Project Reality Forums

Bodybag2224 wrote:That is though when they could get the little buggers to actually track something, and not just release and then turn into a Sparrow bomb.

Notice how I said they were primitive.

the guns on the planes in the game should only take a burst or two to take down a plane because in real life, the cannons on a fighter just needs around two taps of the trigger and the enemy plane is fucked

How true.

BTW a little off topic but what helicopter do the USMC use?

Cobra

ExOps_Mercenary wrote:the guns on the planes in the game should only take a burst or two to take down a plane because in real life, the cannons on a fighter just needs around two taps of the trigger and the enemy plane is fucked

Uh oh, they do, people just chase jets around with dumb missiles, that cant hit shit

El_Vikingo wrote:Cobra

Thank you, but after looking at my post, I wasn't clear lol. I had actually wanted to ask what type of transport helicopter do they use for these medium engagements? I had thought that the BlackHawk was used for the NAVY and ARMY.

TF6049 wrote:No. All he is saying is that he wants some realistic G-effects. When you do a turn to hard, you black out. Even with G-suits.

I'm not talking about the "G-effects" on pilots. That would be a complete waste of time for such a trivial effect.

Please Fix->>.

Planes. Turn. Too. Fast. (22Gs.)

Missiles. Can't. Hit. (120 degrees)

Decrease. Thrust. Or. Increase. Mass.

F-16 IRL is has a TW ratio of 1.3

Mig has a TW ratio of 0.91 (ignore wikipedia's bs)

Should be reflected ingame. F-16 has a sight speed advantage, not the other way around.

F-16 is 6000 lbs lighter than the MiG-29, should also be reflected.

If there isn't time for all this by version 6.XYZ, rather than include a dysfunctional element to PR, please just remove aircraft and put them in when its completed.



Oh and please don't explain my posts.

hehe
great stuff

Awesome.

Does anybody know if it would be possible to put tunnel vision/edge blurriness when pulling a high G turn? Sounds like a long shot but you never know.

El_Vikingo wrote:Does the US Army or marine use any double seater aircraft?

They don't use F-16s or A-10s either, so we can just use our imagination on aircraft the way we use our imagination on the ACOG. Although the USAF has become interested in the formation of a COIN squadron made up of A-10s under the command of the JSOC.

The MiG29s saying "I cost (from what I can see $600"? Obviously your not going for the whole accuracy thing but like isn't the MiG supposed to be superior to most modern day fighters?

all i want is the Brit fights and more US fighters!

Regarding the GSh-30 cannons, the exhaust flames are much bigger than they are currently. You can see it very clearly around 2:45 of this video. Also note how much force is being exerted on the aircraft even with just a few shots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWWPVjA3juQ[/youtube]

Edit: Look at 0:45 as this only has a "time remaining" rather than time elapsed timer.

AnRK wrote:The MiG29s saying "I cost (from what I can see $600"? Obviously your not going for the whole accuracy thing but like isn't the MiG supposed to be superior to most modern day fighters?

MiG-29s cost $11,000,000. Where you got $600 shall remain a mystery to me.

Heres some nice reading on the subject of the MiG-29 vs F-16.

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives ... 2a_95.html

Anyways to sum it up...

In a turning fight, the Mig-29 is inferior at supersonic speeds, equal at subsonic, and a slight advantage at low speeds. Radar doesn't provide equal coverage to the F-16 (because they would never actually fight). Has the helmet mounted display, which if ever used, means the pilot made some pretty major tactical mistakes. BVR missile firing is not automated. Requires a pilot to mentally calculate the missiles flight time and set the radar to illuminate for the duration. Detection, arming, and firing requires multiple button pushes and hands leaving the throttle. Can't see directly behind it. Engines last about 1/10th the time of the F-16s. To compensate, engines run at a reduced throttle which lowers the range. Engine changes at about 400 hours to the F-16s 4000. Pilots cannot fire the 30mm cannon with a centerline fuel tank, and cannot jettison the tank at supersonic speeds. Speed brakes cannot function at supersonic flight.

F-16 is slightly faster, better acceleration, which allows it to maintain speeds longer (which is good because the MiG can beat it at low speeds). Is currently getting a helmet mounted display system (because no self-respecting fighter pilot wants to get into a dogfight). Its thrust to weight ratio translates to being able to pull 9 G's continuously. BVR engagement is almost completely automated with pilots being able to keep hands on the throttle, pressing only 2 buttons, all while looking at the hud. Engines lifetime exceeds the MiG-29s by a factor of ten.

Quote: "If you define an F-16 as a third-generation fighter, it is not fair to speak of the MiG-29 as a third-generation aircraft because of its avionics,"

(First German Pilot to fly in an F-16)

A plane is only as good as its pilot, but a pilot is only as good as his plane.

i wish we couldn't turn so hard and have g effects in so when u turn hard you screen gets darker and eventually turns black and after s couple seconds starts to slowly lightens..

caboose wrote:MiG-29s cost $11,000,000. Where you got $600 shall remain a mystery to me.

Heres some nice reading on the subject of the MiG-29 vs F-16.

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives ... 2a_95.html

Anyways to sum it up...

In a turning fight, the Mig-29 is inferior at supersonic speeds, equal at subsonic, and a slight advantage at low speeds. Radar doesn't provide equal coverage to the F-16 (because they would never actually fight). Has the helmet mounted display, which if ever used, means the pilot made some pretty major tactical mistakes. BVR missile firing is not automated. Requires a pilot to mentally calculate the missiles flight time and set the radar to illuminate for the duration. Detection, arming, and firing requires multiple button pushes and hands leaving the throttle. Can't see directly behind it. Engines last about 1/10th the time of the F-16s. To compensate, engines run at a reduced throttle which lowers the range. Engine changes at about 400 hours to the F-16s 4000. Pilots cannot fire the 30mm cannon with a centerline fuel tank, and cannot jettison the tank at supersonic speeds. Speed brakes cannot function at supersonic flight.

F-16 is slightly faster, better acceleration, which allows it to maintain speeds longer (which is good because the MiG can beat it at low speeds). Is currently getting a helmet mounted display system (because no self-respecting fighter pilot wants to get into a dogfight). Its thrust to weight ratio translates to being able to pull 9 G's continuously. BVR engagement is almost completely automated with pilots being able to keep hands on the throttle, pressing only 2 buttons, all while looking at the hud. Engines lifetime exceeds the MiG-29s by a factor of ten.

Quote: "If you define an F-16 as a third-generation fighter, it is not fair to speak of the MiG-29 as a third-generation aircraft because of its avionics,"

(First German Pilot to fly in an F-16)

A plane is only as good as its pilot, but a pilot is only as good as his plane.

Nice article, i read the whole thing. Its nice to know that the good old F-16 will do this country well against the "super lee7 MIG-29" as the internet fools would have you believe.

I was also skimming through some other articles and found this:
"We joke about our missions against the raptor because they can be fairly boring. We fly to the range. Die. Go to the tanker. Go back out. Die. Go back to the tanker. Go back out. Die a third time. Then we go home," says Lt. Col. Paul Huffman, the commander of the 64th Aggressor Squadron at Nellis AFB, Nevada, who has flown as an adversary against the F/A-22 more than twenty times."

caboose, are you a former jet pilot or something? You seem very professonial.