Posting mode: Reply
Password(Password used for file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 3072 KB.
  • Images greater than 250x250 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Read the rules and FAQ before posting.
  • ????????? - ??

  • File : 1279159048.jpg-(383 KB, 1024x782, 0982978.jpg)
    383 KB Planes and Mercenaries XXXI op again !XQ6W0CNp/o 07/14/10(Wed)21:57 No.11140708  
    Hi guys, just reading the newest mission brief from Steve, figured you'd want to take a look at it. Had a question though, we're planning on flying with these aircraft, any opinions on them?

    I'm going to take the F-18, and the Rafale Hugs plans to use. Judge however is thinking about taking either a MiG-29k or a F-14A. I'm not sure which is better, I think the MiG is better all rounder but the Tomcat probably is better at doing one thing. Scotch asked, and got permission to either take a Yak-38 or AV-8B. I'm not sure on specifics of either aircraft.

    Any thoughts on the planes?
    >> op again !XQ6W0CNp/o 07/14/10(Wed)22:31 No.11141268
    BlackFlag Internal Document #100423

    Mission Briefing “Burnt Lion”
    Source: French Ministry of Foreign Affairs
    Deployment: Vengeance Heavy Bulk Carrier
    Pancake: Vengeance Heavy Bulk Carrier
    Alternate: None
    AAR: Etenard tanking squadron available on request
    AWACS: Copernicus Flight (Embraer)
    CSAR: Moroccan Navy

    Contract Employer: Kingdom of Morocco

    Objective: Protect the Vengeance from attack
    Secondary Objective: None
    Secondary Objective: None
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)22:37 No.11141359
    bumping because page 2
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/14/10(Wed)22:52 No.11141583
    wow is no one on to see this? seriously?
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/14/10(Wed)22:53 No.11141609
    Come on OP keep posting.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)22:55 No.11141631
    Eh, I'd be careful about the Tomcat. It's nice, but I think the US is dead set on keeping parts out of Iran's (and anyone else's) hands - they're shredding old F-14s instead of selling them, I think. Parts will be hard to come by for maintenance. I think the MiG-29 would be better just for logistics.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/14/10(Wed)22:58 No.11141682
    The Mig 29 and the AV8. The tomcat is a big fat un-maneuverable missile boat and the Yak is even more limited than the harrier. See if he can get a sea harrier...best version available.
    >> op again !XQ6W0CNp/o 07/14/10(Wed)23:04 No.11141772
    Excellent work on your initial opening strike against the Monrovian Air Defense network. Secondary target assessment has confirmed numerous stationary sites destroyed, along with a significant portion of mobile sites rendered inoperative. The raid on the harbour was mildly successful, however imagery has confirmed that the vessel is still operative, but without manoeuvring power. We will likely need to sink it in the future to ensure a clear path for the Moroccan strike force.
    >> op again !XQ6W0CNp/o 07/14/10(Wed)23:05 No.11141792
    However, what concerns us most at the present time is the unexpected presence of a mercenary air wing apparently under Liberian contract. We've analyzed the radar tapes of the ambush, and have concluded that the aircraft departed from the Monrovian air field to intercept. Because the airfield is the site of UN operations as well, a strike against it has been denied. The use of advanced technology has been confirmed, including stocks of modern western hardware, as your last sortie proved. On the positive side, we have identified the mercenary company as AirScan, a PMC with strong US national links. While the US denies involvement in this conflict, the presence of AirScan seems to indicate otherwise. We are continuing our investigation of the details of the contract.
    Because the balance of this operation hinges on securing air superiority over the skies of Monrovia, command has decided to pull AirScan out of hiding. Our original plan was to track their operational patterns and jump them when they didn't expect it, or simply deny them their airfield. Unfortunately they have varied their deployment and the airfield continues to be used by the UN. Since we are on a strict timetable, we have decided to try a more risky gambit, but one that has a high reward. We will use the Vengeance as bait, to draw them in, while your flight performs a combat air patrol guided by Copernicus. We have leaked the position of the Vengeance, as well as some operational time tables detailing a number of our flights and some false information. We have made it seem as if the Vengeance will be unprotected for a brief window, which is a target too big to ignore. Copernicus will direct you to intercept the strike packages, and it is vital that you succeed, since the Vengeance has limited defensive systems and no dedicated escort group.
    >> op again !XQ6W0CNp/o 07/14/10(Wed)23:06 No.11141809
    HUMINT: None
    ELINT: None
    SATINT: None

    Threat Assessment: Moderate. AirScan operates using near state of the art equipment, and has close ties with the US Department of Defense. Expect veteran and seasoned opponents operating in advanced airframes.

    ROE: DO NOT FIRE on UN aircraft operating in Liberian airspace. All airborne unidentified targets within 150nm of the Carrier are to be considered hostile. Copernicus targets may be engaged without visual identification. Surface targets must be visually identified prior to engagement. Weapons release authorized if fired upon.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:08 No.11141837
    What sort of idiot writes these missions? Who wold ever expose a carrier?
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:09 No.11141850
    As the brief says, it has been done to present a target they cannot ignore.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:12 No.11141879
    Given the mission, the F-14 doesn't look like a bad choice.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:14 No.11141897
    that's why it's called a "risky gambit."
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:15 No.11141922
    "Risky Gambit" is Military Code for "You're fucked"
    >> 008 07/14/10(Wed)23:16 No.11141936
         File1279163776.jpg-(274 KB, 1068x801, star n large.jpg)
    274 KB
    A Starship2000 with guns sticking out of the windows.
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/14/10(Wed)23:17 No.11141954
         File1279163850.jpg-(53 KB, 640x480, snapshot20100711125802.jpg)
    53 KB
    Tomcat will definitely be a money hog.

    Part of me says go MiG-29 just to see the Fulcrum get some love for a change.

    Now to read the briefing.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:17 No.11141962
         File1279163878.jpg-(252 KB, 1024x695, 1137100.jpg)
    252 KB
    Air Scan vs Hell's Black Aces.

    In terms of names, you've already won OP.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/14/10(Wed)23:18 No.11141969
    Yeah a tom might be useful in this case simply because of the amount of long range missiles it can carry. Of course the latest migs and sukhois can carry just as many, if not more, missiles. If Judge just wants to sit back and pop off missiles it should be a decent choice.

    And tell scotch to forget the AV8B and go for an FA2 Sea Harrier. Much better at the AtA bit than the US version is.
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/14/10(Wed)23:18 No.11141975
         File1279163927.jpg-(36 KB, 640x480, snapshot20100711134247.jpg)
    36 KB
    Harrier might be a decent choice, but VTOL just make me nervous.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:19 No.11141987
    They can VIFF!
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:22 No.11142032
    well, fuck me sideways, OP. It looks like you're gonna have to up your game, you last pure AtA mission didn't end well.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:22 No.11142035

    Viff in hell, Harrierfag.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:23 No.11142048
    Which one was that?
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/14/10(Wed)23:23 No.11142053
         File1279164231.jpg-(35 KB, 640x480, snapshot20100711124031.jpg)
    35 KB
    Ah hell, this is a risky mission. I don't like it.

    Screw it up here and its ditching for the whole flight.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/14/10(Wed)23:24 No.11142066
    Yeah they're a bit more tricky to fly than normal aircraft but they certainly do have an advantage in close. And with that pulse doppler and the ability to carry AMRAAMs its a good choice for a mission like this.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:25 No.11142076
    They have surprise on their side!
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:26 No.11142096
    We need some more Planes 'n Mercs book covers!

    And Some Planes 'n Merchandise while we're at it.

    Dibs on the Queen Vic playset.
    >> planefag 07/14/10(Wed)23:26 No.11142100
         File1279164411.jpg-(22 KB, 300x309, 1275015032034.jpg)
    22 KB

    What the hell? Did I miss the last mission debrief? Godddamit! And sup/tg/ was down! I will never read that thread!
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:26 No.11142101
    Every time I start to have suicidal thoughts one of these threads come up. Thank you, OP
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/14/10(Wed)23:27 No.11142107
         File1279164433.jpg-(51 KB, 640x480, snapshot20100711134658.jpg)
    51 KB

    Maybe, but the Harrier is such a fiddly craft.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:28 No.11142120
    If only there was some place where all the debriefs were....
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/14/10(Wed)23:28 No.11142126
    that would be the "defend the airfield from an entire carrier strike group" mission. This time they'll hopefully have the advantage of surprise...plus they've gotten better since then. Just don't wimp out and buy cheap ass AtA.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:29 No.11142134
    dangerously close to YIFF, I don't like it.
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/14/10(Wed)23:29 No.11142135
         File1279164585.jpg-(35 KB, 640x480, snapshot20100417001211.jpg)
    35 KB

    As a wise man once said about missiles: "Argggh, the cheap ones are worthless!"
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/14/10(Wed)23:30 No.11142143
    What do you mean by "fiddly"?
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:30 No.11142144
    >Queen Vic playset

    Complete with realistic battle damage and screaming innocent passenger sound effects!
    >> planefag 07/14/10(Wed)23:30 No.11142155
         File1279164646.jpg-(177 KB, 454x300, 1211855399243.jpg)
    177 KB

    This makes my life *so* much better. Now, I get two planethreads in one.

    brb happy dance
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:31 No.11142165
         File1279164677.jpg-(1.16 MB, 2000x1312, 10_Harrier.jpg)
    1.16 MB
    Only Fags and the Royal Navy Fly harriers.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:31 No.11142167
         File1279164682.jpg-(23 KB, 750x485, ares1.jpg)
    23 KB
    How fictional do you want it? The Scaled Composites ARES is a one of a kind prototype of an inexpensive ground attack plane. It's built around a gatling cannon, similar to the A-10.
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/14/10(Wed)23:32 No.11142177
         File1279164720.jpg-(42 KB, 640x480, snapshot20100711123355.jpg)
    42 KB
    Worst part about this briefing is that we can't even comment much on it besides aircraft recommendations. Initiative is purely in Airscan's court.

    I'm going to assume they have more F-16s, but I wonder if they have other aircraft as well?
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:32 No.11142182
         File1279164750.jpg-(9 KB, 251x251, 1229990481896.jpg)
    9 KB




    When they swing FORWARD, the plane becomes surprisingly MANEUVERABLE. Whiners! Nay-sayers and whiners! Haet haet haet.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:32 No.11142186
    Holy shit, googled AirScan, not a made up company!
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:33 No.11142202
    Tomcat and as many Phoenix missiles as you can load onto it. See if you can get one Iranian surplus.

    In general, I'd say you should pick ammo capacity and electronic warfare capability over raw speed or agility.

    If you want to go real crazy, though, see if you can get yourself a bomber and then load it up a la the B-1R concept.
    >> op again !XQ6W0CNp/o 07/14/10(Wed)23:33 No.11142204
    I wrote Steve about that, waiting for his reply. I'm hoping we can buy some intel about what they have in inventory.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:34 No.11142212
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/14/10(Wed)23:34 No.11142217
    True...but then Steve is known for his use of real people and organizations.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:35 No.11142219
    Welcome to Planes and Mercs, where there is always just enough of the real to balance the make believe. And sometimes the coincidences stack up pretty fast.
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/14/10(Wed)23:35 No.11142228
         File1279164930.jpg-(38 KB, 640x480, snapshot20100711134519.jpg)
    38 KB

    Just the way the jet nozzle system works makes me nervous. I dunno why. Its a purely amateur apprehension towards the aircraft.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:35 No.11142233
    I would give my left nut to be a part of this campaign.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:36 No.11142240
    I'd say they'll be flying F-15s, F-16s, maybe F-18s. F-35 and F-22 are right out; ties with the US or not, those birds aren't going to a PMC.

    The electronics gear is going to be pretty damn good, though. You may want to look for missiles that are known for being particularly resistant to jamming.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:36 No.11142241
    You probably don't like helicopters either, am I right?
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:37 No.11142261
    Crazy idea: tell the Russians what you're up against, ask if they have anything they'd like field-tested against America's best non-F22 gear?
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/14/10(Wed)23:38 No.11142266
         File1279165110.jpg-(37 KB, 640x480, snapshot20100711123635.jpg)
    37 KB

    I think Pops is referring to the aircraft's physical size, not its mobility.

    I noticed Mickey flies his Tomcat solo, no backseater. While certain possible, I'm sure, this seems unwise to me.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/14/10(Wed)23:40 No.11142297
    Ooh fun idea! Make sure you tell them they'll get sensor logs and any unused equipment back asap.
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/14/10(Wed)23:40 No.11142308
         File1279165257.jpg-(44 KB, 640x480, snapshot20100416162828.jpg)
    44 KB

    Nah, Helicopters I'm fine with. I just don't like that RR Pegasus.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:41 No.11142322
    >Crazy idea
    I think you may be on to something here
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:44 No.11142365

    Maybe you can get some Su-33s or naval MiGs, if not modified -35BMs
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/14/10(Wed)23:45 No.11142385
    Hey anyone familiar with the air launched version of the Stinger that comes in four packs? I've read that they're usually only good against helicopters but the Germans have listed them as AtA options for their Alpha Jets. If they're any good one would think you could load up four of the four packs on a harrier and be an amazing close in fighter.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:47 No.11142422
    The problem is getting into range, the stinger is pretty shitty on a maneuvering target.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:49 No.11142437
    you mean this one?
    Not a bad idea IMO, but if the fighting turns into a ball, it's tracking might mess up
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/14/10(Wed)23:50 No.11142450
    Yeah i realize its not an amazing choice...i'm simply looking for a way to get as many AtA missiles up there as possible. Stat wise they're pretty decent in Air War.

    Hey OP, ask Steve about the AIM92 stingers and see what his thoughts are on the subject.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:50 No.11142451
    sorry, bad grammar
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:50 No.11142453
    Yeah. I mean, they've got a good rep with them from the Georgia op, and a chance to poke America in the eye and get away with it is one of Putin's favorite things.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:51 No.11142469
         File1279165891.png-(196 KB, 324x334, cookiecomvv5.png)
    196 KB
    You talk to my brother Yuri, da? He give you good deal, top shelf stuff, best fighters in all of Polytrana Military District. Tell him Cousin Vachenko sent you.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:52 No.11142479
    >as many missiles as possible

    Cheapass bomber, loaded up as a missile truck. Fire off the missiles fast, then either dump the bomber or RTB on land.
    >> Anonymous 07/14/10(Wed)23:54 No.11142500
    Does anyone know how good the carrier is at defense?
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/14/10(Wed)23:55 No.11142515
    Problem is no bomber of the size you're suggesting could launch from the carrier OPs group is stationed on. That and it'd be a cobbled together jury rigged nightmare. That said i like the idea of a missile truck like that.
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/14/10(Wed)23:58 No.11142563
         File1279166318.jpg-(41 KB, 640x480, snapshot20100711123927.jpg)
    41 KB

    Not very. Its a converted Cargo ship.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:00 No.11142579
    wasn't judge flying a MIG back in the day anyway? As much as I'd love to see a 'cat get some action, I'd say the MIG would be the better bet- plus, you guys have pretty good relations with the Russians, might be easier to get hold of.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:00 No.11142581
    That being said, I seem to remember it being respectable anti-air wise.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:00 No.11142584
    Well, to be honest the point is that it's a cobbled together nightmare. It's not a good idea for regular use, because the bomber still can't maneuver or run like a fighter can; all you've done under normal circumstances is made a much more expensive than normal target.

    For this one particular situation, though, buying something cheap with the expectation that it probably won't survive the mission in flyable condition is worth it.

    And fly it from a local airfield. Sierra Leone or Guinea should have something suitable, they both have reason to hate Liberia, and since you're only using the airfield for a single outbound flight you don't have to worry about setting up the infrastructure for a more permanent base.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:01 No.11142590

    Garbage. Even vs. F-16's it's going to drown. It's a goddamn converted tanker with a deck and guns strapped to it.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:01 No.11142592
    Respectable versus what they thought the Liberians might have, not against large amounts of high-spec US gear.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)00:02 No.11142599
    ECM and decoys will be just as important as good missiles in this one. This would be a good opportunity to pick up an ECM pod if you haven't yet OP.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:03 No.11142616

    "Defensively, the ship had quite a few systems, including a vertical launch ASTER and MISTRAL SAMs, as well as several GIAT 20mm point defense cannons."

    Though that's still probably garbage compared to a warship, it's not exactly defenseless
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:05 No.11142629
    OP, the biggest piece of advice I can give you is this:

    You're not fighting enemies anymore. Steve has been watching. Learning. From you.

    You're going up against another PMC, which means another adventuring party. They're going to play as dirty as you, be as good as you, and kill as ruthlessly as you. Which means you've got to up your game.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:05 No.11142635
    Depends, that High Spec US gear has hurt OP before, but it hasn't won a battle yet.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:07 No.11142654
    I think the most important question here is: Just how many aircraft does OP expect to face here?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:08 No.11142663
         File1279166905.jpg-(329 KB, 627x900, ASTER_15_SAAM_firing_from_the_(...).jpg)
    329 KB

    Goddamn, the French didn't fuck around, that's some good SAM system!
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)00:08 No.11142667
    Also see about getting the three pack version of the ASRAAM. More capable than the Stinger option and only one less missile. Another good choice for the Harrier.
    >> planefag 07/15/10(Thu)00:10 No.11142686
         File1279167009.gif-(50 KB, 345x329, horrible_rape_radius.gif)
    50 KB
    As for planes, well, you've already made a good investment in the F-18 (and a good call taking the Phantom last mission.) As for Judge, I'd have to side with the F-14. The last avionics upgrade ever released for the F-14 integrated air-to-ground capability, so Judge can join the mud moving fun when he so chooses; and for this mission the F-14 certainly has the better radar. (Unless I'm sadly mistaken.) Fuck the haters; the F-14 is far more manuverable at subsonic knife-fighting speeds then people give it credit for. Strictly speaking, though, the MiG-29 is still better there- the manuverability bothers me less then the underpowered problem. Underpowered is bad in the rolling scissors, and hinders you all around.

    Of course, that is less important when you have the superior horrible rape radius.
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/15/10(Thu)00:11 No.11142703
         File1279167086.jpg-(22 KB, 700x311, june-FALKLANDS-25-EXOCET.jpg)
    22 KB

    Respectable armament up close, yeah. However, if Airscan has antiship missiles (and I'm sure they do...).
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)00:12 No.11142717
    Aye...it'd be good to have that horrible rape radius. But OP is dealing with F16s which could potentially chew up a big bird like the tomcat if they got in close. Potentially. And who knows what else AirScan is fielding?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:12 No.11142719
         File1279167155.jpg-(10 KB, 275x300, 1248666249705.jpg)
    10 KB


    It is incredibly juvenile, but I can't help but marvel at that one every time I see it.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:12 No.11142720
    Well that was my thinking, if they launch any air to sea missiles, the Carrier has a good chance of picking quite a few of them off.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:14 No.11142730
    The F-14 can dictate the terms of an engagement with an F-16, it has the sheer brute force to do so. It may not be the best dogfighter, but it can do a pretty good job at it.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)00:14 No.11142738
    any air to air missiles out there designed to be able to intercept cruise missiles?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:14 No.11142745
    Presumably, the Aster missiles are meant to be used on those. The Mistrals are short-range (5km i.e. 3mi) IR homers, so if those are in use then things have already gone pear-shaped.
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/15/10(Thu)00:15 No.11142751
         File1279167304.jpg-(43 KB, 640x480, snapshot20100711123458.jpg)
    43 KB

    Yeah, maybe. Depends on how many Airscan has/survives to launch though.

    We're helpless without knowing what they'll be fielding. Anything we can do here is just guessing.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)00:16 No.11142768
    true but this is assuming the plan works. If they can sneak in or some how turn the tables on OPs flight everything changes. Still the tomcat does have the power to pull away from the falcon and keep the range open if it wants to.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:16 No.11142771
    False-flag would also be a great idea. Any civilian plane that could reasonably be flying in the area and that could have missiles kitbashed onto it would be great for the "SURPRISE, MOTHERFUCKERS!" value.
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/15/10(Thu)00:17 No.11142782
         File1279167464.jpg-(61 KB, 1000x572, Index-bkgrnd1000.jpg)
    61 KB

    Let's just hope Airscan doesn't get that idea...
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)00:18 No.11142794
    Snag a plane of the same type the UN is using and play false flag missile boat? sure...could work.
    >> planefag 07/15/10(Thu)00:19 No.11142807
         File1279167592.jpg-(708 KB, 3144x2400, 1259483566742.jpg)
    708 KB

    Meh. That's why you use teamwork and cover each others tails. Not even dogfights are 1v1 duels. Furballs are what happen when you fuck up, no matter HOW much the Fighter Mafia masturbates to their Falcon.

    And fleet defense of a Carrier is exactly what the F-14 was designed to do.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)00:23 No.11142860
    I must admit i'm a fan of the Fighter Mafias style but I can see where they could be wrong. Problem with covering your wing man in this flight is the wide differences between each of the flights aircraft and fighting styles. I mean who's gonna cover the Harrier(if he gets a harrier) when the shit hits the fan? Nothing can keep up with its turns. Not saying covering your wingman in this case isn't possible...just harder.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:24 No.11142864
    Goddamn, they are a real company? Or did you make that graphic?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:25 No.11142880
    What is there to "cover your wingman" beyond "fire off a missile/some cannon rounds at the guy targeting your wingman to at least fuck up his aim if you don't kill him"?
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)00:25 No.11142881

    Fleet defense against long range bombers...not fast movers. Still it adapted nicely and i've gotta admit this is a perfect opportunity to pick one up if someones been yearning for one.
    >> Alpharius 07/15/10(Thu)00:25 No.11142886
    guys... guys

    guys look at this... guys

    Brigadier General Joe Stringham, a founding member of AirScan and in charge of operations in Cabinda was responsible for many covert counter-insurgency activities in El Salvador during their dirty war in the '80s
    >> Alpharius 07/15/10(Thu)00:27 No.11142910

    Forgot my citation, yes its wikipedia, but the article has citations itself

    >> planefag 07/15/10(Thu)00:27 No.11142911

    Well, for starters, anybody that brings a Harrier to a airsup battle should be raped by a wookie. On matters of general principle, of course.

    The Fighter Mafia had a good point, and made a great plane, but if you've seen some of the shit they've said over the years- especially in regards to the F-22- it can be really, really hard to believe that these men once made the F-16.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)00:27 No.11142925
    generally its a good idea to stick with your friend and work together...not just shoot at something thats shooting/gonna shot at your friend.
    >> Alpharius 07/15/10(Thu)00:28 No.11142943

    Jeese these guys are the IRL blackflag

    On December 13, 1998, AirScan misidentified the village of Santo Domingo as a hostile guerrilla target, leading to a cluster bomb attack by Colombian Air Force units which killed eighteen civilians, including nine children.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:28 No.11142944
    op, if you're still looking for new pilots, I think now'd be a good time to get them, no? *wink wink*
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:29 No.11142957

    >implying Harriers being Harriers isnt a reason to take one
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)00:30 No.11142974
    It all went to their heads after the Falcon.

    And thats a lovely mental picture there. Sea Harrier at least could manage fairly well. Hell it servers as fleet defense itself...or it did.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:30 No.11142976
    Holy Fuck, have we been Steve'd again?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:38 No.11143085
    wait a sec
    >Brigadier General Joe Stringham, a founding member of AirScan and in charge of operations in Cabinda was responsible for many covert counter-insurgency activities in El Salvador during their dirty war in the '80s

    If I'm not mistaken the plan is to
    >leak location of carrier
    >leaked window of opportunity to sink it

    What are the chances that AirScan will fall for this trap?
    Better have a back up plan IMO
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:41 No.11143139
    My guess is that the operational schedule has some sacrificial lambs in it, so Air Scan can believe the quality of the intel. They won't come in stupid, but they'll come in confident. And, who knows, they might think they're going up against a normal bulk carrier with a flat top welded on to it, not a full fledged air defense platform.
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/15/10(Thu)00:46 No.11143212
         File1279169203.gif-(28 KB, 240x250, AIRSCAN.gif)
    28 KB
    Besides, its one of those "Yeah, it might be a trap, but an opportunity likes this just can't be passed up."

    Ok, let's change focus here. Stop thinking about Black Aces. Put ourselves in AirScan's shoes. How would we do this? We've got a shot at the enemy's carrier, how do we go about it? One of the guys thinks it might be a trap.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:49 No.11143248

    Depends on the assets we have.

    Personally? Hornets with Harpoons. Launch from standoff range, problem solved.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)00:53 No.11143301
    overload its defenses with AtS missiles...gg.

    But seriously we have to assume they know that the carrier is armed in some fashion. Can they know exactly what it carriers? Yes but probably not. Will they expect that many systems? No probably not but always better to be safe than sorry.

    Therefore we can assume they'll come in as fast, yet as sneakily, as they can and launch from a respectable range that won't put them inside whatever it is they suspect a bulk hauler turned carrier would mount.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)00:54 No.11143322
    carries, not carriers
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)00:55 No.11143334
    Well, Harpoons would be my first guess, but I'd provide umbrella air cover as well if I had the fighter backbone to support it. And worst case scenario would have our small missile launch not be effective, so I'm thinking some kind of dedicated penetration strike aircraft with a large payload, if one was available. I'd also have cutout points on the way in, so that if things go south we can back out if we need to.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)01:04 No.11143461
    My guess is that they will probably pull a feign out, draw out the combatants and attack elsewhere.
    Since this is Airscan we're talking about, I bet they'll have stealth capable planes at their disposal and will probably come up on another side. They will most likely fly in no formation (for stealth).

    I suggest pulling your punches and have a plane in intercept role as a reserve (Judge?)
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)01:04 No.11143469
    The good thing is depending on range from land, the enemy mercs won't be spending much time in the area, giving you the upper hand in a dogfight.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)01:08 No.11143536
    AirScan is known for using drones to scout so watch for bird sized returns on your radar that appear to be moving at a higher speed than normal.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)01:25 No.11143800
    I suspect we'll see a B-52 in this mission.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)01:28 No.11143839
    Two ways: Stright and hard, or indirect and subtle.

    If you go straight and hard, Hornets with Harpoons, add one or two with AMRAAMs and one with ECM.
    Alternatives of this version include non-US planes firing non-US weapons, eg Etendards with Exocets.
    This would be a straight no-nonsense shootout.

    The other variant can be a lot harder to spot. It's not very haard to jury-rig an Exocet or four onto something that flies or swims. This means everything is a potential threat. Fishing trawler, cargo plane, everything can potentially kill your carrier if it comes close.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)01:48 No.11144130
    The ROE makes it very straightforward. Anything within 150 miles of the carrier is a threat.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)01:51 No.11144173
         File1279173096.jpg-(24 KB, 500x400, Mariner UAV.jpg)
    24 KB
    What about a boat? OP's flight shouldn't expect a vessel, but if there is one, should they have a backup bomb/missile, or go straight-on AA?

    If AIRSCAN uses drones, we've got trouble. They'd probably use pic related for maritime scouting. I don't know the launch specifics of a Mariner, but drones are not worth a missile. You'd want to gun them down.

    This doesn't look good from any angle.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)01:53 No.11144202
    Tired, Down on their luck, Pressed for time, and it's running out.

    This smacks of a modern day re-enactment of the Battle of Britain.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)01:55 No.11144228
    From the front that Dassault is achingly beautiful.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)01:57 No.11144255
    OP, the above anon was right. You're going up against DMPCs, not regular 'ole bad guys anymore.

    Heck, if the enemy country (forgot if it was Libya or Liberia, don't wanna sound stupid. Too late for that, eh?) still has anything resembling an air force, Airscan may have them throw sacrificial planes or helicopters to meet the Vengeance with AtShip ordnance, while Airscan themselves stay in AtA mode.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)01:58 No.11144265
         File1279173486.jpg-(7 KB, 240x192, Mariner UAV 2.jpg)
    7 KB
    >> op again !XQ6W0CNp/o 07/15/10(Thu)02:01 No.11144312
    I'm heading to bed, Steve got back to me, and said that the Russians would be willing to cut a deal with us if we needed it, depending on our timetable.

    As to AirScan, purchase records indicate that they had acquired several Surplus export F-16s, as well as some purchases from Libya and the Ukraine, although the nature of the purchases remains vague beyond 'aeronautical components.' A recent purchase of note had large sums funneled through back channels to Ecuador, although the exact purchase remains unknown.

    So, that's what I know so far. Kind of mysterious but I'm sure you guys will figure it out, not the first time Steve has given us chunks of intel like this, leaving it up to us to put pieces together.

    Anyways, good night for now, hope to read your conclusions tomorrow morning!
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)02:06 No.11144371
    Perhaps you should try to get a new model Mig-29k for Judge, as WELL as Scotch. Or an MKI. Or a -33, if they're willing to part with them. According wikipedia, at least, some of the -33s missiles can be used to intercept ASMs.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)02:30 No.11144703
    p and m, best threads ever
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)02:38 No.11144830
    Alright, /tg/! Time to make the shi/tg/et done!

    What comes out of Ukraine and Libya that US Aircraft would want?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)02:43 No.11144893

    I'm personally more concerned about the Ecuador thing. Nothing they have(According to the internet) could warrant a large cash transfer, therefore, that seems fishy to me. Ukraine and Libya could be technology compatability.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)02:46 No.11144928
    Could Ecuador have been used as a middleman for some other piece of equipment or armament?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)03:05 No.11145183

    Possibly, but I don't see what they could be buying that just couldn't be done directly with their US contacts, since they're butt buddies with them.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)03:34 No.11145574
    My knowledge of Ecuadorian air assets and what they have for export it very limited.
    The only things that come to mind for large monetary transfers is:
    A. Laundering money. They're trying to buy something non-US and so need to go through Ecuador.
    B. Purchasing a civilian aircraft to convert to a missile boat.

    Ecuador is a member of the UN so...
    AirScan bought a civilian aircraft from Ecuador, and they're going to give it a UN paintjob, load it up with missiles, and use a valid Ecuadorian transponder with UN identification to get in close to the carrier while their F-16's draw away any air cover that the Vengeance has. Since they've IDed themselves as a UN flight, ROE states that they cannot be fired upon. Once they're within range, they let loose a swarm of AtS missiles.

    Does this sound plausible, given AirScan's background?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)03:47 No.11145755
    To the top with you
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)04:01 No.11145928

    That seems just ridiculous enough to work, except ONE thing. ROE only gives a no-go on firing on UN aircraft INSIDE Liberian airspace, in addition, all aircraft within 150nm of the carrier are hostile, no ifs ands or buts
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)04:08 No.11146037

    Even still, very very sneaky. Idk about the Libyans (or if they have any sort of military hardware worth exporting) but Ukraine might suggest that they have Russian tech. Could be trouble....
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)04:20 No.11146201

    Or it could just be Russian tech compatability mods.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)04:48 No.11146669
         File1279183725.jpg-(78 KB, 800x512, Moskit_missile.jpg)
    78 KB

    I had a random though that maybe AirScan might use that russian anti-AWACS missile that OP's group used during their Russian contract.

    Then I remembered that russians like making anti-carrier missiles.


    Fuck, that's big.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)04:51 No.11146721
    Holy crap that's half the size of the plane.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)05:03 No.11146869
    they could be hoping that moment of confusion and/or hesitation about a UN aircraft, probably a large hauler of some type (and therefore filled with valuable/essential supplies), appearing in their airspace could lead to that tiny window they need to do something sneaky, either from the UN marked craft or some other wing waiting in the wind.

    OP, I'd definitely not discount this. ANYTHING you see within that 150nm engagement rage, you take out. Don't hesitate for a second.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)05:04 No.11146889

    Well, fuck.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)05:09 No.11146952
    >>11146669 this
    >>11145574 this

    = OH SHIT
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)05:10 No.11146974
    I rrrrrreally hope Steve doesn't read these threads
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)05:18 No.11147063
         File1279185486.jpg-(332 KB, 1200x550, 8641570.jpg)
    332 KB
    I sure as heck hope not or all our advise would be for naught or worse give him ideas.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)05:26 No.11147195
    From what I've seen, Anyone with Russian-compatible hardpoints could take Alamo-EMs, the naval ones, they can engage targets 3m above sea level, meaning they could probably shoot down incoming ASMs, as well as fighters.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)05:33 No.11147285
    given that most ASM's operate below 20 meters, I think they should definitely stock up with these.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)05:35 No.11147315
    Caution: Oh shit.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)05:46 No.11147423
         File1279187200.jpg-(1.83 MB, 1920x1200, 4166856.jpg)
    1.83 MB
    I just had a horrifying realization the CSAR is as good as not even there. The reason I say this is if they are shot down and lose the Vengeance then the Moroccan Navy sure as hell are not going to risk sending their ships into enemy controlled airspace thats loaded with ASM's save them assuming that the AirScan mercs don't shoot the pilots when they're in the water.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)05:55 No.11147503

    Even worse, if they lose the vengeance they'll lose all the planes they've got stashed on board.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)06:04 No.11147602
         File1279188296.jpg-(357 KB, 1250x975, 6251090.jpg)
    357 KB
    I forgot about that part but lets not speak any further on how badly things will go if they fail and try to help make sure that they don't.
    >> F-22 fag !nUpIOg2/OM 07/15/10(Thu)06:16 No.11147722
         File1279188996.jpg-(136 KB, 1032x774, Duel_over_Tokyo_by_Panzerfire.jpg)
    136 KB
    The F-14 is made for this mission, I really hope Judge takes it, AIM-54Cs and the AWG-9 could save the day.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)06:18 No.11147737
         File1279189082.png-(88 KB, 246x245, [EAF] 156th Tactical Fighter S(...).png)
    88 KB
    Enemy aces inbound!

    And the most dogfight-capable bird anyone's looking at currently is...the Rafale?

    We're toast.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)06:21 No.11147766
         File1279189291.jpg-(495 KB, 2000x1125, Su-33 in action.jpg)
    495 KB
    I wouldn't recommend the 14A though, personally.

    In fact, holy shit, if there was ever a mission where someone SHOULD have a fucking Su-33 full of AIM-9Ms, THIS IS IT
    >> F-22 fag !nUpIOg2/OM 07/15/10(Thu)06:29 No.11147860
         File1279189742.jpg-(102 KB, 720x540, 34853_453897830358_724695358_6(...).jpg)
    102 KB
    I'm guessing its due to the 14A's shit engine/airframe combo?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)06:40 No.11147990
    Well I just assume that a later variant would be better due to UPGRADES.

    Also the Tomcat flies like a pregnant cow.
    >> F-22 fag !nUpIOg2/OM 07/15/10(Thu)06:43 No.11148020
    Hell of alot more nimble than the F-4
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)06:43 No.11148023
         File1279190635.jpg-(342 KB, 1500x1100, 6647928.jpg)
    342 KB
    What is the position of the Moroccan fleet in relation to the Vengeance OP?

    Depending on where they are they may be able to assist in protecting the Vengeance from a possible boat based attack and/or help provide an Anti-Missile screen.
    >> Da Killboss 07/15/10(Thu)07:09 No.11148240

    What if Judge took a Foxhound? It was designed from the Foxbat specifically as a low-altitude interceptor, against cruise missiles. How effective would that be, loaded with long range stuff for general interception plus current-gen heaters for the ASM's?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)07:14 No.11148267
         File1279192468.jpg-(364 KB, 1200x812, 1658624.jpg)
    364 KB
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)07:21 No.11148310
    Sounds good, but I know nothing about MiGs in general.

    Where the shit are all the proper planefags?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)07:24 No.11148334
         File1279193042.jpg-(583 KB, 1280x865, 1215273.jpg)
    583 KB
    Getting it on and off the carrier would be impossible/ball breaking levels of no fun.
    >> Da Killboss 07/15/10(Thu)07:30 No.11148370
         File1279193423.jpg-(255 KB, 496x386, carrierfoxbad.jpg)
    255 KB

    How that slipped my mind, I have no idea.

    In that case, might as well +1 to the Cat fans- high power heavy fighter, going from AirWar C21 it's slower than the MiG but if you swap the Phoenix for MICA radar guided (should get em cheap from France) plus some Lima Sidewinders, should be work well.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)07:31 No.11148376
    For long range air to air engagements F-14 is godly but sucks everywhere else. The Fulcrum is very versatile and more suited to the medium and short range scuffles. Its also known to be able to pull crazy stunts. The F-14 is faster though
    >> F-22 fag !nUpIOg2/OM 07/15/10(Thu)07:33 No.11148384
    Not to mention the RIO and the radar. Judge could use the Tomcat as a AWAC like the IRIAF.

    Also he will be able to stay in the fight a hell of a lot longer than the -29 with the Tomcat
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)07:34 No.11148390
         File1279193665.jpg-(112 KB, 849x600, fddfb06f8a664b3a0cb8c8c552bf03(...).jpg)
    112 KB
    I still say Su-33. The previous threads pretty much summed up why it's the perfect plane for this.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)07:47 No.11148474
    There's a cost issue and an availability issue.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)07:53 No.11148528
    Total Air War 2.0 as an interlude.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)07:54 No.11148540
    Well the Mig-29K version that Judge is thinking about is naval version Mig-29M which has published combat range of 850 kms so it can stay up some time. And it has 8 hardpoints to put missiles on
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)07:55 No.11148546
         File1279194907.jpg-(417 KB, 2560x1108, Mirage_2000_DSC04162.jpg)
    417 KB

    I wonder if there's a carrier-variant Mir2k?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)08:06 No.11148623
    Nope, the French Navy used the F-8 Crusader before the Rafale.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)08:11 No.11148653
    Oh no
    Oh no
    Oh no
    Yo yo yo
    Oh no you didn't
    Sucka tried to play me
    But you never paid me, Neva
    Oh no you didn't
    Payback is a' comin'
    You will be runnin', foreva
    Oh no you didn't
    Until i get my vengeance
    I will never end this mayhem
    Oh no you didn't
    I'm a mercenary
    You ain't got a prayer, you owe meeee
    Oh no you didn't
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)08:12 No.11148659
    FUcking lol!

    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)08:12 No.11148663
         File1279195936.jpg-(104 KB, 640x640, de666a6e35117f28e09e3a28b3732f(...).jpg)
    104 KB
    So the Rafale is pretty much exactly the plane you want for this mission.

    Make sure it's the Iori Minase version. For the utter humiliation of being shot down by a neon pink Rafale covered in bunnies.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)08:13 No.11148674
    Baron should be bringing a tape or something to future missions so he can play it during the final assault on Liberia's command bunker.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)08:40 No.11148889
    Oh yes, so much potential there.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)10:12 No.11149726
         File1279203152.jpg-(26 KB, 320x320, sweating Bullets.jpg)
    26 KB
    Oh no! Not Santo Domingo!
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)10:16 No.11149767
    Well shit. We all know that no converted aircraft carriers can survive in the South Atlantic.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)10:33 No.11149910
    They're in the North
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)10:41 No.11149981
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)10:43 No.11150009
         File1279205025.jpg-(14 KB, 326x500, b52-aircraft-carrier.jpg)
    14 KB
    This one's going to be a bitch.
    And an expensive one at that.

    Can you hire goons to run some cheap boats with expensive systems on board? Here's what I imagine:

    AirScan will have drones in the air and satellite imaging leading up to the mission, so everything has to look good. They will send up a squad of AtA and a strike package. They have a confirmed location of the target and see a lot of small boats and maybe a few planes in the area. Their approach will be as covert as possible, using civilian planes as cover, hugging the waves, splitting off the strike package to appear unexpectedly.

    Their drones should only be attacked if they get close enough to be obvious. If they send a Harpoon or an Exocet it should only be intercepted on it's terminal run. So the carrier will need some reliable CIWSs.

    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)10:50 No.11150078
         File1279205446.jpg-(24 KB, 400x286, Phalanx_CIWS_-_s%3D070709-N-90(...).jpg)
    24 KB

    As the jets approach the vicinity of the target massive jamming and ECM springs up everywhere. Missiles are in the air from out of nowhere. Apparently those damned Blackflag thugs managed to hide a first perimeter screen in jury rigged boats all over the place. Drones hitting water left and right. Remaining jets take formation for target run.

    No matter, we have AWACS support and that clears things up a bit. Wait, what is that? One of the commercial airliners just had a radar-baby. It's speeding up. Fast bogey heading for AWACS, there's nobody close enough! Shit. Radar went dead.

    Okay let's just deliver this load and sink that carrier cargo ship. Here they come. We expected them to loiter for CAP after that boat surprise, let's at 'em then. As long as the strike gets through.

    Oh no! More AAA boats around the carrier. And the thing's defense is stronger than expected as well!


    F-18 sounds great. A Tomcat could hurry to a hot spot and take down strays from far off, but it's expensive and good for not much else. If the Fulcrum can get up from a carrier it seems more versatile to me. Scotch shouldn't take a VTOL. Its strength is being stationed without a runway, but it's always stretched too thin when going AtA.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)11:07 No.11150265
         File1279206431.jpg-(213 KB, 657x598, ohfuck.jpg)
    213 KB
    Say, remembering the Great Harrier Debacle at Kitona, I just started thinking... we're expecting F-16's and AtS missiles, but what keeps AirScan from just sending one flight of falcons to bugger the squadron, and twenty below-third gen buckets to riddle the carrier with exocets? Landing denial works both ways in this one.
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)11:20 No.11150399
    The trick would be finding enough pilots for the kind of swarm you're plan is making me think of. Of course who knows what kind of resources they have. We can assume they've got some soviet era stuff from Ukraine which could be airframes or missiles so your idea has merit.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)11:20 No.11150402
    I assume AirScan will be attempting to use BVR weaponry against the OP's carrier? Remember the Ustinov & Queen Victoria incident? I believe this could be turned to our advantage.: OP's group flies CAP over an unrelated ship while the Vengeance floats off somewhere else entirely.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)11:24 No.11150442
    I say. That sounds absolutely sneaky.

    Although I suspect AirScan propably has good enough SATINT to screw that over.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)11:26 No.11150457
    Bonus of decoy ship is a UN relief ship. Double bonus if you can both record AirScan blowing it up, and record them ignoring numerous pleas from OPs group not to blow up the UN vessel <obviouslyfakename>.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)11:31 No.11150529
         File1279207908.jpg-(245 KB, 1024x694, 1278880179468.jpg)
    245 KB
    The odds of getting a Flanker don't sound that bad since, apparently
    >the Russians will be making a deal with us if needed
    or some shit. And an Su-33 would definitely be a great help on this kind of mission.
    Blah blah, dead horse, thwack thwack.

    On that note, what would it take to pull a fast one on AirScan and have a plane or two sitting in the carrier, preflight and ready for launch, and then punt them up as soon as shit GETS REAL?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)11:35 No.11150575
    No no no, you're doing it wrong.

    You heap the defences round the real carrier. They can see it's a carrier and know it's a carrier. Even if they can't see it, they know it's important.

    Then you have just two F-16s or something flying patrol around a big fucking tanker. For no reason. Off in the middle of fuck nowhere.

    THAT'S a decoy.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)11:35 No.11150580
    I think this has merit.
    Have a picket line of cheap boats manned by a some PMC's or French Navy sailors armed with ECM and ECCM packages, and a few MANPAD's (maybe something cheap and either French or Russian?).
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)11:42 No.11150641
    A Super Hornet packed full of EWS shit would be helpful, too.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)11:45 No.11150684
         File1279208720.jpg-(264 KB, 1152x780, 1424095.jpg)
    264 KB
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)11:50 No.11150756
    >EWS shit

    That looks so weird in the middle of a sentence like that.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)12:14 No.11151066
         File1279210454.jpg-(331 KB, 1024x695, 1094492.jpg)
    331 KB
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)12:23 No.11151187
    woah...where's he going that he'll need six LGBs?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)12:46 No.11151430
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)12:48 No.11151454
         File1279212486.jpg-(111 KB, 1024x808, yf23__001.jpg)
    111 KB
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)12:50 No.11151485
         File1279212639.jpg-(21 KB, 500x468, yf_25_x_02_wyvern-26582.jpg)
    21 KB
    Ah, ruddervators.

    You know who else had ruddervators?
    >> Skyhawk !c6DO1M4BMw 07/15/10(Thu)12:53 No.11151518
    YF-23 just looked so much more sexy than the stupid F-22...sigh
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)12:59 No.11151589

    To take out Stonehenge.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)12:59 No.11151593
    I dunno, the F-22 has kind of grown on me.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:02 No.11151624
         File1279213321.jpg-(207 KB, 1024x694, 1153270.jpg)
    207 KB
    Is this thread going to descend into us attributing female characteristics to planes and discussing the allure of their curves?
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:02 No.11151627
    StoP ATtAcKInG AnD_FuckINg_WITH_wwW.AnOCArrotstalk.se rePLACe_caRRoTs WITh n
    g dydduo ov il g tjkq hbw jzd jxqe bce t
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:02 No.11151632
    Nah, we did that one already.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:04 No.11151662
         File1279213497.png-(57 KB, 343x356, [ODF] 32nd Tactical Fighter Sq(...).png)
    57 KB
    I think the YF-23 looks a bit too silly. The Raptor just has...that certain something.

    Then again, I could be biased because Sorcerer flew fucking YF-23s.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:07 No.11151686
         File1279213657.jpg-(52 KB, 660x520, viggengripen.jpg)
    52 KB
    You say it like it was a bad thing.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:11 No.11151729
         File1279213919.jpg-(138 KB, 800x1000, B1-B.jpg)
    138 KB
    Well if there's going to be drooling, you'll need a bib.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:20 No.11151838
         File1279214459.jpg-(169 KB, 1024x768, 1210837434010.jpg)
    169 KB
    Remember kids. The Su-27 series is what happens when planes commit incest.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:23 No.11151869
         File1279214590.jpg-(251 KB, 1024x768, F-15E.jpg)
    251 KB
    Strike Eagle is a big fat cow. But god damn can she ever wreck shit.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:29 No.11151940
         File1279214976.png-(542 KB, 742x915, 1227244088077.png)
    542 KB
    A lot of Russia's planes are ugly fuckers, big and square or weird (lol Fishbed) but something about the Flanker design is just strangely aesthetically appealing to me. The extended forward fuselage and pushed-back wings just make such a strikingly recognisable silhouette.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:32 No.11151964
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:34 No.11151996
    Wait what.

    I have no problem with anything going on in this thread. On top of which, I don't really think five images posted several minutes apart each constitutes a flood.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:35 No.11152006
         File1279215350.png-(420 KB, 600x506, planeporn.png)
    420 KB

    I'm not sure whether this is meant to be taken seriously or not.
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)13:38 No.11152029
    Is that a Flanker and an Eagle?

    What the fuck would the offspring look like?
    >> NightElf !!Rx/542DBv74 07/15/10(Thu)13:43 No.11152074
         File1279215827.jpg-(81 KB, 800x732, a-10-19990422-f-7910d-518.jpg)
    81 KB
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)14:32 No.11152655
         File1279218773.jpg-(49 KB, 505x272, v30832_5j.jpg)
    49 KB
    >> Anonymous 07/15/10(Thu)15:27 No.11153443
         File1279222069.jpg-(66 KB, 576x442, v30836_F-16 DR IUCAV UCAS.jpg)
    66 KB
    It's a pity they were totally impractical, RQ-16s would have been pretty awesome.
    >> sukhoi !KJHro3/ISM 07/15/10(Thu)15:35 No.11153545
         File1279222520.jpg-(193 KB, 1280x866, 1523103.jpg)
    193 KB
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/15/10(Thu)15:45 No.11153665
         File1279223118.jpg-(34 KB, 640x480, snapshot20100711123940.jpg)
    34 KB

    Personally I like the MiG-21's look.
    >> sukhoi !KJHro3/ISM 07/15/10(Thu)16:06 No.11153922
         File1279224413.jpg-(442 KB, 1200x812, 1718826.jpg)
    442 KB
    I really dislike the MiG-21's look, but enjoy the Su-22s. I can't figure it out.
    >> Air Action Weekly 07/15/10(Thu)16:28 No.11154240
         File1279225706.jpg-(164 KB, 800x1077, SU22 MIG21.jpg)
    164 KB

    The wings maybe?

    Delete Post [File Only]
    Style [Yotsuba | Yotsuba B | Futaba | Burichan]