Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

This is why Don loves my late night forays as well but, since I just got home a short time ago unfortunately this will happen at times. Thanks for the catch! Does make a world difference though, also they are saying those MIRAGES did perform better then their F-16C/D fighters.

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well this next article is the most update and comprehensive one out there on the F-35 on all types, timelines, issues, capabilities, weapons by types/loads etc. etc. and even comparisons to existing craft and they were eye opening in a couple of instances not from what I already knew but how big the gap truly is and admitted too. We're in such a hurry now with this plane that even with the current software issues widely reported in the main stream media here, that the CORPS is going to push on to IOC with limited and restricted operational capabilities. Makes AUSA look real good from the articles posted in here about three or more years ago on the F-35. If you really read this carefully it's just a sad situation.
Again DID is a multi-sourced publication.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...ersies-021922/

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

I always love the folks that say the F-35 is a "Fighter", and not a very good one. It's a "Ground Attack" aircraft, and should be a significant improvement over most currently in use.

I'll stick to my current 01/2017 deployment time, but I did suggest a few weapon loadout changes based on your find.
Thanks again Fastboat!

I also love the A-10 as a ground attack aircraft, if only they could figure out how to put tail hooks on them and get them off a runway less then 1,200m ...

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I've been waiting for the "GHOSTRIDER" for ~3yrs. now. The only minor surprise for me is that AFSOC decided to stay with the 105mm, but it proved it's value again in Iraq and in the mountains of Afghanistan so I'm glad it's there. And with VIPER STRIKE anti armor and other precision strike weapons, new electronics offensive and defensive suite onboard it'll be someones nightmare on the ground. The SPECTRE is already on my list as well. If all goes well operational testing should be complete by Spring of 2016 so that puts it out two patches anyway.
http://www.janes.com/article/53354/a...trider-gunship
http://www.af.mil/AboutUs/FactSheets...hostrider.aspx
http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDispla...t-ac-130j.aspx

TRACKING

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

As I'm sure Don is well aware of, there have been many stories on what the Liberal Party in Canada under now Prime Minister Trudeau promised it would do if elected. One that had possible ramifications to our defense industry and beyond was, the promise to end Canada's participation in the F-35 program. No formal decision has been made thus far from the Trudeau government but, the French are feeling confident enough to offer the RAFALE to the Canadian government now.
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...in-time-05991/
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/rafale/
http://www.military-today.com/aircra...ult_rafale.htm

The consequences of a decision by Canada to drop the F-35 will be huge for some countries as the per unit cost before maintenance/support considerations are taken into account, will mean a million dollar increase regardless of who's buying them.
Hit the highlighted portions of the top/first para for those details.

This article will also have me take a look at the RAFALE in the French OOB, since this a multi-sourced document, it's enough to do a quick check, the issue here is the first version(s) weren't a ground attack capable platform. I'll see.

Also this is as good a place as any for the next article as it pertains to Canada and Russia. The Northwest Passage opening up is causing a "can of worms" between those two countries and others. Russia is wasting no time in establishing bases/or reopening in some cases Cold War era bases long shut down in the Arctic. At stake besides territorial issues are the vast resources and who'll control them in that region (Is someone thinking about a scenario/or campaign here!?!) both Navies are there and we've visited as well.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/march...equipment.html
http://www.newsweek.com/2015/07/17/u...ic-349973.html

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Before our two year budget gets approved the DOD will have to cut a further 5 Billion dollars from the defense budget. So for the USAF a further delay for the F-35 was already mentioned. The USA is supposed to draw down another 40,000 troops and around 19,000 civilian personnel. And we'll the effects of that here after Thanksgiving. With all this "doom and gloom" it appears you can't keep and "old bird" down face it, it's still our best CAS asset we have. Here's the latest.
http://www.janes.com/article/49836/p...ic-replacement
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...utm_medium=RSS
http://www.janes.com/article/54629/u...10a-re-winging
http://www.janes.com/article/55459/u...-syria-strikes
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...program-03187/
http://www.janes.com/article/55895/u...tirement-delay

What's this all mean?
1) Improved birds (2 I think.) will need to be added.
2) Current plans take the A-10 out to at least 2021. Though ongoing life cycle issues will keep the A-10 flying/viable through 2028.

And since Don can reasonably understand "Conklinese" something I've very recently touched on, has left me with a "loss of appetite" and you might be "serving dinner without me" but I'll let you know via PM as the situation has been developing for sometime and is ongoing into the foreseeable near term future.

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

Not directly game relevant but never-the-less interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtZN...6m1GAg&index=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyHl...6m1GAg&index=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkrR...6m1GAg&index=3

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Not directly game relevant but never-the-less interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtZN...6m1GAg&index=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyHl...6m1GAg&index=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkrR...6m1GAg&index=3

New update:

[urlhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31oJIo8EVwY[/url]

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I truly do this with a "heavy heart", full respect of the history and not to save slots, this is more about not being able to meet the capabilities of these assets in the game due to coding issues etc. Even as I have new data and new units to be added to the game even from other countries, what I'm about to ask has been on my mind on and off for years now since I asked a "similar" question dealing with the game engines ability to improve upon how it treats the attack capabilities of gunships. Going back to "PUFF THE MAGIC DRAGON" AC-47 gunships from the below ref...

"They tried the idea with ten, 30 caliber machine guns mounted in a C-47. The idea worked and the Air Force replaced the machine guns with three General Electric, six barrel, rotating mini-guns, reminiscent of the Civil War Gatling guns. These 7.62 mm guns were capable of covering every square foot of a football field with one round, in one minute."
http://www.dc3history.org/aircraftmi...gicdragon.html

We at best can only do a 50 meter attack hex. The newer models are now carrying ATGW which could be set up for stand off attacks, however we have plenty of those already for about the same cost in planes and jets. And there's the issue cost vs. benefit and at one hex and as much as I REALLY like these units I don't see the benefit to the player even as the capabilities have increased over the years to include the latest version just coming online. Cost doesn't normally bother me as Suhiir knows and I've put a fair amount of work into these units across the board in both recommending fixes and otherwise submitting new units over a couple of years not that long ago.

Again I don't like this, but, at the same time I think this matter bears some thought and reflection on what's best for the game and players if nothing can be done to improve it's capabilities. I have a couple of thoughts on the matter for modeling within the "hex world", otherwise I again would ask serious consideration be given to what I'm asking.

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

Pat, for the most part they were added as scenario window dressing not a serious in game unit because, as you noted, they simply cannot do what their RL counterparts do. The fact they even circle a target and fire while doing so was an accomplishment only dreamed of in the days of SP2 But of the Triumvirate of off map air assets we HAVE added, gliders, paras and gunships...gunships was the one that never quite worked but they did gradually grow from one or two curiosity units into a bit of a crowd that eats up increasingly scarce slots