@GunnersMate

[XabbaRus]

Well since it seems you have received your copy of DW and have been playing in the OHP, how does the DW version handle in the sea compared to the real thing?

[GunnersMate]

Seems a bit more - responsive. The turn rate is about 50% quicker in the sim and the APUs are a lot more powerful on the real thing. Acceleration seems about 50% faster as well. And the deacceleraion in the game is totally out the window :o From a flank bell to a stop bell in the game is more like a crash stop. :doh:

BTW I was a helmsman and I wish the helmsman control panel had the real controls.

[XabbaRus]

What about the speed loss when you hit full rudder at any speed especially flank?

Also should the Perry heel over more in a hard/fast turn?

[GunnersMate]

At flank with a 30` rudder speed loss should be about 3-4 kts.
Ship should heel between 30-40` with 30` rudder and flank bell.

BTW- Dont subs have an APU? Called a dolphin d1ck?

[XabbaRus]

Cool things to tell SCS then.

[Mau]

Agree,


I said it way way earlier that the max speed lost during a 30 deg helm should not be more than 5 to 6 knots.

on our Canadian frigate I never noticed more than this.

For torpedo evasion, in this Sim, that is a must to reflect like in RL.

We should be able as well to fire a salvo of two missiles with the same Fire control radar on the same target!

[OKO]

We should be able as well to fire a salvo of two missiles with the same Fire control radar on the same target!

sounds very logical, as a semi active missile just need a radar return to home.
once the radar return is found by the missile (and so, the target is illuminated by one radar), I don't see why more than one SM2 couldn't be guided onto the target with the same radar beam.

This should allow you to launch as many missiles as you want on a target already illuminated, and not just one missile per radar.

[Henson]

BTW- Dont subs have an APU? Called a dolphin d1ck?

Yes. It retracts into one of the aft ballast tanks. Handy little bugger to have around. In addition to its obvious uses, it's also our third backup to the main engines.

I have never heard it called that though...we always just called it the APU.

[Mau]

OKO wrote:

``sounds very logical, as a semi active missile just need a radar return to home.
once the radar return is found by the missile (and so, the target is illuminated by one radar), I don't see why more than one SM2 couldn't be guided onto the target with the same radar beam.

This should allow you to launch as many missiles as you want on a target already illuminated, and not just one missile per radar.``

Absolutely right unless the actual Weapon System or the Command and Control system of the ship is limiting it.

It shouldn't be too hard to fix since we were almost able to do it, but it looked more like cheating since we had to reload very very quickly to do it.

We should go ahead with this for sure!!!!

[OKO]

This should allow you to launch as many missiles as you want on a target already illuminated, and not just one missile per radar

I forgot also to mention : this is how AIM-7 Sparrows works on fighters.
As soon as target is locked, you could launch as many missiles as you want, all the stock if you wish ...
I can't see why a bigger radar (even a naval one :lol: ) couldn't also do that !

With this (realistic unless proved wrong) feature, ASuW engagment with SM2 should be much more deadly for the surface targets, just limited by the reload time of the MK13.

[Bubblehead Nuke]

I have never heard it called that though...we always just called it the APU.

You must not have been a nuke. Lord knows how many times I have heard over the 2MC (or was it 7MC?? Good.. I forgot something!) on a drill.

"Prepare to lower the outboard"

I have never heard it called anything else. In Nuke school, which at the time was 637 biased, all the instructors would call it that. Seeing as I was on a 688 and that was what we called it, I figured that was the standard nomenclature for the thing.

[Bellman]

:D OKO -As soon as target is locked, you could launch as many missiles as you want, all the stock if you wish ...

Flight sim aerial targets rarely require 2 Sparrows and further targets need redisignation.
OK if they are suicidaly, and rarely, in a nice neat formation.

In practise it is difficult enough to maintain the painting and lock on one target without enemy interference.
Hence the Sparrow has largely now given way to active or semi- active missiles.

[TLAM Strike]

The AIM-7 did have the Lock on Jamming capablity which has only recently been givien to the AIM-120. So if your Air Force dosn't have the latest (and most expensive) AMRAAM having the cheaper AIM-7 might be a better thing to have in place of the older AMRAAMs.

If you are going up against something like an AWACs or a heavy bomber launching several SARHs might not be such a bad idea. (Talking real life here). A big multi-engine aircraft might be able to survive one or maybe even two hits if its really lucky (they hit a non-critical part of the plane or something.)

[GunnersMate]

The AIM-7 did have the Lock on Jamming capablity which has only recently been givien to the AIM-120. So if your Air Force dosn't have the latest (and most expensive) AMRAAM having the cheaper AIM-7 might be a better thing to have in place of the older AMRAAMs.

If you are going up against something like an AWACs or a heavy bomber launching several SARHs might not be such a bad idea. (Talking real life here). A big multi-engine aircraft might be able to survive one or maybe even two hits if its really lucky (they hit a non-critical part of the plane or something.)
umm stupid question but why not use a Shrike or a HARM ? :hmm:

[TLAM Strike]

The AIM-7 did have the Lock on Jamming capablity which has only recently been givien to the AIM-120. So if your Air Force dosn't have the latest (and most expensive) AMRAAM having the cheaper AIM-7 might be a better thing to have in place of the older AMRAAMs.

If you are going up against something like an AWACs or a heavy bomber launching several SARHs might not be such a bad idea. (Talking real life here). A big multi-engine aircraft might be able to survive one or maybe even two hits if its really lucky (they hit a non-critical part of the plane or something.)
umm stupid question but why not use a Shrike or a HARM ? :hmm: Against a EW Bird? : :hmm: Is an ARM even A/A capable? :o

[GunnersMate]

The AIM-7 did have the Lock on Jamming capablity which has only recently been givien to the AIM-120. So if your Air Force dosn't have the latest (and most expensive) AMRAAM having the cheaper AIM-7 might be a better thing to have in place of the older AMRAAMs.

If you are going up against something like an AWACs or a heavy bomber launching several SARHs might not be such a bad idea. (Talking real life here). A big multi-engine aircraft might be able to survive one or maybe even two hits if its really lucky (they hit a non-critical part of the plane or something.)
umm stupid question but why not use a Shrike or a HARM ? :hmm: Against a EW Bird? : :hmm: Is an ARM even A/A capable? :o

Ohh pardon my ignorance I didn't know it was A/A :oops:

[TLAM Strike]

The AIM-7 did have the Lock on Jamming capablity which has only recently been givien to the AIM-120. So if your Air Force dosn't have the latest (and most expensive) AMRAAM having the cheaper AIM-7 might be a better thing to have in place of the older AMRAAMs.

If you are going up against something like an AWACs or a heavy bomber launching several SARHs might not be such a bad idea. (Talking real life here). A big multi-engine aircraft might be able to survive one or maybe even two hits if its really lucky (they hit a non-critical part of the plane or something.)
umm stupid question but why not use a Shrike or a HARM ? :hmm: Against a EW Bird? : :hmm: Is an ARM even A/A capable? :o

Ohh pardon my ignorance I didn't know it was A/A :oops:

No problem ;)

Ever see Flight of the Intruder?

Grafton: Are you crazy man that’s a MiG, we don’t even have a gun!
Cole: No but we got a Shrike and that will take care of the radar site that’s guiding the sucker.

I just couldn't help but think of that scene just now.

[GunnersMate]

The AIM-7 did have the Lock on Jamming capablity which has only recently been givien to the AIM-120. So if your Air Force dosn't have the latest (and most expensive) AMRAAM having the cheaper AIM-7 might be a better thing to have in place of the older AMRAAMs.

If you are going up against something like an AWACs or a heavy bomber launching several SARHs might not be such a bad idea. (Talking real life here). A big multi-engine aircraft might be able to survive one or maybe even two hits if its really lucky (they hit a non-critical part of the plane or something.)
umm stupid question but why not use a Shrike or a HARM ? :hmm: Against a EW Bird? : :hmm: Is an ARM even A/A capable? :o

Ohh pardon my ignorance I didn't know it was A/A :oops:

No problem ;)

Ever see Flight of the Intruder?

Grafton: Are you crazy man that’s a MiG, we don’t even have a gun!
Cole: No but we got a Shrike and that will take care of the radar site that’s guiding the sucker.

I just couldn't help but think of that scene just now.

Goin Downtown!

[TLAM Strike]

:ping: I remember once in Jane’s Fighters Anthology (USNF 97, Ukraine Campaign) I managed to shoot down a MiG 29 Fulcrum with an AGM-88. I saw the MiG pop up on the screen; I forgot what weapon I had selected and just fired when I saw it had locked. I just kinda stared in disbelief when I checked my HUD after killing the target and saw I had HARMs selected and not AMRAAMs. :lol:

[GunnersMate]

:ping: I remember once in Jane’s Fighters Anthology (USNF 97, Ukraine Campaign) I managed to shoot down a MiG 29 Fulcrum with an AGM-88. I saw the MiG pop up on the screen; I forgot what weapon I had selected and just fired when I saw it had locked. I just kinda stared in disbelief when I checked my HUD after killing the target and saw I had HARMs selected and not AMRAAMs. :lol:

Gotta love Jane's. :yep: I remember blowing up a SAM track, a tank 3 APC's and about 5 trucks with a MK82 in Jane's USAF Osirak mission! :arrgh!: :rock:

[Bellman]

:lol: GM - You got very lucky with a MK82 - sure you had'nt sneeked on a couple of cluster bombs ?
USAF packed the CBU-89 and CBU-93 Anti-armor ! But then USAF , a fun sim but a bit arcadish !

Preferred Janes Longbow, but there other stuff, like ATC (Advanced Tactical Fighters) and USNF ' 97
were fun but gamey. F15 had some good points.

Now Falcon !! :|\

PS. FA18e Super Hornet was a good 'horse' from the same UK software stable as the old Tornado sim.
Squashed from the market by its less able, well promoted, and popular USA counterpart ! Thats life !

[Wim Libaers]

:lol: GM - You got very lucky with a MK82 - sure you had'nt sneeked on a couple of cluster bombs ?
USAF packed the CBU-89 and CBU-93 Anti-armor ! But then USAF , a fun sim but a bit arcadish !

Preferred Janes Longbow, but there other stuff, like ATC (Advanced Tactical Fighters) and USNF ' 97
were fun but gamey. F15 had some good points.

Now Falcon !! :|\

PS. FA18e Super Hornet was a good 'horse' from the same UK software stable as the old Tornado sim.
Squashed from the market by its less able, well promoted, and popular USA counterpart ! Thats life !

There'a also Jane's F/A-18 (also models the E/F, but it's a different one than the British game, even though both were released in the same period). Very good, nice graphics, and carrier landings.