68 replies to this topic

[CMDR Sweeper]

Well I had an excess of 200 knots when touching down on my last run...
And that is even too hot for a normal landing

[redfalcon]

Well i was doing over 1000 knots before i backed off power and slapped airbrake on,   , hard turns are key to slowing down quick! ....luck is key too with this one.

[redfalcon]

CMDR Sweeper, on 04 December 2011 - 01:08 PM, said:

The truth is, you want to face the brunt of TAW...Well the training missions isn't the best way to "battle harden" in my opinion.It is the campaigns, things that seems simple can quickly turn into a friggin nightmare.Like the "milk run" description I gave Home Fries a while ago, it was all bandit and SAM clear until my return trip, where I got damage, fuel leak, and I spent my remaining fuel climbing to have a high potential energy.While I was gliding towards my homebase, 2x fully loaded strike flights spot me, and I cannot manouver or do anything as I have no engine power and barely enough energy, my airspeed was similar to a 737's climbing speed.In short, I belly landed that Raptor with barely any systems left, and empty stores of chaff and flares...That is what the campaign can expect you to pull off, and that is on easy.

See what you mean Sweeper!!.....just done a SEAD Strike, holy crap!, must of been about 30 bad guys flying round target area!, was lucky to get home, i just hit and ran!, let the Wild Weasel's deal with them, if they survived?? ....and that's on easy level!!

[Wombat1940]

redfalcon, on 27 December 2011 - 04:23 PM, said:

Well i headed straight for runway at full thrust in M5 from mission start position!, backed of power completely and slapped airbrake on when runway at 90 degrees to my left!, well a bit earlier than that!... then when your turning towards runway the turning itself slows you down loads!....belly flop in and keep it in straight line when your skidding in.  

Ye ........ I did the same at the end of a MP mission yesterday ........ only thing ..... I just forgot to put the wheels down .......    In fact ..... now I think of it ....... where was "Betty"? Probably drowned out by the cricket commentators ....  

[CMDR Sweeper]

Well try forgetting the landing gear in the MD-11, it will go on your nerves with alarms and betty will be bitching about "Landing Gear"
You get one loud warning beep and then the "Laaanding Geear." from Betty and then one beep as the warning repeats until the gear is down and locked.
Of course it has other warnings too if you forget flaps or spoilers.

Of course, Wombat in a civillian airliner might trigger this:

[Wombat1940]

CMDR Sweeper, on 30 December 2011 - 12:43 AM, said:

Well try forgetting the landing gear in the MD-11, it will go on your nerves with alarms and betty will be bitching about "Landing Gear"
You get one loud warning beep and then the "Laaanding Geear." from Betty and then one beep as the warning repeats until the gear is down and locked.
Of course it has other warnings too if you forget flaps or spoilers.

Of course, Wombat in a civillian airliner might trigger this:

Interesting ....... and all male voices. I'll stick with betty.  

EDIT: Hmmmmmm ...... betty doesn't tell you "ground proximity" when in landing mode with gear up.  Can't blame the cricket commentators distraction then .....  

Edited by Wombat1940, 30 December 2011 - 03:01 AM.

[I B Spectre]

During development of the F/A-18, the U.S. military studied the issue of which vocal annuciator worked best in the cockpit environment.  It was found that a female voice stood out, likely due to the dominance of male voices at that time in radio communication, hence Betty was adopted.  I saw a documentary in which Gen. Robin Olds was recounting an F-4 mission over North Vietnam, saying how the aircrew was subjected to sensory overload.  "You had the radar warning receiver going off, the sidewinder growler, somebody always yelling on Guard frequency, so after awhile we turned a lot of that stuff off and just concentrated on keeping our eyes open for SAM launches".  You can see why a voice that stood out from the background clutter would be most effective.

[Iceman1736]

CMDR Sweeper, on 30 December 2011 - 12:43 AM, said:

Well try forgetting the landing gear in the MD-11, it will go on your nerves with alarms and betty will be bitching about "Landing Gear"
You get one loud warning beep and then the "Laaanding Geear." from Betty and then one beep as the warning repeats until the gear is down and locked.
Of course it has other warnings too if you forget flaps or spoilers.

Of course, Wombat in a civillian airliner might trigger this:

It has a nice beat and I could ditch to it..!!!! I'd give it a 6 out of 10 score...

[CMDR Sweeper]

Well the GPWS or Ground Proximity Warning System in civillian jets are male based for some reason.
Of course he has been nicknamed "Bitching Bob" but if he says pull up, you better do it, or start doing it.
A 747 doesn't actually change direction on a dime so to speak

Anyways, the Bitching Betty for the Boeing 717 (Boeing rebranded MD-80 essentially.) can be found here:

[redfalcon]

In the Eurofighter they call her 'Nagging Nora'!

[Wombat1940]

I B Spectre, on 30 December 2011 - 10:19 AM, said:

During development of the F/A-18, the U.S. military studied the issue of which vocal annuciator worked best in the cockpit environment.  It was found that a female voice stood out, likely due to the dominance of male voices at that time in radio communication, hence Betty was adopted.  I saw a documentary in which Gen. Robin Olds was recounting an F-4 mission over North Vietnam, saying how the aircrew was subjected to sensory overload.  "You had the radar warning receiver going off, the sidewinder growler, somebody always yelling on Guard frequency, so after awhile we turned a lot of that stuff off and just concentrated on keeping our eyes open for SAM launches".  You can see why a voice that stood out from the background clutter would be most effective.

is it likely that we males will respond to female voice more readily than a male voice? That sexual thing?

[Iceman1736]

Wombat1940, on 30 December 2011 - 07:21 PM, said:

is it likely that we males will respond to female voice more readily than a male voice? That sexual thing?

More than likely we are used to the female voice barking out commands that we know we better respond to (or else...)....

[Wombat1940]

Iceman1736, on 30 December 2011 - 08:43 PM, said:

More than likely we are used to the female voice barking out commands that we know we better respond to (or else...)....

Ye .... I agree, but I think there is a sexual thing to it. That is to male heterosexuals anyway. If I'm going to get a speeding ticket from a cop, I appreciate it more accept it more graciously if "its" female.  

Edited by Wombat1940, 31 December 2011 - 08:01 AM.

[Home Fries]

Not just a sexual thing, but a recognition thing, at least in the military.  Considering most military pilots are male,having a female voice in your headset with a bunch of male voices on the radio tends to make it stick out more.  If Betty were Bob in the military aircraft, "he" would be more likely to get ignored in the clutter.

[Wombat1940]

Home Fries, on 31 December 2011 - 07:29 PM, said:

Not just a sexual thing, but a recognition thing, at least in the military.  Considering most military pilots are male,having a female voice in your headset with a bunch of male voices on the radio tends to make it stick out more.  If Betty were Bob in the military aircraft, "he" would be more likely to get ignored in the clutter.

Ye ..... I can understand that.

[Eagle_Flight]

Home Fries, on 31 December 2011 - 07:29 PM, said:

Not just a sexual thing, but a recognition thing, at least in the military.  Considering most military pilots are male,having a female voice in your headset with a bunch of male voices on the radio tends to make it stick out more.  If Betty were Bob in the military aircraft, "he" would be more likely to get ignored in the clutter.

I think a few other factors could also come intro play.. I'm tempted to agree with Wombat, as I think he also has a point about the sexism thing.

The 'competition' feeling you have when another male would give a male advice is something that (I'm guessing) could affect the way one percieves the warning.

I think a male pilot might question the warning's intention to actually help him in a life/death situation, if it's given by another male.

Of course this is generalizing the situation, but I think it could also be a factor..

Really interesting though!


Funny that betty really exists though

[pdmarsh]

I might be coming to the forum a bit early on this single-player mission, but after about six or more tries I can't get passed the first kill box in the "Threat Kill" mission within the Red Sea Tour.  The two scud launchers are surrounded by SAMS and, I think, some AAA.  Either three enemy fighters, or two pair of fighters, are in the area.

I have tried to draw the enemy fighters away from the SAM threat zone with minimal success.  Maybe I need to get further away, but then the fighters won't pick up my flight and engage.  We still need to approach the target zone, whether to go after the scuds or kill the fighters.  I send my wingmen to engage the fighters while I stay on the outer edge of the SAM threat zone and try to get all of the SAMs to launch (I read about that strategy in the TAW Wiki).  I don't know how long that should take, but it hasn't worked yet.  I'll get some SAMS to launch, but others remain.  Meanwhile, I can't seem to avoid getting drawn into the dogfight since at least one of the enemy fighters is still dogging me.

At the moment, this is feeling like a suicide mission.  I don't know how to attack such a heavily defended target with Mavericks and dumb bumbs, both of which put you squarely in the SAM and AAA kill zone.

While I feel like I'm almost asking for the cheat to get through a scripted mission, what I would really like is to learn the finer points of strategy I'm missing.

Thanks in advance for any tips.

Sincerely,
Paul

[Wombat1940]

I'm restricted to minimal TAW2.0 at the moment; therefore  SPing when I can and unfortunately no MP.  Hence I''ll give it ago. But have you looked at page 273 of the F-22 ADF Strategy Guide? Its not cheating; its a report from a recon. flight immediately available prior to your package take-off. Also when you get in the cockpit hit <DEL> key have a look at the in-flight briefing map. It all helps. You might be able to locate a friendly base to rearm with mavericks.

[pdmarsh]

Hi Wombat,

I did read the Strategy Guide and have been trying to follow it.  I will say that I have to get it in my head that it's possible to land and re-arm.  I still think I'm missing something on mission strategy in general.  There must be some way to approach this successfully.  I'll keep trying!

Thanks,
Paul

[Wombat1940]

pdmarsh, on 27 February 2012 - 08:49 PM, said:

Hi Wombat,

I did read the Strategy Guide and have been trying to follow it.  I will say that I have to get it in my head that it's possible to land and re-arm.  I still think I'm missing something on mission strategy in general.  There must be some way to approach this successfully.  I'll keep trying!

Thanks,
Paul

I gave it a quick go. My wingies couldn't taken out the two F16,  and I wasn't paying attention. You need the sky clear before you sort out the ground "T's". I possibly didn't suck the F16's far enough away from the target area and I'm also a lousy pilot.   Like you, I'll keep trying.