Dogfights

[NicQ]

I know that workaround. But what if I wanted to keep realtime track of tank movement as I go to bomb it?

if you could use the TARPS for that, you'd do it through the cameras, and thus through MFD in optical mode and radar display
But you can't, it's not combat equipment.

The TARPS is 17 feet long, 1850 pounds heavy, btw

TARPS missions
The TARPS pod provided capability for the Tomcat to conduct a variety of Reconnaissance tasking including:

* mapping (the Tomcat software was also upgraded to assist with this demanding and painstaking mission)
* pre and post strike Bomb Damage Assessment
* standoff oblique photography
* maritime ship surveillance

Note, no bombing
It only takes photos, has absolutely no integration with combat systems, on-board or through datalinks with other a/c : it's not a weapon system, period.

I think you're mistaking the TARPS for the LANTIRN system, both which CANNOT be on the same a/c at the same time, the latter being an night/all-weather combat system.

Cheers !

[flyer5]

I know that workaround. But what if I wanted to keep realtime track of tank movement as I go to bomb it?

if you could use the TARPS for that, you'd do it through the cameras, and thus through MFD in optical mode and radar display
But you can't, it's not combat equipment.

The TARPS is 17 feet long, 1850 pounds heavy, btw

TARPS missions
The TARPS pod provided capability for the Tomcat to conduct a variety of Reconnaissance tasking including:

* mapping (the Tomcat software was also upgraded to assist with this demanding and painstaking mission)
* pre and post strike Bomb Damage Assessment
* standoff oblique photography
* maritime ship surveillance

Note, no bombing
It only takes photos, has absolutely no integration with combat systems, on-board or through datalinks with other a/c : it's not a weapon system, period.

I think you're mistaking the TARPS for the LANTIRN system, both which CANNOT be on the same a/c at the same time, the latter being an night/all-weather combat system.

Cheers !

hehe, silly me!

[Prince Dark]

Well if there is no want to have a combat version of FlightGear then why have military jets in the regular FlightGear?

[jack]

Well if there is no want to have a combat version of FlightGear then why have military jets in the regular FlightGear?

Don't you realize that this topic has been dead for well over a year? You don't just go around waking dead topics just to shove in your two cents.

And what do you mean if nobody wants military aircraft? I want military aircraft, and so do hundreds of other people. Military aircraft take way more skill to fly than your giant 787.

[skyop]

Not to mention that armed military fighters have been in FG for years, and nobody's complained. It's only WMD's that cause controversies.

[Prince Dark]

And what do you mean if nobody wants military aircraft? I want military aircraft, and so do hundreds of other people. Military aircraft take way more skill to fly than your giant 787.

I would know how to fly jets, I've flown the A-10 Thunderbolt. And what's the point in craft having guns if there's nothing to shoot at?

And I know I'm picking up on an inactive topic, I've been busy working with Greenpeace Virtual. Don't blame me that it's taken this long to respond.

[jack]

So, you woke up a 1 1/2 year old topic, so you could make what point exactly?

And what's the point in craft having guns if there's nothing to shoot at?

There's plenty to shoot at. There's an addon known as the bombable script, that enables you to create and fight advanced ai aircraft, which perform advanced combat maneuvers and even shoot back at you. I've been looking into modifying it so we can have AI flak guns and SAM batteries too.

Some of us want to see a little more 'action' during our flights. Compared to taking off in a 787-800, setting the autopilot, coming back to the computer in 5 hours, and setting the ILS so it lands itself.

I would know how to fly jets, I've flown the A-10 Thunderbolt.

We aren't specifically talking about the warthog here. Are you saying that because you may have flown one jet, you know exactly what it's like to fly other jets too? Like the MiG-15, F-14B, and F/A-18?

EDIT: Fixed aircraft technicality to help Skyop cope with nitpicking issues.

[Prince Dark]

We aren't specifically talking about the warthog here. Are you saying that because you may have flown one jet, you know exactly what it's like to fly other jets too? Like the MiG-15, F-14B, and F/A-18?

I've even gone on the Seahawk FGA6, A-10 Thunderbolt, NG T-38, and the English Electric Lightning (and the English Electric Lightning is a rocket)

So, you woke up a 1 1/2 year old topic, so you could make what point exactly?

More like 1/2 year old, the last post before now was December of last year

[skyop]

Some of us want to see a little more 'action' during our flights. Compared to taking off in a 777, setting the autopilot, coming back to the computer in 5 hours, and setting the ILS so it lands itself.

Our 777's autopilot doesn't do that.

[jack]

Fixed.

[skyop]

None of our aircraft can autoland, including the 787.

I think your assertion that flying a commercial transport is as easy as setting the autopilot and coming back once in awhile to push buttons is complete nonsense. In real life, you have to deal with fuel and payload balancing, constant air traffic control monitoring and commands, weather and turbulence, and a strict schedule from the airlines. None of these, of course, is simulated in FlightGear (or at least not very well). So it's no surprise taking up a 777 (which could have a better FDM) in FG is very easy compared to doing it IRL.

[jack]

I'm only comparing sim aircraft, not the real life ones. Of course a real 777 is much more complicated than the one we have, but in the sim, a fighter like the MiG-15 or F-14B is much more difficult to fly than the 777 or 787-8.

Anyways, I still don't understand why this topic was awakened in the first place....

[Prince Dark]

Anyways, I still don't understand why this topic was awakened in the first place....

Cause this is my first revisit to the forum in months, and I saw that you replied

[Gijs]

None of our aircraft can autoland, including the 787.

We do have some that (did) autoland, including the 747-200... but that's too offtopic here

[Armchair Ace]

The 742 definitely can't autoland anymore - well, not with 2.0 or GIT, anyway - so I think we really are out of aircraft that can autoland.