have some means of determining how much refuel a group needs compared to how much a tanker type can supply

 

Occaisionally I run into problems determining how many tankers to scramble to resupply a large starved group that is in flight some distance away from a base. Usually tankers are in short supply, so I don't want to "waste" them by sending out several when one or two may be all that are needed... so I conservatively guesstimate the number needed, only to find that the group comes up just a bit short in many instances when refueling is done.

 

It would help if there was some way to readily determine the fuel needs for a group to go a given distance, as well as how much fuel a particular tanker type can supply, so as to make the correct determination about how many tankers and/or what type of tankers to send out. I'm not sure how it would be best to display this info, but perhaps a status field could be added that would indicate the quantity of fuel that a group needs to return to its base, and a field showing the quantity of fuel that a tanker carries could be added somewhere in the tanker's readying status - like perhaps in the Qty column, or some such.

38. Ability to set a "shadowing" course relative to a specific "target" group

 

This would be the ability to specifiy a group's course such that it could "shadow" another group (either friend or foe) at some specified distance and direction from that "target" group. The "shadowing" group would then follow the target group's course and speed changes so that it would remain at that standoff distance. In the case of shadowing enemy groups, the "shadowng" course could be configured to either "use the last known course" or to actively attempt to re-establish contact with the target group in the event that contact with the target group is lost.

 

This feature would be helpful not only for keeping tabs on AI groups' movements, but also for setting up coordinated attacks and so forth. It would be useful for friendly groups in cases such as escorts or pickets or "macro formations" where two or more groups are to move "in formation", while not actually being a part of the same group, as is sometimes helpful when the 255 mile formation isn't enough to provide the desired spacing, or when it's desirable to keep the groups as separate but coordinated entities.

39. When the popup for automatic attack on missile groups appears, allow new options for manual allocation of weapons and suppression of further messages for that particular attacker/target combination

 

When an "attackable" enemy missile group is in range of a friendly (air?) group, a popup appears occasionally asking whether the missile group should be attacked by the friendly group; if this popup is acknowledged, then the missile attack is conducted automatically, which whatever weapons the system decides to use, usually starting with the longest-ranged AAMs that the group has available. In some cases, it is more advantageous to use the shorter-ranged missiles (so as to save the longer-ranged missiles for the primary intercept mission).

 

For example, say an AI missile group comes within close range of an F-14 group having a full intercept weapons load; if the resulting popup is answered affirmatively, the system will likely attack the missile group with the Phoenix missiles first - even if the Sparrow and Sidewinders are also in range. Conversely, if the player was to initiate an attack on the missile group via the Attack menu, the weapons allocation box would pop up, allowing the player to select Sparrows or Sidewinders, as might be desirable in this example because the short-ranged weapons could be expended on the missile group, while the Phoenixes coud be saved for that Foxhound group that is heading this way!.

 

So, the wish is for the automatic popup to have its affirmative button changed to something like "automatic", and a third button would be added to permit the attack, but allow "manual" allocation of the weapons to be used - by invoking the usual weapons allocation popup. That way, it would be possible to use either automatic or manual weapons allocation as may be desirable.

 

Another wish relating to the automatic missile attack popup is to offer the ability to suppress the attack on the given missile group by the given friendly group. Sometimes when there are multiple friendly groups around the missile group's path, it is desirable to have only some of those groups attack the missiles - rather than having everyone shoot at them. Unfortunately, the current scheme will repeatedly ask whether each particular friendly group should attack the missiles - and this flurry of redundant popups can get to be overwhelming. Instead, it would be nice to have a button on the popup that would suppress further popups for whatever missile group and air group combination was being offered by the particular popup, thus avoiding the needless recurrence of requests for that combination - and avoiding the resulting "excess workload" and confusion.

40. Change the logic of the Weapons Allocation Popup so that the shortest-ranged missiles (that are in range) will be allocated first

 

Currently, the logic of the Weapons Allocation Dialog appears to always start with the longest-ranged weapons in the loadout, even when shorter-ranged weapons are in range, and it will proceed to add the shorter-ranged weapons only as needed to fill the computed number of weapons to fire. In most cases, it seems that it would be preferrable to use the shortest-ranged (or the fastest) missiles first, when more than one type is in range.

 

For example, say a pair of MiG-21's has "snuck up on" a pair of F-14s. By the time the MiGs are detected, they are within range of all three types of missiles carried by the F-14s (but not inside the minimum range of the Phoenixes), so, under the current logic, the Weapons Allocation Popup offers three or four Phoenixes to shoot. However, the F-14s are trying to intercept a group of four Flanker Es, so it's not really best to waste their Phoenixes on the MiGs. In such a scenario, it would seem best to "dump" Sidewinders and/or Sparrows on the MiGs, so the Phoenixes will still be available to deal with the Flankers!

 

So, my wish would be for the Weapons Allocation Dialog to select the optimum weapons to fire first at the target, rather than just starting with the longest-ranged missiles, and working down through the loadout. (The "optimum" might vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on the type of weapons and the target involved, but generally speaking, it seems like it would be best to start with the shortest-ranged weapons that are capable, or perhaps with the fastest missiles, if it's a real "knife fight").

 

Obviously, whatever default is offered, the player can re-allocate as needed, but it makes sense to have the most likely choices offered as the default, so as to minimize the horsing around.

29. Get BINGO fuel warning even when air group is already returning to base

 

 

I'd like to lobby hard for something to solve this problem... because it's gotten to the point for me that I lose nearly as many aircraft to unreported fuel exhaustion as I do to any "legitimate" causes.

29. Get BINGO fuel warning even when air group is already returning to base

 

 

I'd like to lobby hard for something to solve this problem... because it's gotten to the point for me that I lose nearly as many aircraft to unreported fuel exhaustion as I do to any "legitimate" causes.

I know what you mean I cat my vote with you. Seems to be a few conditions that can cause problems, if I'm in doubt instead of just ordering return to base I set a course to a point next to the base then insert the land command in the course. A bit fiddly but I have to make a lot less cap in hand visits to next of kin.

Don

29. Get BINGO fuel warning even when air group is already returning to base

 

 

I'd like to lobby hard for something to solve this problem... because it's gotten to the point for me that I lose nearly as many aircraft to unreported fuel exhaustion as I do to any "legitimate" causes.

I know what you mean I cat my vote with you. Seems to be a few conditions that can cause problems, if I'm in doubt instead of just ordering return to base I set a course to a point next to the base then insert the land command in the course. A bit fiddly but I have to make a lot less cap in hand visits to next of kin.

Don

 

Does that actually make the BINGO message come up when it's appropriate? I was thinking that I tried to do that awhile back, but it appeared that any course which included a return-to-base leg would cause the BINGO report not to come up (and the planes would crash), regardless of whether there were course legs other than the return-to-base, or if that was the only leg. I know for sure that the warning doesn't occur if the return-to-base is the only leg, and I'm pretty sure that it also does not appear if a multi-leg course includes a return-to-base leg... so I just assumed that the presence of any return-to-base command in the path would suppress the warning. (?)

29. Get BINGO fuel warning even when air group is already returning to base

 

 

I'd like to lobby hard for something to solve this problem... because it's gotten to the point for me that I lose nearly as many aircraft to unreported fuel exhaustion as I do to any "legitimate" causes.

I know what you mean I cat my vote with you. Seems to be a few conditions that can cause problems, if I'm in doubt instead of just ordering return to base I set a course to a point next to the base then insert the land command in the course. A bit fiddly but I have to make a lot less cap in hand visits to next of kin.

Don

 

Does that actually make the BINGO message come up when it's appropriate? I was thinking that I tried to do that awhile back, but it appeared that any course which included a return-to-base leg would cause the BINGO report not to come up (and the planes would crash), regardless of whether there were course legs other than the return-to-base, or if that was the only leg. I know for sure that the warning doesn't occur if the return-to-base is the only leg, and I'm pretty sure that it also does not appear if a multi-leg course includes a return-to-base leg... so I just assumed that the presence of any return-to-base command in the path would suppress the warning. (?)

I'll have another look but I think it works, got to have return to base right at the end. I haven't exhaustingly tested it though. Would still be nice if as you suggest the warning came up at bingo no matter what.

Don

.....

Here's an autosave showing what I mean, the hornet is coming home on military and will run dry before home but calls in reporting at bingo and requesting ordered home, reply yes and she goes onto cruise and glides in. Don

autosave.zip

wishes 32-40 added to condensed wish list