Lock on: modern air combat

[Warin 0]

I remember being a kid and hearing my dad (ex Royal Netherlands Airforce pilot) tell me about how the EF2000 was obsolete before its first operational flight due to its idiotically long development. It is 1980's technology ....

Would you call the F-16 obsolete? It's 70's technology.

Airframes have a lot longer operational lifespan than you might think. Even the systems inside most modern airframes are laughably outdated compared to the hunk of hardware sitting on your desk.

[Longinius 1]

"All anyone's getting from the developers is "summer 2003" "

And the publisher says 2003-10-03, atleast for the Nordic area. : )

[Supah 0]

I remember being a kid and hearing my dad (ex Royal Netherlands Airforce pilot) tell me about how the EF2000 was obsolete before its first operational flight due to its idiotically long development. It is 1980's technology ....

Would you call the F-16 obsolete?  It's 70's technology.

Airframes have a lot longer operational lifespan than you might think.  Even the systems inside most modern airframes are laughably outdated compared to the hunk of hardware sitting on your desk.

Well the F-16 was 1970-ties technology but it was introduced in 1979 (in the netherlands, USAF pbb was earlier) The EF2000 is 70/80's technology and has yet to be introduced in any real numbers with units. It lacks allot of things say the F-22 does have. The F-16 is old but it is still very capable due to its excellent manueverabillity and how that there are allot of updates to its avionics. Recently the dutch F-16 A's recieved the MLU (Mid Life Update) which puts them on par and beyond in some area's with the USAF's late F-16 C's. The EF2000 is going to be a new aircraft, you dont want to be updating a new aircraft in a big way

[Badgerboy 0]

I remember being a kid and hearing my dad (ex Royal Netherlands Airforce pilot) tell me about how the EF2000 was obsolete before its first operational flight due to its idiotically long development. It is 1980's technology ....

This is true, but fortunately the only the airframe has remained essentially the same. The EF2000 was designed to beat two upgraded Su27 with thrust vectoring and BVM's byt itself.

I can tell you the avionics have been constantly re-evaluated throughout its development, as has its capabilities. Remember, it was designed as a A-A fighter like the F-22, but was redesignated for A-G work when the cold war threats subsided. In that respect, its more succesful than the F-22, and a hell of alot less expensive.

The Rafale is a very nice aircraft, as is the Gripen, but I'd rather wait a little longer and receive a fully capable Typhoon. Some of the voice activation proceedures and data links are frankly amazing! You can effectively target multiple bandits, hand off targets to your flight, and begin to engage without pressing a button! Couple that with a AWAC's in the area, and the bastards won't see you coming.

[Supah 0]

I remember being a kid and hearing my dad (ex Royal Netherlands Airforce pilot) tell me about how the EF2000 was obsolete before its first operational flight due to its idiotically long development. It is 1980's technology ....

This is true, but fortunately the only the airframe has remained essentially the same. The EF2000 was designed to beat two upgraded Su27 with thrust vectoring and BVM's byt itself.

I can tell you the avionics have been constantly re-evaluated throughout its development, as has its capabilities. Remember, it was designed as a A-A fighter like the F-22, but was redesignated for A-G work when the cold war threats subsided. In that respect, its more succesful than the F-22, and a hell of alot less expensive.

The Rafale is a very nice aircraft, as is the Gripen, but I'd rather wait a little longer and receive a fully capable Typhoon. Some of the voice activation proceedures and data links are frankly amazing! You can effectively target multiple bandits, hand off targets to your flight, and begin to engage without pressing a button! Couple that with a AWAC's in the area, and the bastards won't see you coming.

Wouldnt telling the aircraft what to do take longer then pressing the button? A big advantage however would be that there is no need to look inside the cockpit and thus take your eye of of the enemy. As for the F-22 being a pure A - A fighter (or with very limited strike capabillity), i never understood that decision. Sure its better to have the very best plane you can have but recent times have shown that most wars are going to be against countries who's airforce wont get off the ground let alone have the capabillity too defeat even the current generation of western fighter jets. I would be more worried about AAA and SAM's then enemy fighter jets.

Will the EF2000 have thrustvectoring, supercruise ability and alike? When is it scheduled to be in full operational service? Am i correct in thinking that it basically does the same thing the Joint Strike Fighter is supposed to do (well not the VTOL but the standard JSF wont do that either, they have a special version for that) ?

[Badgerboy 0]

I remember being a kid and hearing my dad (ex Royal Netherlands Airforce pilot) tell me about how the EF2000 was obsolete before its first operational flight due to its idiotically long development. It is 1980's technology ....

This is true, but fortunately the only the airframe has remained essentially the same. The EF2000 was designed to beat two upgraded Su27 with thrust vectoring and BVM's byt itself.

I can tell you the avionics have been constantly re-evaluated throughout its development, as has its capabilities. Remember, it was designed as a A-A fighter like the F-22, but was redesignated for A-G work when the cold war threats subsided. In that respect, its more succesful than the F-22, and a hell of alot less expensive.

The Rafale is a very nice aircraft, as is the Gripen, but I'd rather wait a little longer and receive a fully capable Typhoon. Some of the voice activation proceedures and data links are frankly amazing! You can effectively target multiple bandits, hand off targets to your flight, and begin to engage without pressing a button! Couple that with a AWAC's in the area, and the bastards won't see you coming.

Wouldnt telling the aircraft what to do take longer then pressing the button? A big advantage however would be that there is no need to look inside the cockpit and thus take your eye of of the enemy. As for the F-22 being a pure A - A fighter (or with very limited strike capabillity), i never understood that decision. Sure its better to have the very best plane you can have but recent times have shown that most wars are going to be against countries who's airforce wont get off the ground let alone have the capabillity too defeat even the current generation of western fighter jets. I would be more worried about AAA and SAM's then enemy fighter jets.

Will the EF2000 have thrustvectoring, supercruise ability and alike? When is it scheduled to be in full operational service? Am i correct in thinking that it basically does the same thing the Joint Strike Fighter is supposed to do (well not the VTOL but the standard JSF wont do that either, they have a special version for that) ?

Thrust vectoring was toyed with, and they developed a concept model, but it was decided that it didn't need the extra weight of the nozzles as it was maneovrable enough for its role. No supercruise either, which is a shame, but have you seen its takeoff roll on afterburner? Its like a STOL aircraft!

As for the voice activation, it lets you fly the plane, and look outside, instead of focussing on instruments constantly, something which is liable to get you killed.

[Supah 0]

Thrust vectoring was toyed with, and they developed a concept model, but it was decided that it didn't need the extra weight of the nozzles as it was maneovrable enough for its role. No supercruise either, which is a shame, but have you seen its takeoff roll on afterburner? Its like a STOL aircraft!

Well i am looking forward to seeing it at NATO excersizes at Leeuwarden Airbase  My house is directly under the approach to its main runway. In the end thats the only way your going to know how it measures up against other fighters. ATM the resident squadrons are taking on Lakenheath F-15's (rather noiseiy at that ). I remember 322 squadron intercepting a b-2 a few years back that was sneaking in to the airspace as a part of an excersize or something, caused quite a upstir though it supposedly was more accidental. The F-16 pilot got visual on it as it was crossing the "afsluitdijk" by chance

Quote[/b] ] As for the voice activation, it lets you fly the plane, and look outside, instead of focussing on instruments constantly, something which is liable to get you killed.

Yeah that is the basic idea behind the HOTAS idea too. Placing all controls relevant to dogfighting and bombing on the throttle and stick so you dont have to mess with the instrumentpanel or side panels. The F-16 was one of the first aircraft with this feature I believe

Lets hope the EF2000 isnt as unreliable as the Tornado IDS is. When ever the germans come here and practice allot aircraft of their attack waves have to abort the mission with some sort of defect, mainly undercarraige and weapon system malfunctions.

[Tovarish 0]

Screenies Some new, a couple old.

http://www.gamekult.com/pc....6160417

[Supah 0]

Pretty cool! Those markings are from the 32 TFS "Wolfhounds" and the tail code is for Soesterberg airbase in the netherlands. The squadron has been withdrawn state side and disbanded i believe. They were the only US squadron to have "royal" status They had the Dutch crown displayed on their Aircraft. Look on the intake.

Thats the logo

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Wow, that's pretty detailed.

[Supah 0]

@ June 26 2003,18:09)]Wow, that's pretty detailed.

Yeah they even got the orange tail band right. Even better, just looked up its serial number and the particular Aircraft did fly for the 32nd talk about attention to detail!

[Tex -USMC- 0]

lol, I think I'm going to buy two copies of this game just to support these guys- they deserve it.

[iNeo 0]

Guess I'll buy it after all... and hope they put Gripen in, one way or another.

[FSPilot 0]

The F-16 isn't that obsolete. It's an old model, but it's got plenty of engine and avionics updates. Plus it's got a pretty good model to go along with it.

[FSPilot 0]

It's a good time to be a flight simmer...

I just heard (but it probably wasn't just released) that FS2004 is set for a July 29th release date.  32 days and counting...

I'm just going to set that thing on "kiosk" mode while I go to work.

[PFC_Mike 2]

The most important part of a plane is the knowledge and skills of the pilot. I'd much rather be a superbly-trained US pilot in an F-16 with AWAC support than a poorly-trained Chinese pilot in a shiny new Su-30MKK or whatever.

LOMAC is looking really good. I may have to regain my addiction to flight sims.

As for FS2004, I have low expectations. Not enough fun planes like the Concord, too many gimmicky things like the Wright Flyer I. But airships...that would be so cool!

[Tovarish 0]

An old friend's opinion

[FSPilot 0]

Hahahaha

"US Propoganda!"

[Warin 0]

It's a good time to be a flight simmer...

I just heard (but it probably wasn't just released) that FS2004 is set for a July 29th release date.  32 days and counting...

I'm just going to set that thing on "kiosk" mode while I go to work.

Ooooooooh.... DC-3. That one aircraft makes this a must buy for me. One of the most enduring symbols, to me at least, of commercial aviation. Hell, they are still flying around in various places in the world. I got to sit in one when the mechanics were doing engine tests, and it was a glorious feeling to hear those engines crank up. Sent shivers down my spine. Sadly, a good friend of my sisters that worked for the charter company was killed, and the aircraft destroyed, when he and the DC-3 had to make a forced landing and crashed just short of the field.

I remember how thrilled I was to go from an IFR only sim on my Vic 20 to MS Flight Sim back in my Commodore 64 days, progressing through versions to 2000. I havent bought one since then, but it looks like Ill end up with this as a relaxing 'fly around' game to take me away from the stresses of dogfighting in FB or LOMAC

[Supah 0]

It's a good time to be a flight simmer...

I just heard (but it probably wasn't just released) that FS2004 is set for a July 29th release date.  32 days and counting...

I'm just going to set that thing on "kiosk" mode while I go to work.

Ooooooooh.... DC-3.  That one aircraft makes this a must buy for me.  One of the most enduring symbols, to me at least, of commercial aviation.  Hell, they are still flying around in various places in the world.  I got to sit in one when the mechanics were doing engine tests, and it was a glorious feeling to hear those engines crank up.  Sent shivers down my spine.  Sadly, a good friend of my sisters that worked for the charter company was killed, and the aircraft destroyed, when he and the DC-3 had to make a forced landing and crashed just short of the field.

I remember how thrilled I was to go from an IFR only sim on my Vic 20 to MS Flight Sim back in my Commodore 64 days, progressing through versions to 2000.  I havent bought one since then, but it looks like Ill end up with this as a relaxing 'fly around' game to take me away from the stresses of dogfighting in FB or LOMAC

I got to fly as a passenger in one from the Dutch Dakota Association. Quite the experience. It crashed in to the north sea a year later. Sad but they have gotten a new one Very cool plane, greatly ahead of its time when compared to what else was available at that time

[FSPilot 0]

DC-3 is definately an enduring symbol of aviation. It was the C-47 in wartime, also served as a gunship. Almost the first real cargo workhorse of the military.

[iNeo 0]

We used DC-3 for recon on Soviet's coast

[Warin 0]

DC-3 is definately an enduring symbol of aviation.  It was the C-47 in wartime, also served as a gunship.  Almost the first real cargo workhorse of the military.

Puff The Magic Dragon.

Hee hee hee.

Hippy crunchy granola name for a wicked killing machine

[Tovarish 0]

We used DC-3 for recon on Soviet's coast

And as you can see by my sig, the Soviets also used DC-3's (lend lease and license build during WWII)

[FSPilot 0]

I bet their propellers went the wrong way too.