AARDVARK

>>8526381
Who's the idiot who took a Phantom for Air Superiority?

>>8526381
Damn, that's an awesome archive! Reading now.

Out of curiosity, what system are you using for this, OP? Or is it more freeform?

>>8526408
I belive it was mentioned in the last thread that if he purchased a super-cool Plane he would have nothing but the integral cannon for a few missions.

>>8526436
Yeah, but the other guy has a FLANKER. I mean, Tomcat at the very least, or maybe an early gen Eagle. Both are superior Air to Air choices.

>>8526436

Again, who's the idiot who chose the phantom for air superiority? They took the cannon out of the phantom's design because "The era of such close quarters dogfighting was over". All subsequent planes were designed with cannons because it was found that not having one was such a retarted concept that got too many people killed.

Ontop of that, the phantom had SHIT maneuverability. It's said that it took FOREVER to just turn the damn thing. With a Mirage and Flanker on your team? you best bet you're the weakest link and all you're good for is screaming in at full thrust to drop bombs and get the fuck out of there.

>>8526423
Our GM has built the system, using pieces of other systems. I'm not too worried, steve has always been awesome with vehicle combat, he's never shied away from it. He told us that there might be a few bugs initially as he irons out the ruleset, but if we were cool with that, he'd love to test out this new one with us, since according to him its the one he's been trying to perfect for more than a year, air combat.

>>8526479
The Phantom is an awesome BVR fighter, since it can carry a fuckload of missiles. WHy bother closing with the enemy in a dogfight, just dump some Sparrows and watch him die.

>>8526479
The Phantom has a cannon in it... Look at op's picture.

>>8526503
I see. I was just wondering because I thought maybe there was some awesome game with aerial combat out there I hadn't heard of. So here's to hoping it works out well.

>>8526532
I don't know about an RPG, but "Birds of Prey" is a pretty rock solid air combat game.

>>8526503
If I recall from the last thread the guy who picked it added an Israeli upgrade kit to it as well. Which assumes he picked a later model F-4 that does include a cannon.

>>8526519

that's exactly how it was designed, but exactly how it failed to work. Phantom ended up in WAY more close quarters dogfights than it should have been. I'm just saying, the OP is MUCH better off with an F14, F16, F15 or F18, seeing as they each of those were planes that REPLACED the phantom and each of them (save the F14) are still in service, making them having served longer than the F4.

You may only have a gun for the first few missions, but trust me, you'll have an overall better investment.

You should get a Goodyear inflatoplane. You know, as backup.

>>8526572
OP is multirole, I think his F4 choice is very strong. Also, the bVR issues the F4 had initially were caused by the lousy perfromance of the first BVR air to air missiles. Load up on AMRAAMs and the Phantom is a cheap effective weapons delivery platform.

OP, I hope you got yourself an F-4E and not an early model without a fixed 20mm vulcan!

I thought the Viggen would've been a pretty good choice myself, considering the crappy runways OP's group will probably be expected to operate from.

Fuck OP, your merc force has a Bear? Your GM has a sweet sense of total awesomeness!

>>8526675
The Viggen still needs a paved runway, it's not that rugged.

>>8526730
Yeah, but it only needs 500 m of runway, and can also land on some extra-wide roads and highways.

>>8526675
If you're talking about runways, they should've gotten a Harrier.

http://books.google.ca/books?id=qCUDAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA61&dq=F-4%20Phantom&as_pt=MAGAZINES&a
mp;rview=1&pg=PA61#v=onepage&q=&f=false

http://books.google.ca/books?id=jCkDAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA77&dq=F-4%20Phantom&as_pt=MAGAZINES&a
mp;rview=1&pg=PA77#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Some cool links from Popular science about the Aardvark and F5 specifically.

>>8526809
Yes, that would have been pretty cool too. Downsides would include subsonic speed and not being able to take off vertically with a full load, but who cares when you can hover in place?

>>8526873
Despite what Cameron and True Lies would have you believe, the Harrier isn't that capable of an aircraft. It's not bad at multirole, but it sacrifices a lot for it's V/STOL performance.

>>8526479
There are plenty Phantom variants with integral guns, you know. That, and a modernised F-4 can bring AMRAAMs and the like to the party.

The Germans actually had a nasty aggressor wing (JG 73) that was flying a combination of MiG-29s and F-4s and they brought up some really evil tricks when it came to exploiting the respective strenghts of the planes during all the exercises they flew against other NATO airforces.

Want to go BVR? Those Phantoms have good modernised radar, AMRAAMs and can do missile guidance for the MiGs. Want to get stuck in? Say hello to MiG-29s with western avionics and AA-11 Archers. (Who happen to be superior to any western short-range AAMs short of the AIM-9x or IRIS-T.)

Rutan Ares 151, was only a prototype for a study in a cheap ground support aircraft. But it carried a GAU-12/U 25 mm rotary barreled cannon. Very neat craft. Also small and very cheap.

Would your GM allow this? Because you'd win every dogfight, every time.

>>8526949

Wow... that looks like something right out of Ace Combat (but I guess that should be expected from a Burt Rutan design)

>>8527019
I want Rutan chops.

>>8526522
>The Phantom has a cannon in it... Look at op's picture.
>no visible cannon on OP's picture
Hmmm

>>8527127
It's right under the nose...

>>8526381
P-51
A-10
Hobo strapped to some balloons

>>8527140
>It's right under the nose...
Mate, that's an air scoop for some of the instruments. Look at how short the "pod" is and tell me they can fit a gun in there, let alone ammunition feeds.

>>8527164
It's a gun mount dumbass.

>>8527194
I love it when people pretend to know things

>>8527272
Hey shit for brains, That's an F-4E, with an M-61 Cannon mounted under the nose. Do you want a Jane's link or something?

>>8527164
Doesn't matter if that dude's right or not, Phantoms have had guns since late Vietnam. It's a good choice, chill out.

OP, I'll have a site for you in just a moment. Can you ask your GM about posting his ruleset somewhere for us to use ourselves? Also his price list?

>>8527127
>>8527164
>>8527272

Yeah, sure looks like an 'air scoop' for avionics...

>>8527362
>Lol at file name.

>>8527164
You got told.

>>8527336
http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/man/uswpns/air/fighter/f4phantom.html#specifications

FAS is good for unclassified specs. Will that suffice, or do you need more/other stuff?

Your loadout will depend on your mission, OP. If you post it for us, I'll be glad to help.

Draken, the superior choice.

>>8527362
OUch. Someone got proved wrong due to pics happening.

>>8527431
Dat double delta wing

Question: Why don't most planes use delta wings? Why aren't most bombers flying wings? Don't both configurations have superior lift and capacity?

>>8527534
Many modern fighters use a combination of Delta wings and Canards, or cropped delta surfaces.

Having a pure delta, and only a delta design bleeds too much energy in dogfighting and I think it lowers performance in low altitude flying.

Still very good for high-altitude interceptors though.

>>8527534
Not at all speeds, and certainly not at all price points they are built at.

>>8527534
Delta sucks at slower speeds in most cases.

>>8526479

>Thinks the only way to dogfight is with a hard left turn

OP: Everything depends on your target, naturally, but an excellent multi-role loadout would be two sidewinders (or whatever good short-range IR missile you're using,) and four Mk-82 500lb iron bombs. Or six, however many the F-4 can carry (i.e. a lot.) You can swap that for laser-guided ones if you have a FLIR pod to designate, and laser guidance kits for those bombs, or cluster bombs for soft targets. A mix of Rockeye cluster bombs and Mk-84 2,000 lbs bombs works great against mixed soft/hard targets.

Your sidewinders are simply for self-defense. If you plan on more air-to-air, four medium-range radar guided missiles and four 500lb bombs will serve you well.

>>8527534
>>Why aren't most bombers flying wings?

Harder to fly those. If you want them reliable and safe, you need really good electronics.

It turns slow as shit and can only get into mach 1 with afterburners unless you get a modernized one, so I'd suggest you GET THE FUCK OUT OF DODGE when dogfighting goes down and stay in the bomber role.

>>8527592

>turns like shit lol

SO FUCKING WHAT

>>8527615
Jesus christ don't pop a vein
I was just saying that the system probably isn't gonna be incredibly detailed the the F-4 might not be able to turn very well in the GM's system
Christ you're a shithead

Pictured- the rolling scissors, a maneuver where power/weight ratio is more important then turn rate.

>>8527690

I dunno, broseph. This guy is running a game that seems to be 100% oriented around plane geekage. He might know his shit.

>>8527691
Not pictured: The possibility that the GM hasn't worked complicated manuevers into his system and he's just assigned arbitrary turn rates that will fuck OP over

>>8527702

I didn't notice that that was a YOU MAD macro, here, have a better Reagan.

What system?

>>8527719
u mad reagan?

>>8527733
>>8527733

Some homebrew thing.

If we beg and plead perhaps OP will share his GM's system.

>>8527742
Do want.

>>8527738

Don't go away, OP! We're sorry the thread wasn't good!

>>8527703
>>8527690
>>8527592

From the previous thread it is quite clear the OP doesn't need to be shititng bricks over his choice of initial plane.

Sounds like the GM is an understanding GM that isn't of the "GM vs Players" mindset.

It is just as likely that his F-4 May perform better in the tabletop then in the real world.

No one should be getting too worked up over the nitty gritty without seeing the system. (Hell without playing it.)

>>8527755
Planefag did it
also is dat some arma 2?

>>8527759
Well both of you stop and shake hands then. We don't care who started it.

"I'm a fighter pilot, Tex. Not a murderer. Return to base."

youtube.com/watch?v=oAdikjwJ2vs

>>8527769
B-b-but
he's trying to take my soviet missiles

>>8527759

NO U

Actually that GIF is from Lock On. I've got a few of my own on my hard drive. This one is particularly epic. A-10 schools carrier.

Great simulator, shitty single-player game, like most of Ubisoft's stuff.

>>8527778
All I remember is the excellent soundtrack:
youtube.com/watch?v=5qsjTOF62Z

Can we at least have a rundown of how the system works?

>>8527785
Goddamn fuck you just pop that vein already
OP hope your gm has a system for aerial manuevers and some deus ex machina to save your ass like an ejector seat and armored to hell cockpit

>>8527829

>dogfight system without aerial manuvers

You'd have to be a special kind of retarded to make that, I think.

Unless it's Crimson Skies, which is kind of like Battlemechs that FLY, etc.

>>8527785
pretty much.

I liked the depth of learning when it came to flying a new plane though.

The Frogfoot in particular has a soviet style epic simpleness to it that always made me smile.

>>radar? we don't need no stinking radar.

>>8527785
This is in-game?

That's fucking awesome.

>>8527880
God, i was so glad it had no radar. I spent most of my time in the SU-27 fighting with the fucking pan and scan system to get a goddamn lock.

I'm a little sad that the EA-6B got veto'd ;_;

I'm not a fan of the f-4, historically they had a very high maintenance cost and weren't so hot on the maneuverability/agility side of things. Kind of like flying buses.


OP, if you want info on the F-4 wiki was a good start. I would also suggest looking on youtube for the history channel's Dogfights series. Find one about vietnam they are usually about f-4's. You'll get to hear mission stories retold by actual pilots.


As far as I know, the f-4 handles like shit, consumes a huge amount of fuel and is ancient by today's standards. Make sure you get a later model that includes an integral canon as the first models were built without them.

Extensive upgrades to the electronics/radar/ACM/ECM/EVERYTHING are MANDATORY if you want to survive in modern day aerial combat.


An f-4 is kind of like a late 60's muscle car. If you're willing to put a fuckton of work and money into it, you can get the thing going down a drag strip real fucking good. But it'll never corner, handle, accelerate or brake like a modern day sports car.

hope that helps.

>>8527917

Yes, that's in-game recording. Dodging naval SAM's like he's fucking batman.

>>8527917
LOMAC, the best Aerial sim since Falcon 4, or any Janes game.

>>8527939
All true, but the F-4 has ridiculous straight line speed, sexy looks (that counts), and burners that only have two settings: Off, and OH GOD MY SPINE, IT SHATTERED MY SPINE!

>>8527939

Why don't you look up the Dogfights episode where Duke Cunningham details how his fatass F-4 Phantom managed to kick the shit out of a Vietnamese ace flying the super-manuverable MiG-17?

I'll go ahead and blow that vein now.

>>8527945
>LOMAC
>Sim
Oh, come on, now.

>>8527967
I have seen it.

American pilots have historically been the most well-trained and best-equipped pilots in war. If the OP happens to be Duke Cunningham, and can be sure that his campaigns will only ever plot him against the MiG-17, then he should be fine.

Also, the MiG-17 was built in 1950, the f-4 in 1960. I could pound out a list for you, but the f-4 was superior to the mig-17 in almost every way (other than the aforementioned agility).
My point is that if the OP is a modern setting, using the mig-17 as a benchmark for the f-4's performance and potential is fucking stupid.

>>8528070

>modern setting

They're mercenaries operating out of South America.

Short version- no, it's not a modern setting.

Meh, make it a modern German or Israeli-upgraded F4 and it will do just fine.

With the planes in the OP, the Mirage and the Flanker can do the dogfighting while the Phantoms habg back and lob the occasional AMRAAM.

Also, the F-4 is win for it's sheer ugliness alone. The Triumph of Thrust over Aerodymics.

South America still uses prop planes in their air forces because of the reduced cost of maintenance.

A jet fighter'll kick ass down there.

>>8528118

>Thrust over Aerodynamics

>>8528119

Hugo has been spending his oil profits to buy Su-30's though, and Brazil is deciding this month of they're getting Gripens or Rafales (or Super Hornet but that's a nil chance). Otherwise it's pretty much outdated.

>>8528197

>Hugo Chavez with Su-30s

This does not please me.

>>8528197
And there you have your final boss.

>>8528231

I WANT IN ON THIS GAME

>>8528207

He bought about a hundred T-72's modernised to near T-90 standards too, so there's plenty of ground targets too. Venezuela's neighbours don't have proper MBT's and fighters at all, so yeah.

>>8528256

That's just, absolutely, fucking, fantastic. I hope his neighbors aren't counting too heavily on US intervention.

OP again, got this from the GM about five minutes ago.

BlackFlag Internal Document #100298

Mission Briefing “Horse Therapy”
Deployment: Kisangani
Pancake: Kisangani
Alternate: None (We are still negotiating with the provisional government)
AAR: None
AWACS: None
CSAR: MI-24 Hind + Jaeger Flight. Eight Million Sortie Fee if utilized

Contract Employer: Ministre de Sécurité Externale, France

Objective: Destruction of suspected Sudan terrorist training camp and airfield located at the old Marida airfield, just inside the Sudanese border. Primary targets are the airfield runway, fuel dump in the southeast, and the command bunker to the north northwest.

Background: These guys have been a thorn in the side of France's efforts to pacify the region. Due to UN regulations as well as their own civil government issues, the French have not had the ability to simply remove this training camp. That's where we come in. Taking out the command bunker will most likely remove some key leadership positions, and with the airstrip gone, will force the OPFOR to move on the ground, where the French security force has a presence and a good chance of catching and stopping them.

(Part two to follow, long doc)

>>8528318
And the rest of the mission Brief:
Intel (HUMINT free): OPFOR likely disorganized, undertrained. Equipment status rated at no better then barely serviceable. Most equipment unmanned unless alert given. OPFOR operates off grid, and does not benefit from outside intel, support, elint.
Air Assets: Two MiG-17s, One MiG-21, Two Bell Huey Gunships.
Surface Assets: SA-2 system, 4xZSU-23 at objective.
Intel (Remote Imaging free): Attached you will find the latest keyhole pass. We've marked off targets and defences. We could not find the fourth ZSU-23, and suspect that the OPFOR has begun camo-netting the emplacements, or simply placed it inside for maintenance.

Threat Assessment: Very Low. The biggest threats will be from the MiG-21 and the SA-2 system, neutralize them first, and the rest of this mission should be a cakewalk.

ROE: No limits in Sudanese Airspace. Return fire only in DRC airspace.

>>8528318
>>8528327
Your GM is boss.

>>8528207
Don't worry too much about it, Venezuela doesn't have the logistics to properly maintain the entire fleet, about half of them are going to be undergoing maintenance at any given time, and considering the bad reputation that Russian engines have for their short lifetimes I think it's going to inflict a heavy financial burden on Venezuela in the long run. As of now they are barely able to train their pilots, and certainly not properly. The Indian Air Force would rape them on a 1:1 basis.

>>8528318
>>8528327
FUCK YEAH

Your likely going to want to kit out more for anti-ground in this mission. Keep some spare AA weapons otherwise load up.

What are the prices involved of such?

>>8528471
If you can bomb out the runway before the Migs get in the air you don't have to worry about them anymore.

>>8528431
I wish my own GM put in 10% the energy this guy's GM does. I just looked up the stuff in the briefing, the guy used actual sat imagery of that airfield, all the places are real, I mean, shit, this is fucking awesome!

Ok assholes, we have a mission now.

From what OP has told us, this looks to be a strike mission for the most part.

OP's crew is flying:
Flanker and Phantom as Air to Air
Phantom and Mirage as Multi Role
Aardvark as Air to Ground.

The airfield has a lot of Close in anti-air. The SA-2 isn't a huge threat, but it has range, and detection abilities. Anyone know the range between these airfields, to get an idea what fuel loadout should be?

I'm thinking one of the multiroles goes wild weasel, the other goes Anti-Tank, the Aardvark takes the heavy GBU's and maybe a cluster bomb or two for the runway and bunker. The fuel depot is soft enough that it shouldn't present a problem, iron bombs or a single cluster would do it in.

The Weasel role would probably be good for OP. Just shoot at radiating targets. It should eliminate the SA-2, and as a benefit, the ZSUs will have to fire without radar targeting, making them much less dangerous for the Mirage to clean up.

>>8528599
The last parts made me think of bitchin' attack helicopters.

>>8528619
Fuck you! You just had to post that?

Installin'...

OP, two things.

How do I get in on this?
When is your GM going to release his rules?

>>8528619

From the previous thread I gather that you will have to pay for your own ordinance, fuel, and maintenance.

Of course you could spring for radar seeking ATGs, Sensor Fused Munitions for the ZSUs, an up to date Maverick for the bunker, and some giant cluster bomb for the runway, plus a few AIM-120Cs in case they get their feet off the ground. But unless you buy wholesale from the producer, these will set you back a few millions.

Instead slap some JDAGs on a few 500lbs dookies and drop them from ceiling height, one for each AA, three over the runway, and maybe a 2000lbs puppy for the bunker. Then napalm what's left (can't beat that value) and keep a few advanced ATGs and ATAs in reserve just to be save. You can bring them back home if everything works out. Wouldn't set you back much more than 500,000 including fuel.

yeah, the real problem are those fucking ZSU-23s. Those niggers are mean up close and low. Come in low with your Phantom and pop cluster bombs on those fuckers while the Aardvark puts an Mk-84 on the Command bunker. A few Mk-82s on the runway will crater it and put it out of commission.

Doesn't sound too bad.

Pack an anti-radiation missile to silence the Guideline and try to get in fast. One cluster or iron bomb on the fuel depot, a couple irons on the bunker and either some more iron bombs or anti-runway ckuster munitions against the runway. The AtA elements can stay outside the range of the Shilkas and intervene if any of those rusty old MiGs make it into the air before the runway is gone.

Sounds like the real trick is beating the mission while spending as little as possible.

Can they really just Iron Bomb the bunker though? I'd think we'd want a bunker buster of some type on that thing.

>>8528723
Yeah, this is actually a really cool idea. I mean, a modern air force, this mission is easy. But when you are paying for ordinance, you want to be mission effective for the lowest cost...

The more I read, the more I think OP's GM is some sort of gaming genius.

I agree with the guy who said that OP should go for the Wild Weasel role here.

Also, see if you can't do some timing shenanigans with your raid. Have the rest of the force come in just long enough after the Weasel that the terrorists have started to man their planes, but not long enough for them to have gotten anything in the air. That way, you can kill their pilots (which are significantly harder to replace than a trashed runway) when you bomb the strip.

>>8528671
Depends. If you circle your long F-4 loops over enemy territory ZSUs can be a problem. A fast NOE bomb run on the other hand would only have to worry about missing the SAM, which could then hail mary a seeker on his tail. Why do you think cannon based AA is obsolete save for close in defense? And a ZSU is no R2D2 Phalanx.

>>8528746
Looking at the image, that thing looks like an above-ground bunker. Wasting a bunker-buster on that isn't needed. You hit that thing with a 1000 pounder (or a 2k pounder if you're feeling generous) and it's ruined and the guys inside will have the shittiest day of their lives.

You want to do this cheap, the best way is to have 2 planes come in low and fast to take out the fuel depot and the bunker while the third one initialises the attack with an ARM to kill the SA-2 followed by flying somewhat higher over the runway, dropping a few 250-pounders on it. The Flanker and Phantom can stay in reserve in case something manages to get airborne before the runway gets redecorated.

Pull that off and with a bit of luck, nobody will evne have the time to fire a shot at the strike package.

>>8528746
You need bunker busters for reinforced concrete structures meters underground. For anything a pack of low techs can rig up with E-tools and burlap you need no bunker buster, unless you want to attack the aquifer below the bunker.

Anyone know about approaches here? I don't think terrain is going to provide a good buffer on Radar pick up, so coming in low, willhave to be REALLY low for these plans to work. And we're assuming that the baddies don't have an aircraft up in the air when the strike arrives. The 21 has a radar that could cause problems, even a small hit return and the base goes on alert.

>>8526381
This is stupid, a Valkyrie could do the job faster and better.

>>8528599
I hope to hell that they have "Bombs over Baghdad" playing at the highest volume setting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmY4FnxcN9E

>>8528895
Agreed. And what is that bucket on your pic?

Once you finish up your primary mission, strafe the training camp's vehicle pool. If you can take out any technicals the OPFOR has, the French will thank you for it. Possibly in cashmoneys, or gear that you won't be able to find on the black market.

>>8528318
>>8528327
Reminds me of a game I ran, but with Heavy Gear.

Mercs fo sho'

Also, Google Earth is awesome for nice maps. Just need to piff them up in paint or photoshop.

>>8528667
Lemme refine this into a sneak attack.

Drop the JDAMs out of a cargo plane on a regular flight path. Declare emergency, report lost cargo, fly away.

Then time the strike force to arrive in AA range just when the bombs hit. Unless they moved the AA (how old are your sat pics?) or scrambled a fighter just before you're golden. And if not your force should be far superior at this point and all you'd have to fear is a surprise Stinger at an inopportune moment.

>>8528956
OP again, I think Steve mentioned that stuff like that being beneficial. "Positive Collateral" gets us more money during the debrief. He also said he is putting his stuff online, although it will take a while since he is at work.

For my loadout, this is what I was thinking. Four AGM-78, 6x500lb bombs, Two AIM-7, Two AIM-9E sidewinders.

I don't think I need a centreline tank.

Thoughts?

>>8529013

>AIM-7E

fuck that POS. 20% hit rate? 3 second launch delay? High rate of hangfires? take two more sidewinders. They can take front-aspect shots just fine.

The anti-radiation missiles will easily fuck over the ZSU's or the SA-2, take them.

>>8529057
Actually, his sidewinders can't take front shots, he needs to upgrade them if he can.

>>8529013
You don't need AIM-7s for those old Migs. All they can do is fly slowly and turn really well. Their climb rates are simply unacceptable and their weapon load is insufficient for most modern munitions.

And strap JDAMs on those 500lbsers. With it they're fire and forget, without their spray and pray. And they're only 30,000 each.

>>8529013

Four Standard ARMs? What for? Two should be plenty enough to kill that SAM and the Shilkas are better taken care of with a cluster bomb if you want them gone.

Op again,

I'm heading out to work, back in about five hours or so.

And then the thread was dead.

>>8529099
I've always been fond of taking extra. The worst that happens is that techs have to dismount it later.

>>8526572
that's because of shitty vietnam AAMs, and foolish ROE preventing their use BVR.

>>8529099
Remember that there's at least one missing ZSU-23. Easy way to find it that doesn't involve it shooting OP down is to wait for it to turn on its radar and then pop it.

>>8529013
I'd say to scratch the AIM-7s and take some rocket or gun pods.

Let the air superiority guys splash the enemy MiGs if they get in the air. On this mission, you're going to want more stuff to kill people on the ground.

Oh, and just thought of something. Keep an eye out for MANPAD when you hit the camp. They might still have a few Stingers from old Afghanistan surplus.

all you need for the runway is a 500lb standard bomb

make sure it's the first thing that drops, and your sir superiority guys can stay way up high and be bored for the whole mission (until inevitable SURPRISE ENEMY BACKUP of course)

also, make sure to hit the middle of the runway. If you go for one end, the migs can taxi and take off from the other end.

>>8529403
The air superiority guy with the Phantom should probably kit out with a ground mission in mind too.

Alternatively, he and OP tag-team the enemy anti-air during the SEAD portion of the mission.

>>8529403
Hell no, BLU-107 Durandals. The Aardvark is a prime carrier for those, and they create massive underground craters. The runway will be unusable, unrepairable. 500lb bomb on runway is a 24 hour fixit job.

OP, take a rocket pod like someone mentioned if you can. And watch out for MANPADS, do all your runs hot, and with serious flares pumping.

Air superiority guys are going to be bored as shit on this mission.

>>8529688
They can swat the helicopters if they want.

Maybe bring a missile or two to frag some technicals.

Otherwise yeah, this won't be real exciting for them.

>>8529516
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m-buvo3dj4

I gotta ask OP, how much cash does your Flanker guy have left? And why did he buy Russian?

>>8529885
Because Russian tech is superior to the shit in the rest of the goup.

>>8528895
>>8528943

Get that crap out of here.

Shouldn't this be a /k/ thing?

>>8529983

well, it is advice for an RPG... and /tg/ = /tactical genius/

Thanks for tipping me off on Area 88 guise.

But I have to say that their maintenance requirements are treated the same way driving to a crime scene is on cop shows. And the mix of vastly different generations of fighter planes is just hilarious.

>>8530058
Tactical genius... for an air combat game... without maneuvers...

>>8530074
now with motion!

Real planes for real men. I'll post some.

Notice the 'special bomb'

Bumping a sweet thread, and because I want those rules and prices that this awesome GM Steve has made. Guy's a pro.

Failure.

Mirage F1! Fuck yes!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krC9M4OD0Dg&feature=related

>>8530299
Wait, are those the Israeli Messerschmitts?

OP, remember to make your teammates shoulder an equal share of the ordinance expenses for the mission. I'd go for the EW role, and also ensure the SAM and AAA are taken care of. But bombing the runway, buildings, and taking out any airborne hostiles you should leave to your teammates. Otherwise, you're spending all your cash on ordinance, and they'll be getting a free ride.

>>8530218
Well, that's the Skyraider for you. Can drop everything but the kitchen sink.

Just remember, barrel rolls solve everything.

>>8530380
Yeah, they bought them from France during their inital war after the creation of Israel, but France would not ship them, so the Irsaelis flew special ops to France, and stole the planes they bought, flew them to Israel, and then wiped the floor with their enemies.

>>8530287
Yeah OP, if you're around, has your GM made a compilation of the rules he's used to construct the game? I realize it may be a clusterfuck of systems but it would be interesting to see if there's something you could upload.

Mercs in modern high tech jets? Aw hell no. Propeller powered, up in this motherfucker! Doing old style air combat over some african or south american shithole, getting hired by warlords and drug dealers, air piracy, all the good stuff.

>>8530458
>>Yeah, they bought them from France during their inital war after the creation of Israel, but France would not ship them, so the Irsaelis flew special ops to France, and stole the planes they bought, flew them to Israel, and then wiped the floor with their enemies.

That's fucking awesome. I don't suppose you have a link or the name of the operation so I can read more?

>>8530537
The guy got the details wrong. Something did happen with France and Israel, but it wasn't BF-109s.

http://zionism-israel.com/his/israel_first_air_battle.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Gustav_von_Rosen

WHY IS THERE NO COUNT IN THIS THREAD?

>>8530625
Oh, oka-

>>zionism-israel.com

Wat.

>>8530642
This is awesome. A swede and a Canadian helping the French Secret service in Africa.

bump

Iz this sum Ace Combat RP?

Eagle is the best possible choice that isn't a next gen fighter.

>>8531211
Not really.

Oh, OP, if you're still reading:

If your GM wants you to finish missions with as little cost as possible, why not consider F-16s?
They are probably more expensive than an F-4, but their performance is good and they are suitable for a lot of different roles. Overall, they're a good value buy, which is why so many nations use them instead of the more expensive fighters.

>>8531211
When I think about it, you're right. Since OP wants multirole.
The Eagle is a good plane but it's split into Eagle and Strike Eagle. His plane should be able to do both.

>>8530287
Don't worry, 40k crap will have buried this thread soon, and then we will all forget about the awesome stuff tg can produce and go back to screaming FOR DUH EMPRAH

Interesting scenario. I'd propose two possible solutions. In both, your Air Sup Phantom should load for multirole, too. Let's face it, the Flanker alone, equipped with some semi-modern AAMs, is going to eat those rusty buckets alive if they get airborne.

Plan A:
Hit'n'run. The Wild Weasel pops the SA-2. One plane drops a cluster bomb on the fuel and 1-2 1000-pounders on the command bunker. Plane 2 goes for the central ZSU and the hangar next to it with some irons and cluster bombs, Plane 3 for the runway with a couple 150-pounders or 1-2 Durandals (ask the frenchies if they can give you some). Pull it off and you can get out before anyone of these clowns can even react. Pro: Lower risk, lower ammo expenditure.

Plan B: Complete supression. The WW again pops the SA-2. Plane 1 goes for the two southern ZSUs with clusterbombs, Plane 2 for the hangars and the center ZSU. Plane 3 for the runway, while the Wild Weasel tries finding and killing that last ZSU. After that, you can pop the bunker with some 1000-pounders, kill the runway and flatten everything looking vaguely valuable with smaller iron bombs and clusters while keeping high enough that MANPADS can't do shit. Pro: Lots of positive collateral.

Keeping a good thread alive with my bump.

>>8532121
Should this be archived?

>>8531997
I think the general consensus is that the biggest threat is coming from that SA-2.

>>8532152
If OP delivers ruleset, then fuck yes. If not, still possibly, but I'm going to wait and see. This one hasn't been as good as last night's yet.

>>8532184
I'd be worried.
Quarter ton of fragmentation explosive on a mach 3 and a half missile with a range of thirty miles and a ceiling of 68,000 ft. The SA2 might be old, but it's nothing to sneeze at.

>>8532241

>flying telephone pole packed with eleventy billion pounds of explosives

Yes. Yes, I think we should give the SA-2 the respect it deserves.

However, I think the SA-2 has a rather high minimum altitude. Which is why I worry about the ZSU platforms more; they'll complicate the cluster bomb/Wild Weasel mission.

>>8532339
Hehehehe, yeah, flying telephone pole is right, the thing is fucking massive. Doesn't have to be accurate, a quarter ton of explosive in a HE Frag warhead is going to wreck a plane in proximity.

As to the ZSU-23... Early versions of the ZSU-23-4 sometimes had problems with "runaway guns": after prolonged periods of firing, the guns would get so hot that chambered rounds would "cook off" even if the operator was not pulling the trigger, discharging the weapon and chambering a new round, which would then also cook off, and continue to do so. This would sometimes continue until the entire belt of ammunition had been expended. Overheating barrels could jam and even break away from the vehicle. The problem resulted from a deficient cooling system and made the early ZSU-23-4s dangerous even to friendly troops standing nearby if this happened. Despite the fact that this seldom happened, Soviet operators learned to give these machines a wide berth.

Hehehe, I love russian tech! ARE GUNS FIRE ON FULL AUTO, WHETHER YOU ARE READY OR NOT!

>>8532339

That's why you try coming in low and bagging the place in the first pass. Looking at the intelligence file, these guys are the bottom of the barrel. "Most equipment unmanned unless alert given." You pull off that first pass and there won't be much left to man.

>>8532418
You are basing that on the ZSU-23s being in the same place though. They are mobile. I think the safer plan is to taunt them with the weasel, then blow the crap out of any that light up. I'm almost tempted to suggest AGM-65s, since lining up with a 23 for an iron bomb hit is suicide.

May as well ask this until OP gets back:
If you were in this game, what would you pick to fly and for what role?

Myself, I'm partial to the Mig-23 Flogger, as a multirole aircraft. I think it's one of those 'different' aircraft that most people will not think of, or dismiss. Lot of character in that bird.

>>8532477
>>8532418
Come in low and fast, bag the SAM, then while you turn around and get above AAA range the Air Superiority guys come in at altitude and pop the enemy planes as they try to take off.

Easy. The rest you can pick off at your leisure from on high.

Probably a Draken, since it's excellent value and has good performance. I don't know about how good multirole it is, but to be honest, I don't really believe in multirole. I like mixed battle groups full of specialized units.

>>8532535
I like the Prowler idea a lot myself.

No.

ITT: "BVR missiles were screwy back in the 1960s therefore they must be terrible today."

>>8532663
My favourite story was the AIM-7 that missed a plane because the radar return off a bunch of Geese was better.

The geese did not survive.

>>8529885
Well looking at the OPs list of planes they have. the Flanker is probably the only one not made in the 60's. So if they go vs some credible AF with some semblance of modern equipment It's going to be godsend. And it can pretty much carry any AG ordanance that the russians make, atleast the ones that can fit to a fighter that is.

>>8532712
Yeah, pretty much anything short of an ALCM, the Flanker can carry.

On a related note, russian ALCMs are ridiculuos. Yuri! I have solution! We put wings on tank, da? Slap on Rocket Booster from Moon Rocket, and stuff full of explosif!

AS-4 Kitchen is the result.
12 Ton Mach 4, 250 mile range nuclear capable 11 metre 33 ft 'missile' .

Probably that Super Tucano. What a nice little plane.

>>8532663

ITT: Mercenaries with a limited budget using 1960s tech and missiles

fuck you, read the fucking thread

>>8533008
1960s-1980s planes, mostly with electronics upgrades, and modern weapons.

YOU read the fucking threads.

I like the Viggen, Prowler, and X-29 (FUCKING AWESOME) myself.

Let's forget about all the snazzy low-level attacks and all.

Low approach, but attacking from higher up is the game. The Wild Weasel goes in first and pops a HARM at the SA-2. Afterwards, a Phantom or Mirage can pop the fuel depot and bunker while the Aardvark drops either a couple Durandals or a line of dumb iron (whatever is cheaper) on the runway. A thir plane might want to drop something on the hangars and perhaps the SA-2, just to rub it in. Fly high enough after the SA-2 got killed and take down the runway before the MiGs can start and they can't do shit.

>>8533034

The AIM-7 had a 27% kill ratio... in DESERT STORM.

So fuck you, you still don't know shit.

I'm disappointed there's no Hornet in the group if you want cheap and versatile.

>>8533263
Only fools were suggesting that OP buy that, or any other lackluster munitions. He doesn't actually have to, and since he saved a bunch of his starting funds by not getting the most expensive plane around, can afford to get decent munitions.

Read harder.

>>8533288

see

>>8529013

>For my loadout, this is what I was thinking. Four AGM-78, 6x500lb bombs, Two AIM-7, Two AIM-9E sidewinders.

>AIM-7

YOU read harder.

This thread needs more multi-role fighters.

It's small, and not super expensive, but it has some of the best RADAR systems available and it beats EVERY other fighter aircraft in low level flying in rough/mountainous terrain. It can land on highways, and it was built to be maintained by bootcamp recruits.

>>8533337
Yes, he's asking for advice because he doesn't know what he's doing. Your point?

Party isn't bad-ass enough. Needs a F-117.

>>8533421
Good luck getting one.

Mercenaries like their equipment reliable, inexpensive, easy to maintain, and easy to transport around.

Any fancy shit that's going to need a gazillion hours of maintenance for every hour in flight is not going to be well-received.

>>8533362
So, the Draaken IS good multirole.
The plane's better than I thought. I already knew about its good value, ease of service, STOL and excellent maneuverability.

>8532241

Considering there are confirmed reports from the Yom-Kippur War back in '73 of the Egyptians actually pressing them into anti-tank roles during an Isreali offensive, and them supposedly actually taking out one or two tanks when used direct fire, yeah the SA-2 is pretty crazy.

>>8533571
Hence most not having aircraft to begin with.

A single SA-2 battery is pretty useless. They usually had multiple missile sites connected to a central long range detection radar. Without it you have a long range AA system with a radius of 70km tops which uses target radar sweeps for detection, can't hit anything below 100-400m, and even then 'hit' means within 80m of the target.

The exact technical data is quite obscure, since there are thousands of variants with mixed parts of different generations, origin, and quality out there. But variants are still in use even today.

And the missile is scary. It flies for maybe 30s at up to mach 3-5 and carries a 200-300kg warhead, usually of the fragmenting variety (first series 60m kill radius at low altitude). There even was a nuke version with a 15kt warhead.

Even modern systems can handle 3-6 missiles on 1 target at a time only. Although I wouldn't deny the possibility of multi target options available somewhere. And they are quite susceptible to ECM and radar jamming, but that's a whole arms race of it's own.

Seconding that you make your teammates do their share munitions wise.

You do know that the OP is not the only one who has to pay for the stuff, right? Everybody with their own aircraft has to pay for its maintenance and munitions. He's one of the team, not the one in charge.

>>8533399
OP again.

Yeah, based on what you guys said I figured I'd mount 4 AIM-9 as backup, the Iron Bombs, and the HARMs. I talked with the strike guy today, and he said he was looking into runway cratering stuff, maybe some heavier bombs for the bunker. The fuel dump he and I both agreed is a soft target.
I'm in charge of the SA-2, the other Phantom is backup for that strike, and Air watch with the Flanker. We both agreed we'd try to get Cameron to fly anti-tank against the Anti Air tanks. I was reading about them, they seem pretty short ranged, so kills with missiles outside of their shooting should be doable right?

>>8532817
And they did that in the late 1950s. Just imagine the ridiculous shit they have today.

>>8535028
That should do the trick, yes. Or a regular bomb beyond their vertical range.

>>8534997
He can do it by making sure everyone is taking their share of targets, not making him bomb everything and pay for the munitions to do so.

>>8535078
Good thing he's in the multirole category and not the dedicated bomber, eh?

>>8535028
Make sure your HARMs are of the newer kind which will stay with a radiation source even if it diverts or shuts down. Else they will turn their targetting radar to one side and shut it down for a second and the HARM will lose it's lock.

>>8535028
Any word on the ruleset?

I've been helping keep this thread alive in hope of seeing it.

>>8535078
Well, a regular bomb maybe... Keep in mind OP might not be any good at bombing, and the ZSU23 can drive around...

OP, where are you? Hopefully I luck out and you are close to me so I can join your game. Probably not though.

bamp

>>8535165
Canada
>>8535121
Steve is putting lists and stuff online for you guys. He handwrote most of it in a logbook.

>>8535238
Drat. Well, at least there the GM seems to be willing to let us see the rules and stuff, so I may be able to get into a game of this anyways. How are helicopters handled? Are they viable?

>>8535238
>Canada
Well that narrows it down to something like four millions square miles...

>>8535238
>>Steve is putting lists and stuff online for you guys. He handwrote most of it in a logbook.

EXCELLENT

OK this whole finance thing needs to be worked out better. I am assuming that each mercenary/PC will have to borrow money and work it off, paying for his own equipment, jet, fuel, munitions and artistic photograph magazines.

A little competition might be nice, but when it comes to having your back you don't want your wingman considering missile prices. Fuel is tricky because heavier jets burn much more, so does dogfighting. There should be a money meter next to the afterburner indicator.

Also the air to Ground targets will bring in the money. Yet without fighter escort the fighter-bombers generally don't stand a chance in a setting like this. At least not before dropping payload and tanks.

Either pool all money and divide it after cost is subtracted, maybe with bonuses for kills. Or at least agree to pay for each other's missiles in case someone is on your tail.

>>8535337
You give them too much credit, only like half a million square miles is livable.

>>8535355
I figure that if you are in the position of protecting your wingmate, you aren't going to consider not shooting. They down one of your guys, well, you're down a plane, and they still can attack you.

One question about the mission plan:

Does the Aardvark, which has a ground hugging radar guided autopilot, have to rise to deploy it's payload? Or are there maybe precision munitions which will hit preprogrammed and maybe 1 or 2 quickly selected targets on a NOE flyover?

>>8532817
IIRC, that thing was made to pop American carriers.

As in, one of those mission-kills a Nimitz-class if it hits. Two of them sink it. Three of them sink it in lots of little pieces.

And that's just with conventional explosives.

>>8535509
Well, for the runway, at 200ft, you could use Durandals or Snakeyes, that have fins to deploy so they hit after the aircraft is clear of the blast zone. Everything else, you'll be looking at being a little higher to deploy, since the rest are either iron bombs without retarders, or glide bombs.

When you can op, upgrade to this.

>>8535355
Half of the money from each mission gets pooled and spent to keep the whole group with at least a decent base level of gear.

The other half gets split according to workload/kills.

Also, make sure to pick good callsigns. If or when you pick up a dedicated ELINT/EW aircraft for the squad (preferably an EA-6B or EA-18), it gets named "Harbinger" because of how it'll go ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL when it guides your missiles in with its radar.

>>8535713
For the hundredth time, the EA-6b radar does not work like that. It's a jamming platform, not an AWACS.

>>8535713
>ELINT/EW aircraft for the squad
:O
How did I forget the most bad-ass non-combat aircraft in existance!!!

Party needs this for Epic Level.

>>8535900
I thought they had a "Moss" AWACS?

>>8535816
I thought that it could do at least some AWACS type stuff. Just nowhere near as well, obviously.

But it has a really fucking powerful radar, so you'd think that it could spotlight an enemy plane for somebody else's radar-homing missiles to knock down.

>>8535900
YOU CAN NOT OUT EPIC THE SR-71

>>8535939
*googles Moss AWACS*

Oh wow... Tu-126?
Yeah, that looks pretty bad-ass...

>>8535939
I had to look that up.

>>8535900
Could also go for an E-767. Or the latest version of the Mainstay.

>>8536006
*googles E-767*
Yeah, that's probably a better choice. Same electronics package, but cheaper due to the civilian chassis. Good call.

Op again, we have a R-99A if we need AWACS support according to Steve. But it costs us if we request it for a mission.

What are Awacs benefits? Doesn't my plane have radar already?

>>8536094
AWACS is defensive. You wouldn't need it unless doing, like, a counter-op mission.

>>8536094
AWACS would be your tripwire in the case of catching unexpected enemy re-inforcements coming at you. You'd get a longer heads-up than your personal radar would give, and probably more accurate description.

You can get in below the SA-2's targeting easyly. There is a wide valley leading up to the area, and in close range it's useless.

>>8535534
>Three of them sink it in lots of little pieces.

Very unlikely. You don't sink a ship that size with the top attacks these things do. Doesn't put holes in it that have water coming in. Yeah, one is a mission-kill, though. Hard to do carrier operations if there's a huge gaping hole in the middle of the flight deck. Putting a carrier out of order is way easier than sinking it.

>>8536094
Don't use AWACS unless you don't know where your targets are. That radar will give your enemies a massively long-range heads-up poke that someone's looking. If they're listening for radar, they'll know you're coming long before you find them.

>>8536172
Is that valley deep enough to be meaningful? The contour lines didn't look promising.

Also
IRON EAGLE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVHEFiLQ3GU

The F-111 is almost guaranteed to get the runway, noone else can pack enough bombs. Try to get Durandals at a discount from the French or go for Snakeyes. OP does the Wild Weasel and pops the SAM radar directly before the F-111 does it's run while the Mirage and the other Phantom can come in after that and bomb the fuel depot, command bunker and perhaps the hangars into bits from a height on which the Shilkas can't do shit about it.

>>8536094
Sweet damn that's a sexy looking AWACs! But yeah, op, you don't need it. Nose cold for this strike, until they know you are there. By that time, you should be looking for secondaries!

A thread about cheap warplanes?
A thread about versatile warplanes?
A thread about mercenary warplanes?
AND NO AC-130???

/tg/, i am disappoint

>>8536367
Wit an SA-2 and ZSus around, that would be less than useful.

>>8536367
The AC-130 isnt really cheap considering the armament and avionics/sensors.

The C-47 version is used by some small governments though

>>8536006
Yeah, the E767 is superior to the standard AWAC for fuel consumption levels alone. It's also a hell of a lot nicer inside.

I don't know this game, OP, but as someone with a little knowledge about modern air power I have a couple ideas. Are you going to be providing close air support or focusing entirely on air-to-air? If the former, you may want to look into getting a JSTAR. In either case, a KC-135 (or KC-10 depending on how many friendly craft are in the air) would likely be handy.

>>8536412
The AC-130 can carry enough chaff to make a metal desert five miles wide. The Howitzer probably has better range than the ZSUs.

>>8536367
The AC-130 needs absolute air superiority. And even then a simple MANPAD can down that sucker.

It's a weapon for domination, not warfare. A flying target in the daylight. Great against technicals, not so great against any AA, or a 20mm autocannon with nightvision. A C-130 will fly home with half a wing, but it will be out of the fight really quickly.

>>8536525
>>8536531
Yeah, we're talking about a lot of HVAs here. I hope OP has some rocking good fighter squadrons to keep them all alive, preferably aircraft that can carry AMRAAMs.

>>8536206
Unless, of course, one of them penetrates to a magazine or the jet fuel before exploding.

Or sets the carrier on fire.

>>8536644
>>8536525
>>8536367

You not only need expensive planes, but well-trained crews to staff them, and those planes need large runways, lots of maintenance (including for all the inner equipment), and protection.

Meanwhile the OP's merc group has maybe 10 fighters/fighter-bombers/attack aircraft from the sound of it, some transports, and a few support craft.

I wouldn't be worrying about those planes recommended; that's more for a regular air force.

I would start saving towards a flying home base. Some mid sized rugged transport that can land on a dirt strip if needed.

Get a really good radar system, latest ECM, drone command station, extra tanks and air-refuel setup, maybe even a few hardpoints for HARMs or AAMRAMs, massive counter measures, and a cute girl mechanic on call.

It extends your range massively, is rather inconspicuous with the radar turned off, can disable AA radar from far away, warn of any bogeys in the vicinity, and allows you to keep chasing bad guys until you have only moments of fuel left.

>>8536779
>>8536735

The way I've read it, OP and his group are just one group in this merc crew. From the sounds of it, the Mercs have a ton of support stuff already. It just costs the players cash/money to have access to additional support for missions.

>>8536779
>>Get a really good radar system, latest ECM, drone command station, extra tanks and air-refuel setup, maybe even a few hardpoints for HARMs or AAMRAMs, massive counter measures, and a cute girl mechanic on call.

You couldn't really fit all of that on one of the MASSIVE transports, and finding a place to land it that wasn't a major runway would be impossible.

Planes are smaller than you think, and only can carry so much. Also, you're not going to put missiles on a setup like that.

what about an AC-130 or a B1?

>>8536735
They do have three C-130s, though, so refitting one of them into an AC-130 might be doable.

>>8536869
This is still /tg/, not /k/.

>>8536844
The way I've read it, these guys are THE fighter group of the merc organization. The mercs have resources, sure, but not THAT much. It's not like they're a country or something. A few other planes and choppers does not an entire air force make.

OP clearing this up would be appreciated.

1. Change game to copy plot from Iron Eagle 3.
2. ????
3. Profit!

Dibbs on the Spit

>>8536901
OP's GM is keeping it pretty real.

>>8536735
Four fighters with radar-guided missiles, one tanker, and an AWAC would rape ten lone fighters IRL. Fighters do not have the most sophisticated long range radars in the world, which is important for determining IDs and angles of attack, and the enhanced targeting abilities offered by JTIDS from the AWAC would improve their accuracy over medium distances extraordinarily. Then they have the additional advantage of being able to CAP at high altitudes for long periods of time, thanks to the KC-135.

But this is a game, so maybe you are right.

I'll just leave this here.

>>8536912
I'll ask steve, any other questions I should ask?

It is just a game.

No PMC can ever afford an air force. It's simply too expensive. You need a huge logistic infrastructure and train your pilots and crews for a long time.

The average military combat aircraft needs ten times as much maintenance as it is in the air. You have 30-50 people working full time for 1 aircraft to go up. And half of those need to have been to grad school.

So let's just enjoy this exciting fantasy scenario and limit the realism to fighter roles and weapon specs.

>>8537067
Ask for 2-stage missiles.
Destroy Hubble.

>>8537043
What is this, some sort of loli Airplane Machine?

>>8537085
>And half of those need to have been to grad school.

More like two of those. Maybe. Real men just need tech school!

>So let's just enjoy this exciting fantasy scenario and limit the realism to fighter roles and weapon specs.

Aw, alright. Can we at have AMRAAMs or is it just Fox 2 and Fox 1? Oh, and can we get that wicked sweet F-14 radar system?

Another benefit to OPs choice is that he is carrier capable, unlike the F-16 which is not.

>>8536528
Not good enough. At the range where the thing gets even remotely useful, the fucking Shilka gunners could even change to manual aiming and hit. Chaff isn't exactly foolproof, either. And god may have mercy on the thing if even one of those MiGs is actually flying. Hell, the fucking Hueys can pose a credible danger at the heights on which Spooky operates.

Also, an AC-130 is neither cheap, nor easy to maintain, nor versatile.

>>8537221
Strike Witches is WWII's greatest aces, and their planes turned into lolis. Lolis and big-boobed rabbit girls.

It's better than it sounds. If you can get over the initial shock and shame of the premise, that is.

>>8537238
It does one thing only. It does it Very fucking well, and if one is orbiting, then you are hooped, but it only does one thing. Outside of it's element it's just a target.

>>8537067
Ask if prototypes are fair game for purchase.

Luvs me some YF-23.

>>8537221
You can also have FOX-2-MIKEs.

>>8537274
Well, if you want to kill the living shit out of something on the ground, wouldn't this work just as well if not better?

>>8537381

>>8537261
>If you can get over the initial shock and shame of the premise, that is.

Get over it? I'm still trying to wrap my head around it.

>>8537422
It makes even less sense if you try and watch it. Don't, that other anon is lying to you, it's stupid fanservice pedoshit and there's not much else to it.

>>8537406
I don't know what that is. Is it nuclear?

>>8537476
Goddamnit, Japan! Why would you create a porn about little girls with airplane tails for legs?

At the very least, can we get a list of all a/c you can buy OP?

>>8537641
It's not actually porn. Just a LOT of -very- gratuitous panty-shots.

>>8537712
>Just a LOT of -very- gratuitous panty-shots.
>panty-shots

...AND THEN THEY CENSOR EVERYTHING THAT MATTERS IN A PORN! That's it. It looks like you need a second helping.

OP again,
I think this is all of the planes on the list. Spent way too long copying that out.

F-CK-1 Ching-Kuo
J-10 Annihilator
F-106 Delta Dart
Mirage 2000
Mirage F1
Mirage III
Rafael
Eurofighter Typhoon
A-10 Thunderbolt
F-111 Aardvark
F-16C Falcon
F-16E Falcon
F-16XL Falcon
A-1 Skyraider
A-6 Intruder
F-14B Tomcat
F-14D Tomcat
XF-29 Wildcat II
Kfir
T-50 Golden Eagle
F-104C Starfighter
F-22A Raptor
F-35A Lightning II
F-35B Lightning II
F-35C Lightning II
AV-8B Harrier II
F-101B Voodoo
F-15C Eagle
F-15E Eagle
F-15SE Silent Eagle
F/A-18 Hornet
F/A-18E Super Hornet
XF-31
MiG-21 Fishbed E
MiG-23 Flogger E
MiG-25 Foxbat
MiG-29SM Fulcrum C
MiG-31 Foxhound
MiG-35 Fulcrum E
F-100 Super Sabre
F-20 Tigershark
F-5E Tiger II
YF-23 Black Widow II
Tornado ADV
F-105 Thunderchief
JAS-35 Draken
JAS-37 Viggen
JAS-39 Gripen
Jaguar
PAK-50
Su-17 Fitter
Su-24 Fencer
Su-25 Frogfoot
SU-27BM Flanker J
Su-27S Flanker B
Su-30MKI Flanker H
Su-33 Flanker D
Su-34 Fullback
Su-35 Flanker E
A-7 Corsair
F-8E Crusader

>>8537819
Daaang, nice list.

I feel like a jackass for saying it, but I really wish you'd typed out the prices for each of those too.

>>8537788
It's all good though. In some ways it was sort of bad-ass for an anime.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyIJ06HMugQ

>>8537819
I can work on doing that, but numbers are worse than names.

>>8537819
>>8537851

Forgot two as well. Damit.

Forger
Freestyle

Both Yaks, which sounds like a stupid name.

>>8537819
>MiG-31 Foxhound
Best Worst-Made-Plane Ever.

>>8537940
If your GM is doing it with the ruleset, no worries.

Does he have an ETA for that?

>>8537575
FLOYD is a US made orbital laser weapon from Otomo's Akira mango. Old school.

>>8538015
He did not say when I asked him, although he did get back to me, and explained that we form a 'squadron' in this military corp, and that we are one of three or four. We are not the best, we're the new guys.

>>8538039
Thanks, that does clear things up.

We've autosage, OP, make a new post? This is too awesome to die.

>>8538039
No... you ARE the best... AND you're the new guys.

Don't bring that character-capabilities negativity into this board, mister.

>>8538064
Nah, you should wait until you have a link for the ruleset, or until you have a mission story to tell us, or another mission to ask about, or more plane questions.

Call it a night, I'll archive this and be ready to assist with another thread in the future.

And archive this mother...

>>8538123
Done and Done. OP, make another thread. Definitely an awesome concept.

And that plane list? Fuck me there's some sweet shit in there.

>>8538123
Done. Right before mine took effect.

I couldn't wait.

>>8538520

>>8538535
You impatient fucktard.

I'd roll with the Eurofighter Typhoon for multi-role. It has a large number of hardpoints for A/G payload, and has good long-range standoff capabilities with missiles, although probably not the top choice for dogfighting, if such a thing exists anymore. easily the best all-rounder. Also F-111 Aardvark ftw.