Mano Faber

The key question is when will a non-stealth fighter detect a stealth fighter? If you are at visible range engaged in a dogfight maybe it 'll be less useful. But you still need to aquire/lock the target by radar/IRST maybe even laser etc. How powerful does the SU-35 radar need to be to track/lock the target at say 10 miles? how low is it's IR signature? I'll bet in al these cases the F22 (or JSF) can take the 1st shot. But i assume if you have to strike target somewhere you'll do it at night you'll have to use the sensors which will be less effective against a stealthy target. I think a Su-35/37 is a powerful fighter compared to F-15, F-16 , EF2000, Rafale etc but i think The F-22, JSF etc have the edge. Who knows anytime soon a lot of UAV wills do the dogfighting. They already did some attack with hellfires. Kinda like the early HiMat i think it was called. It's even used/tested on different areas: http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/visby/ http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/sea_shadow.htm More on stealth: "A conventional fighter aircraft has an Radar Cross Section (RCS) in the region of 6 square metres. The much larger B-2B bomber, using the latest stealth technology, displays an RCS of only 0.75 square metres. By comparison, a bird in flight displays an RCS of 0.01 square metres." http://www.f-22raptor.com/st_getstealthy.php http://www.fas.org/spp/aircraft/part06.htm CodeOne(Lockheed) claims: "The Offensive Advantage The ability to move against an adversary at high speeds gives fighter pilots advantages they call ÔÇ£first look, first shot, first kill.ÔÇØ The first pilot to see an adversary is more likely to get off a successful shot and survive the encounter. The kinematic range of an AIM-120 AMRAAM, for example, increases by fifty percent as aircraft speed increases from 0.9 to 1.5 Mach (this assumes an altitude advantage for the shooter). That is, the missile can reach targets fifty percent farther away because its initial speed coming off an F-22 flying 1.5 Mach is much faster. The Raptor easily supercruises in this speed regime. This missile range advantage intensifies the F-22ÔÇÖs sensor advantageÔÇöthe radar on a Raptor can see a bandit long before a banditÔÇÖs radar detects a Raptor." "The Defensive Advantage Supercruise is an added boost to the overall power of the stealth of the F-22. Although not yet a ÔÇ£cloaking device,ÔÇØ stealth does delay the enemyÔÇÖs shot opportunity until late in the engagement. Against a ground-to-air threat, high speed equates to reduced reaction times from detection to launch and reduced kinematic ranges for surface-to-air missiles or antiaircraft artillery" Radars detection equations. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/s...12-1/sld047.htm http://mitglied.lycos.de/radargrundlagen/g...en/gl22-en.html

I don't think they are better 'cos as i mentioned above it's all about stealth. If you can't see them then it will be hard to aquire/lock them. Or a stealthy fighter will see the target earlier than say an SU-37. Stealth means 1 ) Low Radar Crossing Section ( that's what they call it if i recall this correctly) meaning that the that it reflects less radar energy so it harder to detect. This is done by special coating (Radar Absorbent Material) dissipate (eat if you will ) radar energy and by "The sharp angles and triangular shapes that compose the structure of the plane as designer to reflect the radar pulses away". 2 ) It's low IR signature. Like the AH-64 later versions of the Mi-24 HIND (since their experience in Afghanistan) they would use IR supressors by mixing "cold air" with their exhaust fumes. This is just an example. I don't know exactly how they do this with fighters. special materials maybe, hiding certain areas etc. All stealth fighters generally have a low(er) IR signature since you might not be able to pick them up on radar but an AIM-9 would be able to it's heat anyway if this was not reduced. And fighters like the SU-27/35 etc hav an IR-sensor. 3 ) The lastest fighters like the F-22 and better yet the JSF have thrust vectoring (check for more info F-22, X-31) , JSF has S/VTOL capability, their both stealthy and are all multi-role fighters. And they hope that the're relativly cheap. Though lastest flanker have thrust-vectoring toi i think. But not very stealthy. http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/jsf/ About the F-14 i have lotsa books on this but you can check this on the net yourself but it was designed to protect the carrier (a true interceptor) since the carrier vulnerable without aircover (exocet etc) so the AIM-54C is still being used (i assume). I have to say an Aegis cruiser will probably give them a safe umbrella. The trouble is IFF. How do you know for sure if you have a bogey that it's an enemy? That fighter may have damaged IFF and radio maybe it's an F-14. That's the trouble with BVR combat. AIM-54 info excerpt from http://www.jolly-rogers.com/airpower/aim-54/avionics.html "F-14 to carry out a simultaneous attack against up to six separate targets while tracking a total of 24 contacts. The radar is capable of updating all of the missiles until such time as they can become autonomous, thus guiding themselves to the target in the terminal stage of flight." http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/factfi...s/wep-phoe.html http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-54.html F-14D, APG-71 http://www.topedge.com/alley/text/f14d/f14d.htm EDIT: Seems we replied at the same time Jag.

Ok , sounds cool. I'm looking forward to it.

There is speculation (maybe there is, i couldn't find) that Flankers may have this capability. The SU-35/37/34 seem to have a rear-facing radar and could be equiped with rear-firing missiles. http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/Su-35.html Don't know how far technology is right now but it's probably possible. The nose cone generally has some high-tech radar to track/lock targets. You'll need another radar like this in the rear. It's kinda expensive i think in terms of money, weight and drag. An other point might be that the missile will always meet the target head-on. That makes it easier to outmaneuver i think. And last: these days it's all about stealth look at the B2, F117, F22 and the JSF. If you're able to get at his six without being detected (or too late) and take a shot you live to fight another day. If he's already at your six you already did something wrong in the first place . Maybe a autonomous missile (ie has it's own radar or something) would be something for the future. But you still need to aquire the target somehow. For the latest stealth fighters the missile has to stored in an internal bay. Maybe the F117 may be more vulnerable since it's not really a fighter so for bombers,attack etc the rear-firing missile will be more useful. Frankly i don't have a clue maybe the F117 is more stealthy than the F22 or the new JSF. [ 03-21-2004, 02:21 PM: Message edited by: Mano Faber ]

Sounds good. quote: The idea would be to capture each of these spawn points, then all six in order to capture that base or space region. Will this take place in one region or will each region have six spawnpoints? If each region has six spawnpoints then maybe you could have some sort of map rotation. Let's assume the six spawn points in the earth zone need be captured and after 30 minutes the six spawnpoints in the mars zone will be "activated" and you need to capture those. (don't know how to get the MIM players to mars though) Or one spawnpoint in each region and capture those. If it's one region then it think keep it this way. Sounds good. Maybe a variation could be that team B destroys a starstation and a starbase of team A and team B wins and the other way around.

Frankly i support the war by 49/51% (no/yes) in favor of bush though i really dislike the bushgang. I thought most of the arguments were weak or doubtful. However there was an article in a dutch newpaper before the war. It was written by Salmon Rushdie and he argumented (or something like it) that the Goal of Bush and that of the Iraqies coincided, that is a free Iraq. My 51% is for the Iraqies. I also do respect the individual US soldier who believes he's doing this for a good cause and fight in some god forsaken land far away from home. Now Spain mentioned that they might remove their soldiers i think that's a mistake. Just like Holland , Poland (though number of soldiers are symbolic) they should stay there i think. Starting a war is bad leaving in without stabilizing it, is propably worse (creates another pre-war Afghanistan). The numbers are insignificant but the political support is not. It would send the wrong signal to terrorists if the soldiers were to be bring their soldiers back home. Even if you have a valid reason, on the streets this might be explained differently. Frankly i have many doubts but i reluctantly support Bush. I'm finding it hard to understand that times i'm in awe that an american soldier is willing to fight for freedom ( i assume) for some country faraway yet they aren't willing to pay healthcare for their fellow americans.

Sounds cool. I'm interested in UCE2E a more multiplayer focused UC. Teamplay KB graphics looks awesome however don't know if this game is my cup of tea. Though things like running through interiors of a BC seems like fun.

Maybe i'll check it but i can recall installing SP2 or SP3 i think and i noticed i could even set the chaff / flare intervals etc. different programs. Haven't played it for along time it and i don't play it enough to remember all the keyboard combinations. Liked the original F4 very much.

LOL

Didn't know where to put it but guess this is the best place. At the DC site there where talking about naval combat so i thought i'll test something. Placed a STAGNER_SUB and a NAVAL_CARRIER near land. Pretty cool haven't done anything big though. With many vessels etc. Guess they'll be exchanging lotsa missiles. He're a some shot. Here some shots: I feel like Ramius from the Red October Missile away The carrier is hit it will sink soon But the cool stuff was i can let a gunship land and deploy troops (scripted). So i just wait , while from a carrier a marauder takes off and lands (basicly)next to me and deploys squad of marines and they are assigned to escort me. I was playing around with some ideas like a beachlanding or something like that so i put in in an LCAC that would also deploy a marine (just for the fun of it). Created two enemy marines (named SPETNATZ) and phantom gunship. So i thought how hard can this be. Oh, and the gunship was coming for me once the had reinforments landed. Ok so here i am knowing a gunship was coming for me. I thought i'm an assault marine with heavy firepower this is gonna be a walk in the park. Well.. not exactly. So the 1st try i hear "incoming" i dive behind the marauder but it got blown away so i try to run for cover run for cover but it was in vain. 2nd time : i'm not gonna take any changes i'm out in the open i'm gonna run to the hills and take cover there. Well somehow missiles where heading my way, he fired his lasers but ...i'm still alive! he found another target. But huh? i can't stand up 8% huh? my legs? ok now i had to crawl for the supply station and i finally made it. The gunship had lost interest in me but the where still to "spetnatzs" out there. Meanwhile the base has launched a bunch of marines so it's two vs many how dangerous can that be? So i have the bad guy in my sights and shoot but i get hit?! but not by him. I shoot again. I die huh, what the.. great the dude with the big gun kills me! Great blue on blue. 3rd time: Ok, now this ain't funny i'm gonna kick his "you know what" and it'll be over. Got myself a good position (so i thought) and have myself an LR-12 launcher and i gonna blow him right out if the sky. Not , didn't fire a missile i'm dead. 4th time: Okay i can't handle his anymore, i changed some missiles on the ACM mobile SAM and he's finished this time. So this doesn't seems fair but i lock him up before he's even in the air. Even tried to fire a missile in advance but i slammed into a hill (why does it work for him). So he took off i fired a coupla missiles, but did the same and started firing his lasers! I thought i was gonna lose again! but finally he 's going down. I was testing for newbies how you should engage gunships but now you know "DONT DO IT" maybe if you can takecover behind a mayhem tank you'll be safe. Best thing is, find something that's between you and a missile (or the lasers). I have to find a way though. btw: it was a shadow gunship not a phantom. [ 02-20-2004, 05:30 AM: Message edited by: Mano Faber ]

Try this link. Don't know if you set two waypoints or not. This might solve it. http://www.3000ad.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?u...c;f=21;t=000008

Yes , it can be done. Check te UC_manual_ revisions.pdf in your docs directory so you can see what type of asset-swithing is allowed. it depends on the career. A commander can basicly access all units. In addition to this (check VCF) you need 500 EP in order to do that as a commander.

Very cool!

quote: Originally posted by Cc: I am trying to reproduce what you did.But I can't get the gunship to takeoff no matter what I do.Is the gunship your default asset or another one on the base?I have tried tacops,the PLV and the TOM with no luck. Maybe when you have time you could give a more detailed walk-through. Thanks. Start a new career with ROAM as a MIM select ATV (or something) move to the marauder. Disembark and marines will be assigned to you. Put them on hold (HALT) except for one guy and let him follow you in. Once he's in put him on HALT. and so on. Go to the marauder from tacops and give it a fly to or attack order.

quote: Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr: Thats nuthin', wait'll I finish polishing the support structure collision detect. btw, once I fix this damn visible character model bug, I will activate the NPC marine's ability to use assets. They can't use them, thats why they are reluctant (as you pointed above). They're not stupid. I assumed it had something to do with that. But i got them in anyway

Was trying this in BCM/G but this is way cool in UC (haven't tried in UC MP yet). The gunships have cargo area where you can walk into. The Marauder is quite big but it also has a gunner position. So i jumped in the gunners posstion and let the AI pilot move te to another place on the island. Here some nice shots. Looking down from the Marauder Looking from the outside So i figured if i can so can my squads. hehe but that was easier said then done. These guys seems "scared" of anything that looked like a gunship. When i ran into the gunship the ran around it when we came close to it. Something like " you're not gettin me in one of those, ya hear". Finally i managed to two of them in i did my best. These guys aren't afraid of nme fire but they are of gunships. Here some shots: You see, they looked scared Had to put em in one by one. Once one was in i gave 'em the HALT order. Three of us in the air We cheered we survived the gunship ride While we were on the ground i was amazed again this game has snakes and Dragon flies. Then for my last challenge if i can do this ...can i do.... Welll partially it worked. Yes this was tricky as well And I drove it in the gunship. And dit it work....well look for yourself. Though it fell out of the gunship. I checked for some scratches but it looked ok. [ 02-16-2004, 09:01 AM: Message edited by: Mano Faber ]

quote: Originally posted by Mano Faber: I think it just needs to be polished. Yep. But we all know that at $19.99, thats just not gonna happen. Right now, all I'm doing is fixing bugs. And since I always said that BCG was the last one, this is the last one. It would have been nice if it wasn't rushed out and we had time to polish it, but thats publishers for you, what can I say? heh, i know now i'm glad i bought UC even it end here. I'm sure you're doing the best you can. I'm sorry it's just $20 and even more so when i see them available this/next week for EUR 30 to EUR 44 in the dutch shops (checked online). I 'm just sad i see less and less (good) sims being released. Nothing like the scope of UC anyway. And it's 2004 and somehow UC is unique cos i don't have 5 UC-clones on my shelf. (do have a coupla flightsim though)

First of all i've been a supporter of the bc series so you can call me unbiased if you want to but i think UC looks AWESOME . I hear complaining about the graphics and i think it's nonsense. The're good graphics. Just fired up OFP (which i love btw) and the trees and bushes look something like this. I tried GroundOps first and this has changed a lot compared to BCMG ( some a ppl say it's the same, must be playing a different version of BCMG)Trees, bushes etc makes it look a lot better. Then i the noticed the wildlife i was amazed to see tigers, lion, birds (different),apes if was wondering if some animals were related to their geographical location so i checked the arctic areas and the game has Polar Bears ! and of course lotsa fish. And of course other weather effects of rain / lightning ,dusk / dawn. Combination is cool. Noticed some other ppl complaining about the fact that is was always dark when they deployed troops. Guess they didn't check the timezones in tacops. The gunships are very cool. De graphics and the models are good and the control on the gunships a lot better then in BCMG. I hear ppl complaining about physics but why do ppl complain about this in UC while other games like BF1942 or OFP this is also a compromise. And you're gonna apply these on Earth but also on Mars, and Venus? This is UC no LO-MAC of FB. VTOL is a great and te waypoint LAND, DEPLOY options have improved greatly. I've been playing the UC demo and placed a bunch of waypoints for my shuttle. The cool thing is that u have different kinda vehicles on your battlecruiser [OC1 - OC8] for example 2 HAV, 2 CAV, 4 MAYHEM. So you can send a small army to a planet when you load 4 marines in each OC and 4 marines in each shuttle. So i selected a TER/INS base and placed the waypoints 1st [proceed to next] the initial waypoint then [deploy vehicle] in my case a MAYHEM tank and last e [deploy team] waypoint. Then ik placed the three waypoints for OC5 (MAYHEM tank) 1st [proceed to next] then a [deploy team] and the last [sAD]. battleplan waypoints. They attacked the base but many didn't make it did manage to a evacuate a few of them. I tried the Marauder in the last IA mission of UC to take out the marines. It was cool to take out the marines from VTOL mode and i thought pretty safe in this machine until a smart*** Assualt Marine blew me right out of the sky. They have missiles too. Then i tried a ROAM mode as a marine but now the're a lot more options then before an way more weapons. Needed to check the profile for the gear. So i started a career as MIM i chose a CAV as unit and i drove to a DJP. When i started i heard that two squads where assigned to me! So when i arrived at the DJP a bunch of marines headed my way (ALPHA, BRAVO squad). I jumped through the DJP to another NME base (TER/INS) and i heard a "startrek transporter-sound" they all jumped after me . I was busy looking at the marines coming thtough the DJP and i got killed. As a hardcoresimmer i find the air/space combat pretty good. On the planet you can take nme fighters out rather easily with missiles and it's alot harder with guns/lasers like in any other flightsim. One thing though the game was a lot more demanding than i anticipated. Felt a little like LO-MAC. Another thing i noticed was, when i entered a mobile SAL i was able to fire at nme fighters but i was unable to launch missiles from a SAM site. But there's a lot more than i expected, the new Gunships, marines types, profiles (wildlife) it all comes together now. Hopefully GBS-III will be released in the future which will show the possibilities of this game. Oh, and i heard ppl having CTDs but i haven't had a single one yet. [ 02-14-2004, 11:51 AM: Message edited by: Mano Faber ]

Action Trip http://www.actiontrip.com/reviews/universalcombat_ 2.phtml Gamespot http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/review.html "There remains great promise in the core concept--and in many aspects of the design--but even the most dedicated followers of Derek Smart and 3000AD must be wondering (by now) if this promise is ever going to be fulfilled." Hmm, show me the alternative. Since bc3k i've not seen other sims try this. (maybe BF1942 or better yet OFP). I think it just needs to be polished.

Just cancelled two copies of UC. Cancelled one at EBgames and one at gamestop. Was unsure what to do but guess this is the best action i guess i'll wait until further notice. Was checking some documents last night on dreamcatcher seems he did some namechanging in the past. Hope this will be resolved soon . http://www.justadventure.com/Interviews/Ri...rd_Wah_Kan.shtm

Just cancelled two copies of UC. Cancelled one at EBgames and one at gamestop. Was unsure what to do but guess this is the best action i guess i'll wait until further notice. Was checking some documents last night on dreamcatcher seems he did some namechanging in the past. Hope this will be resolved soon . http://www.justadventure.com/Interviews/Ri...rd_Wah_Kan.shtm

Haven't been drinking much lately. But i like Grolsch beer best i guess and some Belgian beers are good.

The developers asking their gamers what to do with the product/patch and explaining that a publisher want to hold/release it for this or that reason. When i saw the news about if the patch should be released, it felt like a deja vu. Looked similar to the Derek question asked a couple of weeks ago whether UC should released with or without some bugs. Guess i just appreciate it that the developers of my favorite games communicate so open with the gamers.

Was checking the news on the LO-MAC patch but something seemed familiar when reading the news. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=...606&m=722107501

Frankly i voted "i don't care" 'cause i figured if Derek's gonna ship it, it probably doesn't have any fatal bugs. They ,Derek and DC agreed, to ship UC that state. However DC decided that the're gonna release the game and i think the're not the experts on UC. Why shouldn't they wait a few weeks the're not many games like this anyway. I still remember Hasbro and Gunship! i was really looking forward to this title. My order still stands but maybe i'll need to buy from 3000AD directly or something. [ 12-21-2003, 10:29 AM: Message edited by: Mano Faber ]