|
With electronics endurance and quality control way down the A should be in the same price range as the F-5. Especially considering they've built twice as many F-16s as they've built F-5s. The F-16 was literally built to be a cheap, much more capable and easier to fly platform to replace the F-5. It is also a 10 times more capable ground attack platform with dumb bombs.
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2019 12:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 20:06 |
|
|
It also struck me that clusters should be really coming back into style now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2019 12:11
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Not unless you can reuse the same avionics in another single-shot 3DP airframe. If the entire aircraft is essentially disposable then the F-16 is way too expensive for most groups to even consider. Honestly I picture the most common aircraft being MiG-17s or something similarly utterly rubbish. Maybe F-104Gs and MiG-21s on the very high end. This isn't much fun for us though, so everyone is probably going to be a little more spendy than they should be. If people wanna buy As Cheap As Possible, there are a bunch of low-cost options that actually give decent bang for your buck. The Pakistani A-5C Fantan (1983) is the gooniest plane imaginable. It's a Chinese-made modification of a Chinese-made knockoff of the first (horribly flawed) supersonic Soviet fighter from the *1950s.* It has some half-decent Sidewinders, and a bunch of cluster bombs, iron bombs, and rockets. The New Zealand A-4K Skyhawk Kahu (1990) looks hella good in RNZAF green. It's one of the only Skyhawks that packs Mavericks *and* Sidewinders in the same loadout for self-defense. The Swiss Hunter Mk58A (1986) is a beautiful airplane and probably the only transonic fighter from the 1950s that didn't have horrific pilot-killing vices. Weirdly enough, it has early Sidewinders and Mavericks (in different loadouts). The New Zealand MB.339CB (1993) trainer has decent Sidewinders for self-defense and carries some great rockets (Hydra and Zuni!) and some iron bombs. The Italian AMX A-11 Ghibli (1991) is a pocket attack aircraft with Sidewinders for self-defense, Mavericks, cluster bombs, rockets, runway-killing Durandals, and a surprisingly large load of iron bombs. The Canadian CF-5A Freedom Fighter (1985) can carry four Sidewinders or a bunch of unguided ground attack weapons ... but not both. With no radar and very few avionics, it's very, very simple.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2019 16:41
|
|
|
Bacarruda posted:If people wanna buy As Cheap As Possible, there are a bunch of low-cost options that actually give decent bang for your buck. That Q-5 with all aspect missiles looks pretty cracking though, definitely a hidden pro pick. We should look out for them on the print market for next time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2019 18:00
|
|
|
From my own post history, here's an assortment of trash that may or may not be worth buying but is probably cheap and is at least somewhat uncommon: J-21 Jastreb. Ground attack with an assortment of unguided munitions and godawful combat range but it's Yugoslavian so what more do you need, really. J 32E Lansen. Unarmed OECM from the 70s. Canberra B(I).12. South African variant with an impossibly annoying designation, but includes a wacky cluster munitions dispenser. Buccaneer S.50. Another South African entry. Pretty sure those H-2s are illegal but it's got a pretty hefty bomb load besides. Jaguar S. Nigerian variant of a basic bomb truck.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2019 23:23
|
|
|
i demand we buy a b-29 for no reason
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 00:04
|
|
|
So I've been laughing at pictures of Alpha Jets and wondering what the smallest combat jet aircraft to enter service was For prop planes apparently it's the I-16, which is adorable. e: search suggests Folland Gnat, the Goblin doesn't count imo e: He 162 is tiny, 8m long by 7 or 8 span aphid_licker fucked around with this message at 10:38 on Oct 16, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 10:32
|
|
|
The I-16 was also the first aircraft to be used as a parasite aircraft in combat. To great success! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zveno_project
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 10:51
|
|
|
The TB-3 is an awesome-looking beast
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 11:00
|
|
|
well, apart from being made from corrugated sheet-metal like the shed in your backyard.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 21:09
|
|
|
Kodos666 posted:well, apart from being made from corrugated sheet-metal like the shed in your backyard. Feature not bug.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2019 21:23
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, I finally caught up to the thread. Please stick me on the pilot roster as Vayra. She'd like to fly something with guided ground-attack weapons if available, or anything else if not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:The TB-3 is an awesome-looking beast I've ridden those many times in IL-2 co-op missions, it's a real treat of a
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2019 03:04
|
|
|
Put me on the pilot roster please. Anything will do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2019 04:04
|
|
|
mllaneza posted:I've ridden those many times in IL-2 co-op missions, it's a real treat of a It can take some punishment in IL-2. Somehow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2019 07:23
|
|
|
Top Hats Monthly posted:It can take some punishment in IL-2. Somehow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2019 13:11
|
|
|
I feel like it is time I-SPY returns to take his comfortable and warm and mostly safe position in any available AWACS. Please sign me up for any AWACS position that becomes available.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2019 23:40
|
|
|
Dr. Snark posted:I do love the mental image of slapping so many parts/electronics onto the drat thing to the point where it's completely unusable by anyone who isn't a part of HG. Don't know how that would work mechanically, but it'd be great... From what the guys in my squadron have said, that's basically how a lot of the P-3s were like before we switched over to the P-8s, planes would get component swaps from other planes like crazy and it was a real grab bag of what would be working when you got on station. For big chunky bois for planes in more specialized roles: A-3 Skywarriors Back when the Navy was trying to figure out if putting big dedicated bombers on the ship was a good idea (it wasn't), these guys eventually went from being a bomber/attack aircraft to a recon and electronic attack aircraft until the E-6B's came online. Fun fact, this plane lacked ejection seats so if the crew needed to escape they had to bail out of the bottom of the aircraft through a hatch in the cockpit floor, which since the plane was designed to fly at near supersonic speeds constantly meant that if you actually did this you died! The Sud Aviation Vautour Designed by France to be a nice all around air interceptor, ground attack plane and possible nuclear bomber, this plane really didn't do any of the things well (reportedly being considered substandard by the French for its nuclear bombing role). The Israeli's bought some and used them to good effect as bomb trucks during the Six Day War, also scoring the aircrafts only known air to air kill. The [ur=http://cmano-db.com/cw/aircraft/26/]IIN Varient[/url] can hold a couple missiles. The Gloster Javelin and English Electric Lightning both served interceptor functions for the UK, working on their old Dreadnought tradition of introducing one class only to develop another class of something that obsoletes the previous one (in this case the Lightning came out a couple years after the Javelin, going twice as fast as it!).
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 07:02
|
|
|
I’d love if we got an A-3 or an A-5 as an Recon bird that persisted between missions!
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 11:15
|
|
|
I don't know what the payloads are like in game but I desperately want a Blackburn Buccaneer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 14:35
|
|
|
Bacarruda posted:If people wanna buy As Cheap As Possible, there are a bunch of low-cost options that actually give decent bang for your buck. Let's get these, Hunters are awesome and that Pakistani thing is all kinds of hosed up. i love it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 15:07
|
|
|
Jaguars have already been mentioned but Jaguars
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 16:52
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:I don't know what the payloads are like in game but I desperately want a Blackburn Buccaneer. The British one is very suitable for our needs in my opinion, it can carry a 15nmi range TV guided Martel for anti-structure or anti-ship work or three, 60s DECM and an all-aspect Sidewinder on some loadouts, Paveways with self-designation or a quartet of 1000lb bombs. Avionics include an elderly but functional FLIR system, a very creditable surface search radar and a good number of flares and chaff. The South African one has no flares and trades the Martel for a 6nmi range AS.30 that deals more damage and can hit mobile targets but doesn't have any other usable guided weapons or air to air capability. It can, however, take vast numbers of Mk.82 500lb bombs or SNEB 68mm rockets, it can buddy-tank (not sure why the British ones can't tbh) and it has an early 80s DECM system that isn't as valuable as it might be given the legal range limitations but it still technically superior. British Bucc '83 loses the flares and British Bucc '76 loses the Paveways and has terrible Sidewinders but gains a quartet of BL.775 cluster bombs. Saffie Bucc '66 loses the FLIR and DECM but retains all weapons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 16:54
|
|
|
i think we should do a crazy mission where we buy ww2 era stuff and fight someone else using ww2 era stuff. a big reenactment thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 18:35
|
|
|
I want an ahistorical WW2 fight of Stukas against Zeroes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
  The accounting firm handling our plane replacement has realized that they have an opportunity to save on platform acquisition by utilizing some obscure 18th century colonial underwriting technique. I don't understand it, but they claim it's a really good idea. Basically, we can choose to acquire replacements for our current slate of aircraft and explore platform acquisition again after a couple more missions. What say ye? Keep Them or poo poo Can I'm back in the country but seemed to have picked up a terrible cold. So I'm conscious... but barely.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
Don't really understand what we're being asked.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 19:47
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:Don't really understand what we're being asked. Go into procurement, scrap all the current planes... OR Top off planes to full strength and continue for another round or two.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Can everything but the Shackleton This DesperateDan fucked around with this message at 20:10 on Oct 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 20:04
|
|
|
Can everything but the Shackleton No I don't care that this wasn't on the list, it's a write in vote.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
Shitcan Everything
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 20:14
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Can everything but the Shackleton 
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 20:29
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Can everything but the Shackleton Agree!
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 21:05
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Can everything but the Shackleton Yeah, AEW craft aren't subject to the same stresses as the main fleet and it's too drat amazing to lose.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 21:48
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Can everything but the Shackleton This . Let's play with the wooden awacs
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 22:09
|
|
|
The Shackleton is so amazingly lovely and cobbled together I think we should keep it for a bit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 22:13
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Can everything but the Shackleton
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 22:17
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Can everything but the Shackleton Agree with this too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Can everything but the Shackleton Nthing this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 22:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 20:06 |
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Can everything but the Shackleton
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 23:11
|
|