• Last Seen: 5 yrs ago
  • Old Guild Username: Phreniphorm
  • Joined: 11 yrs ago
  • Posts: 391 (0.10 / day)
  • VMs: 0
  • Username history
    1. Skythikon 11 yrs ago
  • Latest 10 profile visitors:

Status

Recent Statuses

10 yrs ago
Current acquire raifu, defend waifu
10 yrs ago
Nothing quite like schizophrenic weather.
1 like
10 yrs ago
At this point I don't even care where I end up. I just want to do something productive, bloody hell.
10 yrs ago
I still remember four...
10 yrs ago
Standing by to stand by, cap'n!

Bio

User has no bio, yet

Most Recent Posts

Like I said, it's not because the MiG-29 is better, it's because it's flexible. As a multirole, it can be kitted out for anything from air interception to ground attack. However, it lacks the traits that make planes specially made for those purposes, such as the MiG-25's speed and the Su-25's low speed stability and high number of hardpoints. It only seems better right now because the RP hasn't started yet and I imagine most want to play it safe.

I imagine that there will be a lot of times during this RP when I go 'Gee, I sorta wish I picked the Su-25/MiG-25.' XD
IMO, Flankers should be fine, but only the early versions, 'cause the MiG-29 and early Su-27 were pretty much on equal ground. The F-16 should be allowed as well, seeing as how it's not nearly as 'new' as either. Nationality-wise, I don't see a problem if your character isn't flying an aircraft that doesn't match up with their nationality. I was under the impression that this was a (albeit elite) cobbled together unit given whatever planes they had to spare, thus the emphasis on Gen 3 - Gen 4 aircraft.

Anyway, I added my second character to my initial post. For what it's worth, she's a ground-attack pilot specializing in SEAD flying the AMX International AMX (Brazilian variant)

EDIT: Yeah, definitely head of the Rafale that shot down the F-22. I heard of stuff such as Singaporean F-16s defeating USAF F-15s simply because the USAF pilots had been listening on RSAF comms throughout the exercise, and when our pilots switched to our mangled form of English known as Singlish, they got confused.

EDIT2: And to clarify, I had Everett take the MiG because it would be what was most familiar after having flown the Shenyang J-11, which is a copy of the Su-27. If I could, I would have had Everett fly an upgraded Su-27M or Su-27S
No problem at all. =) Just ask away here or through PMs when you feel the need to.

I wouldn't say the best, but it is up there. The MiG-29 was designed as a multirole, so it's sort of like the jack-of-all-trades. The Su-25 is arguable the best for ground attack; low speed, wide wings and a heavy load? That thing is going to pulverize anything on the ground into scrap metal, but it's easy prey for fighters. The MiG-23 and 25 are awesome interceptors; they'll catch anything that's flying with their Mach 3+ speed, but they have a lower range due to their fuel consumption, and their engines degrade at a comparatively higher rate.

Guess all I'm saying is that the MiG-29 looks to be the best right now simply because we don't know what's going to be thrown at us, but in missions that require specialization, it'll be the dedicated interceptors, ground attack, electronic warfare or fighters that will shine. The MiG-29 and other multiroles simply have adaptability on their side.


See those stuff under the wings? Those are the hardpoints. Image shown in a MiG-29 with the six hardpoints. The upgraded version, the MiG-35, has an additional two.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask! =D I still have all my notes from school, so I'll be more than happy to answer any questions you might have.

@Rafale: Yeah, the MiG-29's going to be pretty much the standard issue aircraft of our squadron. =\ I wish the Su-27 was available, since it was introduced just two years after the MiG-29 and it's maiden flight was only a few months after the MiG-29.
It's a part of the airframe that allows the aircraft to carry an external load.




Driving Park said
Can the more knowledgeable folk here recommend a thrust vectorable or already thrust vectoring pair of engines to replace the 25's Mach 3+ turbojets? Or, if possible, can the turbojets themselves be modified and made to thrust vector? Wiki says thrust vectoring is typically only used with turbofans.


Thrust vectoring is just the hydraulic adjustment of the nozzle to redirect thrust, so there's no reason it can't be used with a turbojet since the powerplant doesn't quite matter, The MiG-25 uses a variable choke nozzle, so it'll just be a case of removing those, linking them to flight control systems and installing the hydraulics to allow them a greater degree of movement.
Oh...Has to be from the list. Sorry! ><''

MiG-29 and Su-25 (No WSOs on either, so it'll be two pilots) it is. Will get the CSes up tomorrow. Late over here, I should probably sleep.
Uh, could I get an yea or nay on the FC-1? I'll probably play a Chinese character, but he won't be affiliated with China. More like a defector or mercenary.

And the mozzie's a beautiful plane. Fastest and most flexible aircraft of WWII (At least until the Me-262, at least in terms of speed). Too bad it didn't do any good in the Pacific since the wood glue they used degraded in moisture. =P
I've done more looking up on Gen 4/4.5 aircraft, and I think I'll go with the FC-1 Xiaolong (Fierce Dragon). It's a multirole that's so far shown itself to be incredibly capable at air-to-ground operations. I'm hoping our pilots won't have to fly planes related to their nationalities, because I'm still hoping to eventually upgrade into a Su-34 eventually.

Still, all down to Silverwindblade to decide if the FC-1 is allowed.

EDIT: The Swedes do make some sweet aircraft. The Draken is still my no.3 favorite, just behind the Il-2 and De Havilland Mosquito (Always been partial to WWII planes.)
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet