PDA

View Full Version : Interview with russian fighter pilot



crazyivan1970
04-30-2006, 11:27 PM
http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/pilots/pilots.htm

CaptainGelo
04-30-2006, 11:42 PM
very nice http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Q: Fw-190 is supposed to have good dive?
A: and what? Il flew 5-10 meters above water level€¦ FW dive would be highly appreciated.



http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

CaptainGelo
04-30-2006, 11:56 PM
didnt knew that USSR and US/UK was shooting each other....

Q: did you ever met Americans in the sky?
A: Yes. Some time after war end there was an American B-26 flying in our territory. I received an order from Moscow to shoot it down. I took of, gained him, but my mechanic forgot to load ammo, so it was my wingman to kill that plane. He shot 90 degrees from below, and it simply fell apart. Later we went on the crash site and saw bodies without chutes. There was a colonel there. Couple of times we were scrambled after British, but there were no heroes among them.

Q: a lot of questions arose about that €œMarauder€ your wingmen shot down; can you describe what happened exactly?
A: We were stationed near Konigsberg, Kaliningrad now, then it was still German territory. The Americans flew from their part of Germany to Baltic Sea, and then south into Poland. The aim was reconnaissance. We had then, if I€m not mistaken Yak-9Us, first of which I brought to base 3rd of May 1945. Our mission was to cover Poland. First engagement was in July, when we intercepted B-25. We flew circles around, but without permission to fire we could do nothing to hamper his activity. Second bomber I intercepted was a B-17. Those fired at me, but I still had no permission to open fire. When I returned my regiment commander shouted at me €œwhy you did not shoot him down?€ I said €œyou forbid it€. He answered €œif you€d kill him, it would be a lot better, since Rokossovskii (then commander of polish armed forces) was angry€. In late July I was scrambled with a direct order to shoot any American down at any cost. What we did in a first pass. I flew from behind and my wingman from behind-low. He shot and killed him, and I did not have the ammo to shoot. British did not get deep enough for us to intercept, but they were always at our borders. The order to shoot Americans was given out at July 1945 until the atomic bomb explosion. During that time we shot down at least 4 bombers to 1 our and 2 Catalinas. Next order was out at 1948 and that was closed by moron Gorbachev. And that was the reason why Rust (a civilan pilot) managed to land in Red Square. As far as I know after that the order is out once again.

georgeo76
05-01-2006, 12:26 AM
Q: Can you remember something funny about war time?
A: We used to have some fun on daily basis. You know, we€d be mad in a week without some rest€¦ Once I remember flying out on an intercept. I noticed a dot ahead and went after it. I almost boiled out my engine only to find out that it was some spot on the windscreen! It was a matter of jokes for a month!

LMAO, I've done this

alert_1
05-01-2006, 01:15 AM
If it had been posted on 1st April I had no problem with it...

HelSqnProtos
05-01-2006, 01:24 AM
S~!

Solid link.

I enjoyed it very much. Quite intersting what he had to say on fw flight profile/gun performance. It confirms what the 'blonde knight' wrote in his book.

I also like the quotation with regards to the Yak 9.

F19_Ob
05-01-2006, 03:29 AM
Interesting story. Thanks for posting. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

FPSOLKOR
05-01-2006, 04:40 AM
Originally posted by oleg86:
didnt knew that USSR and US/UK was shooting each other....


It really happened, in 1952 a former pilot of 35 shap was awarded red banner for shooting down swedish catalina.

luftluuver
05-01-2006, 06:11 AM
Originally posted by FPSOLKOR:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by oleg86:
didnt knew that USSR and US/UK was shooting each other....


It really happened, in 1948 a former pilot of 35 shap was awarded red banner for shooting down swedish catalina. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>The Soviets made a habit of shooting down a/c, even if not over their territory.

On June 13 1952, a Swedish DC-3 (Ser Num 79001) was shot down by MiG15s over the Baltic. The Swedish destroyer Sundsvall found a cannon damaged dingy 2 days later 55km NE of the island of Gotska Sandon (north of Gotland). On the 16 June A Swedish Air-Sea rescue PBY (Ser Num 47002) from F2 searching for survivors from the DC-3 was fired on and forced down ~40km SE from the Finnish lighthouse island Bogskar. The PBY sank from the damage while the crew of 7 was being rescued.

In June 1983, 2 SK37s were fired on (SAMs) by Warsaw Pact vessels in the south Baltic (international waters) while doing a photo pass on the vessels.

FPSOLKOR
05-01-2006, 07:42 AM
Originally posted by luftluuver:
[On June 13 1952, a Swedish DC-3 (Ser Num 79001) was shot down by MiG15s over the Baltic. The Swedish destroyer Sundsvall found a cannon damaged dingy 2 days later 55km NE of the island of Gotska Sandon (north of Gotland). On the 16 June A Swedish Air-Sea rescue PBY (Ser Num 47002) from F2 searching for survivors from the DC-3 was fired on and forced down ~40km SE from the Finnish lighthouse island Bogskar. The PBY sank from the damage while the crew of 7 was being rescued.

In June 1983, 2 SK37s were fired on (SAMs) by Warsaw Pact vessels in the south Baltic (international waters) while doing a photo pass on the vessels.

Out of mentioned i can say that Dc was over russian territory when it was hit (confirmed in 1990-s by sweds), catalina no info?, incident with shooting at aircraft was a matter of flying OVER military vessel, what is by means of international law violating territoreal airspace, so...

Blutarski2004
05-01-2006, 08:30 AM
Important words to remember from the V A Tikhomirov interview: his answer to the last question -


Quote -

Keep peace, in time of war do not hesitate, but be a man, not a beast, when war ends, stop, do not take anger with you, forgive, but forget nothing!

- Unquote

Flying_Nutzo
05-01-2006, 08:55 AM
Thx for the post. A most interesting read.

e.g. re AA:

"...an order was given out to use army aviation for interception of ship convoys. We found one and set off. When they saw all that flack coming in, they returned to the base, and when we got there after strike they said €œoh hell, we do not want medals, we want to live€. The point is? Every cargo ship had at least 4 AA guns. While destroyers had up to 20! Now imagine what a fur ball they could cause when there is a convoy of 5 cargos was covered by 4 destroyers and a couple of trawlers€¦"

re tactics:

Q: What was most common tactic for German attacks?
A: "It was always the same: high speed attack with an attempt to extend upwards. That is where we caught them. They dove steeply, at this moment we started to gain altitude in a shallow climb. At this moment they would start steep climb, and finally we met at the same altitude with the same speed about 200 m apart. Now it was time to kill! Their first attack was fruitless, they were too fast to aim correctly and too afraid to dive real low, so our job was not to let them have a second chance."

Heliopause
05-01-2006, 09:28 AM
Saw a piece of a program the other day..
Russian pilot was on and talked about shooting down B24 over Baltic sea. This was after the war. He received orders over the radio to shoot it down. He did. Apparently some of the americans survived in a dingy and ended up in russian captivity. (beginning of '50's if I remember correctly.)
In the '60's an american from russians captivity was released and mentioned seeing the crew members in a camp he'd spend some time in. ( This individual was captured by the russians at the end of WWII or he was from an other flight, don't remember all the details http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif)
US planes flew out of wiesbaden on their recon / supply / drop infiltrate spies missions. ( C-47's / B24's )

EyeoftheChicken
05-01-2006, 09:51 AM
This link provides some details regarding 14 "Cold War" incidents where US aircraft were shot down.
http://www.dtic.mil/dpmo/coldwar/pmcold_incidents.pdf

FPSOLKOR
05-01-2006, 10:24 AM
Originally posted by EyeoftheChicken:
This link provides some details regarding 14 "Cold War" incidents where US aircraft were shot down.
http://www.dtic.mil/dpmo/coldwar/pmcold_incidents.pdf

What i would like to see - is opposite incidents details ( and i can remember quite a few).

horseback
05-01-2006, 10:35 AM
Originally posted by FPSOLKOR:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by luftluuver:
In June 1983, 2 SK37s were fired on (SAMs) by Warsaw Pact vessels in the south Baltic (international waters) while doing a photo pass on the vessels.

Out of mentioned i can say that Dc was over russian territory when it was hit (confirmed in 1990-s by sweds), catalina no info?, incident with shooting at aircraft was a matter of flying OVER military vessel, what is by means of international law violating territoreal airspace, so... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Really? What would have happened if the Fast Frigate I served on in the late 1970s had taken out the two Bears and the late model Fitter that overflew us on our WESTPAC cruise in 1978/9?

Direct overflight of western warships was a regular practice of the Soviet air forces whenever the opportunity presented itself. At no time were we in the USN told that we had the legal right to fire on these provocateurs in international waters. And yes, we were in international waters on all three occasions. I was the technician responsible for maintaining and repairing the electronics navigation systems (TACAN, LORAN, OMEGA) and only the Chief Quartermaster may have had a better idea of exactly where we were, from day to day.

Soviet foreign policy was based on a schoolyard bully's behavior; made-up rights and rules, threats, lies and cheap shots followed by a "See what you made me do?"

If the West had responded in kind, shooting down rescue aircraft and passenger liners in international air space, as well as violations of our domestic airspace, we'd still be hearing the whining. There were regular flights out of Cuba by Soviet military a/c that 'wandered' over Florida and the Eastern seaboard as well as all kinds of 'navigational errors' by Aeroflot, so it's hardly as though we lacked for opportunities.

It was the policy of the western democracies to demonstrate their tolerance and restraint as opposed to the barbaric (the Russian word is 'nekulturnii' isn't it?) trigger-happy attitude and behavior of the Soviet empire.

cheers

horseback

FPSOLKOR
05-01-2006, 10:59 AM
Really? What would have happened if the Fast Frigate I served on in the late 1970s had taken out the two Bears and the late model Fitter that overflew us on our WESTPAC cruise in 1978/9?
Someone would post a topic like this one nowadays http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

At no time were we in the USN told that we had the legal right to fire on these provocateurs in international waters.
It seems that your commanders wanted to avoid international problems. But speaking from the law point, you had a right to do so

And yes, we were in international waters on all three occasions. A ships deck and airspace above it IS the territory of a correrspondent state, even if it is in a foreighn harbour.


Soviet foreign policy was based on a schoolyard bully's behavior; made-up rights and rules, threats, lies and cheap shots followed by a "See what you made me do?"
Same as US politics at that time and now. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

If the West had responded in kind, shooting down rescue aircraft and passenger liners in international air space, as well as violations of our domestic airspace, we'd still be hearing the whining. There were regular flights out of Cuba by Soviet military a/c that 'wandered' over Florida and the Eastern seaboard as well as all kinds of 'navigational errors' by Aeroflot, so it's hardly as though we lacked for opportunities.
Same as Western planes, and does date 3 july 1988 rings the bell? Do you know what happened on the next day after Korean war officially ended (speaking of airplanes)? I'd say that both powers were equally moronic. Only russians tend to do something and keep silent later, and west is tending towards doing nothing and building loud-mouth what-if scenarios

It was the policy of the western democracies to demonstrate their tolerance and restraint as opposed to the barbaric (the Russian word is 'nekulturnii' isn't it?)
Well, we would say that barbaric is the one who shouts from the mountains "Stop, soldiers, we are showing you on cnn, our mujaheddin friends are comind down to cut open your abs...). I was among those down there, and we were NOT soldiers... Accusations in barbaricism is not something to be tolerated by me from people who have no culture of there own

trigger-happy attitude and behavior of the Soviet empire.
3 july 1988

cheers
Same to you

horseback
05-01-2006, 12:44 PM
Before I start this, let me make it clear that my 'beef' is not with FPSOLKOR personally, but with some of his misconceptions about the west in general, and the United States specifically. He still apparently believes a great deal of what he was taught by the old Soviet system. No doubt I have my own misconceptions, but I have no fear of being corrected when I'm wrong.

Hopefully, we can clear up both of our misconceptions with honest debate.
Originally posted by FPSOLKOR:
Really? What would have happened if the Fast Frigate I served on in the late 1970s had taken out the two Bears and the late model Fitter that overflew us on our WESTPAC cruise in 1978/9?
Someone would post a topic like this one nowadays http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif I try to respond with what I know and saw for myself whenever possible. Personal experience has more validity and impact than hearsay.
At no time were we in the USN told that we had the legal right to fire on these provocateurs in international waters. It seems that your commanders wanted to avoid international problems. But speaking from the law point, you had a right to do so Believe me, it wasn't my commanders, it was the civilian leadership-in this case, the demonstrably execrable Jimmy Carter.
And yes, we were in international waters on all three occasions. A ships deck and airspace above it IS the territory of a correrspondent state, even if it is in a foreighn harbour. In port, there was a general recognition of that principle, but in international waters, it's almost impossible to delineate the "Territorial Airspace" (and silly to try) above a moving ship less than 140m long, particularly in an age of air launched standoff weapons. Any aircraft within 100 km is a potential threat.

To claim the right to fire on these potential threats in peacetime is specious at best; to actually do so is paranoid.

If the West had responded in kind, shooting down rescue aircraft and passenger liners in international air space, as well as violations of our domestic airspace, we'd still be hearing the whining. There were regular flights out of Cuba by Soviet military a/c that 'wandered' over Florida and the Eastern seaboard as well as all kinds of 'navigational errors' by Aeroflot, so it's hardly as though we lacked for opportunities.Same as Western planes, and does date 3 july 1988 rings the bell? Do you know what happened on the next day after Korean war officially ended (speaking of airplanes)? I'd say that both powers were equally moronic. Only russians tend to do something and keep silent later, and west is tending towards doing nothing and building loud-mouth what-if scenarios I'm quite familiar with the VINCINNES incident; as I recall, the Aegis cruiser VINCINNES was in a running shootout with Iranian gunboats at the time that a pair of aircraft approached it, with at least one of them 'squawking' the IFF codes for an Iranian AF F-14 (this I got directly from an Operations Specialist who was in CIC at the time, and it's certainly consistent with my training experiences with the Iranians before the Shah fell). The Captain had literally less than 20 seconds to decide whether to fire on the approaching a/c or risk an air attack (even with just a strafing run with its 20mm cannon, the ship would have taken serious casualties, and the IRIAF was known to have mounted air to surface weapons on their Tomcats). He chose to protect his ship, and an off-schedule airliner flying over a combat zone was shot down.

As I recall, there was a huge investigation, the Captain's family was threatened (their family vehicle was fire-bombed here in San Diego with his wife and kids in it -fortunately, they escaped safely), and while he was officially exonerated, that officer was passed over for promotion and retired shortly after.

Were those Warsaw Pact warships in a firefight with Swedish fishing boats when the recon aircraft approached? Were the two civilian Korean Air flights shot down by the Soviets in the 1980s 'threatening' a ship or ground unit already under fire?

I'm not familiar with the 'day after the Korean War', because hostilities there are only suspended, not ended. Again, however, if you refer to an incident immediately after the 'truce' was called, any provocation or suspicious action would have been met quite forcefully, as were suspicious activities by Japanese or German ships & aircraft in the immediate aftermath of WWII.

Soviet propagandists were quite noisy and provocative most of the time. They only tended to go silent when their minions went over the line and commited obvious atrocities.
It was the policy of the western democracies to demonstrate their tolerance and restraint as opposed to the barbaric (the Russian word is 'nekulturnii' isn't it?) Well, we would say that barbaric is the one who shouts from the mountains "Stop, soldiers, we are showing you on cnn, our mujaheddin friends are comind down to cut open your abs...). I was among those down there, and we were NOT soldiers... Accusations in barbaricism is not something to be tolerated by me from people who have no culture of there own

cheers
Same to you What does CNN have to do with it? They barely existed at that time, and the mujaheddin weren't watching a satellite feed that wouldn't exist until 1990.

Maybe you should place the blame where it belongs, on the government that invaded an unthreatening Afghanistan, pissed off those tribesmen (and every other Muslim in the world, after the Soviets spent so much effort arming and training them for fighting Israel and the 'crusaders'), and then put you there without a serious thought for your wellbeing or support. I don't recall a lot of tears spilt in the USSR on behalf of the American soldiers and airmen killed in Vietnam.

Cold war or not, our systems were at war, and I believe that my side held itself to a higher standard. It certainly held me to one.

THAT's culture.

On the other hand, to be totally fair, I'm REALLY sorry for a lot of Hollywood, rap and hip-hop...

cheers

horseback

Bogun
05-01-2006, 02:22 PM
To be really fare I have to admit €" Horseback€s appologies for the €œHollywood, rap and hip-hop€ go the long way, but still not enough to cover all the inconsistencies left after reading his post€¦

First €œVINCENNES incident€ €" please read this:
http://ocw.mit.edu/NR/rdonlyres/Aeronautics-and-Astrona...43C7/0/vincennes.pdf (http://ocw.mit.edu/NR/rdonlyres/Aeronautics-and-Astronautics/16-422Spring2004/40763DF2-1797-48D5-9D5C-136DFE8D43C7/0/vincennes.pdf)
and pay special attention to pages 12 and after€¦ It would be nice for you Horseback to call f&$*ups their own name and not try to justify or find excuses what captain of Vincennes has done.

Yes, those were systems at war, even a Cold one but war nevertheless, and American side (with all those presumably regards to adherence to higher values) did not behave any better but to equal to Soviets (who we all know from Hollywood movies had no values at all)€¦

Soviets were paranoid even without US incursion into Soviet mainland but non-ending stream of American recognizance planes over Soviet territory (everyone of which could have been a bomber caring nuclear bomb) really did not do anything to build trust.
Here is a link to an article describing how it looked like from the Russian side:
http://www.airforce.ru/awm/hotsky/hotsky.htm
So please refresh my memory Horseback - How many Russian planes were shot down over American mainland?

So don€t even start about €œside held itself to a higher standard€ €" those words just do not stand even a little scrutiny €" war is the war and to win it both sides did what it took.

FPSOLKOR
05-01-2006, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by horseback:
Before I start this, let me make it clear that my 'beef' is not with FPSOLKOR personally, but with some of his misconceptions about the west in general, and the United States specifically. He still apparently believes a great deal of what he was taught by the old Soviet system. No doubt I have my own misconceptions, but I have no fear of being corrected when I'm wrong.

Glad to hear that, but my beliefs (which still may be wrong, of course) are based on more than just propaganda. Or lets say not only on russian or soviet propaganda. I used to live in Manchester for 2 years, i was in RSA, USA, whole europe, except romania and spain. So i had quite a loooot of time and possibilities to study and find facts. I do not drink from visible source of water...

Hopefully, we can clear up both of our misconceptions with honest debate.

Lets try...


Originally posted by FPSOLKOR:
Really? What would have happened if the Fast Frigate I served on in the late 1970s had taken out the two Bears and the late model Fitter that overflew us on our WESTPAC cruise in 1978/9?
Someone would post a topic like this one nowadays http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif I try to respond with what I know and saw for myself whenever possible. Personal experience has more validity and impact than hearsay.

Ok. But i still think that there would be some chit-chat behind stage, and most likely we would find thinngs about what happened about now.


At no time were we in the USN told that we had the legal right to fire on these provocateurs in international waters. It seems that your commanders wanted to avoid international problems. But speaking from the law point, you had a right to do so Believe me, it wasn't my commanders, it was the civilian leadership-in this case, the demonstrably execrable Jimmy Carter.
And yes, we were in international waters on all three occasions. A ships deck and airspace above it IS the territory of a correrspondent state, even if it is in a foreighn harbour. In port, there was a general recognition of that principle, but in international waters, it's almost impossible to delineate the "Territorial Airspace" (and silly to try) above a moving ship less than 140m long, particularly in an age of air launched standoff weapons. Any aircraft within 100 km is a potential threat.

Hmm. Presence of the foreighn state in such case is also a threat to US that should be eliminated? Actually, there is the law, DURA LEX, SED LEX, and untill its changed, it is this way. When you have a weapon above your deck it is violating the airspace... You CAN shoot down aircraft if it has Vilolated space, or if it used weapon agains @state@ territory. That is, if your ship was fired upon, but weapon never hit it, or passed above or below your ship, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO USE WEAPON. If it did hit, then you can use whatever means necessary to retaliate. Not attack, retaliate. Speaking of warzones: a bit different issue. war zone is defined after conflict is begun, and all other nations are given coordinates to avoid.

To claim the right to fire on these potential threats in peacetime is specious at best; to actually do so is paranoid.

If the West had responded in kind, shooting down rescue aircraft and passenger liners in international air space, as well as violations of our domestic airspace, we'd still be hearing the whining. There were regular flights out of Cuba by Soviet military a/c that 'wandered' over Florida and the Eastern seaboard as well as all kinds of 'navigational errors' by Aeroflot, so it's hardly as though we lacked for opportunities.Same as Western planes, and does date 3 july 1988 rings the bell? Do you know what happened on the next day after Korean war officially ended (speaking of airplanes)? I'd say that both powers were equally moronic. Only russians tend to do something and keep silent later, and west is tending towards doing nothing and building loud-mouth what-if scenarios I'm quite familiar with the VINCINNES incident; as I recall, the Aegis cruiser VINCINNES was in a running shootout with Iranian gunboats at the time that a pair of aircraft approached it, with at least one of them 'squawking' the IFF codes for an Iranian AF F-14 (this I got directly from an Operations Specialist who was in CIC at the time, and it's certainly consistent with my training experiences with the Iranians before the Shah fell).

Some history first. There was no Declared military zone. Flight controls were continuouselly threatened by US that no plane should fly in this zone BELOW 9000m. This was at all times used as a directions. At the same time ship commander was well known at this time to systemically interfere in ground-to-air traffic regulation, what lead to at least 3 occasions when it almost caused mid air collisions. It lead to forbidding communication between aircrews and American taskforce. Ground control ALWAYS sent information to task force abut flights going above TF for oncoming day.

The Captain had literally less than 20 seconds to decide whether to fire on the approaching a/c or risk an air attack (even with just a strafing run with its 20mm cannon, the ship would have taken serious casualties, and the IRIAF was known to have mounted air to surface weapons on their Tomcats).

Ok, now exactly what happened: Flight was going at an alt 9500m and CLIMBING. Captain thought that it was going down. As far as i know ship had a new system of defence installed, which was capable of determining actions of an aircraft. Aegis it was? Can you imagine difference between f14 and airbus at least in size?

He chose to protect his ship, and an off-schedule airliner flying over a combat zone was shot down.

This is US pozition. Further investigation was forbidden by Raegan administration. But ALL other data shows that off-schedule flight was actually late 3 minutes, what is rather normal for civil aviation...

As I recall, there was a huge investigation, the Captain's family was threatened (their family vehicle was fire-bombed here in San Diego with his wife and kids in it -fortunately, they escaped safely), and while he was officially exonerated, that officer was passed over for promotion and retired shortly after.

Glad that they made it (wife and kids)

Were those Warsaw Pact warships in a firefight with Swedish fishing boats when the recon aircraft approached? Were the two civilian Korean Air flights shot down by the Soviets in the 1980s 'threatening' a ship or ground unit already under fire?

Look above for law. They were in territoreal airspace. and for korean airlines in both cases they were off course 200km. If i would make 20km mistake i would get my licence recalled...

I'm not familiar with the 'day after the Korean War', because hostilities there are only suspended, not ended. Again, however, if you refer to an incident immediately after the 'truce' was called, any provocation or suspicious action would have been met quite forcefully, as were suspicious activities by Japanese or German ships & aircraft in the immediate aftermath of WWII.

The incident was when OVER China soviet Il-18 (if i'm not mistaken with plane type, i'll check it later) carrying children and hospital personnel with patients bound for Vladivostok was deliberately shot down by 4 F-86. No survivors. This is not a single case either, you know...

Soviet propagandists were quite noisy and provocative most of the time. They only tended to go silent when their minions went over the line and commited obvious atrocities.


Same as US, no difference...

It was the policy of the western democracies to demonstrate their tolerance and restraint as opposed to the barbaric (the Russian word is 'nekulturnii' isn't it?) Well, we would say that barbaric is the one who shouts from the mountains "Stop, soldiers, we are showing you on cnn, our mujaheddin friends are comind down to cut open your abs...). I was among those down there, and we were NOT soldiers... Accusations in barbaricism is not something to be tolerated by me from people who have no culture of there own

cheers
Same to you What does CNN have to do with it?

They were working among terrorists, and hunting for sensation.

They barely existed at that time, and the mujaheddin weren't watching a satellite feed that wouldn't exist until 1990.

Event took place in 1996, Russian Federation. Can you guess where?

Maybe you should place the blame where it belongs, on the government that invaded an unthreatening Afghanistan, pissed off those tribesmen (and every other Muslim in the world, after the Soviets spent so much effort arming and training them for fighting Israel and the 'crusaders'), and then put you there without a serious thought for your wellbeing or support. I don't recall a lot of tears spilt in the USSR on behalf of the American soldiers and airmen killed in Vietnam.

I'm a muslim as well, but Islam has nothing to do with what they did in Afghanistan or Chechnia. And i could tell you some tales, but it is OT here.

Cold war or not, our systems were at war, and I believe that my side held itself to a higher standard. It certainly held me to one.

Hmm. Not sure who actually won... And what was the prize. I was taught in USSR time, and i'm both expert doc, as well as expert killer (in military meaning of word), and fact that i'm alive proves it. On the other hand those who were taught and trained now are no match for even me now...

THAT's culture.

THAT'S progress. Culture is something different. You know, Darwin was right when he said that we all came out of monkeys, and the first human was a monkey that took a stick in it's hand and made the rest of the herd work. US nowadays is the most human state in this meaning. But it is not a culture state by no means. It has to pass couple of centuries more, befor you will develop culture. Given, that we will not destroy our planet, that is.

On the other hand, to be totally fair, I'm REALLY sorry for a lot of Hollywood, rap and hip-hop...

Well, we can make friends over this bit http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

cheers

horseback[/QUOTE]

waffen-79
05-01-2006, 03:09 PM
Q: do you believe in kill tolls by Germans?
A: difficult to answer. We had an I-2 crash landed 11 times. It fell, German could note it as kill, we restored it the next day, it is flying, we think it is battle damaged. But of course everybody lied. We shot down German pilot who had pilot log with him. There were 7 kills on a day when the entire front was on the ground.

Please disscuss

How much of that claims were propaganda?

FPSOLKOR
05-01-2006, 03:24 PM
Originally posted by waffen-79:
Q: do you believe in kill tolls by Germans?
A: difficult to answer. We had an I-2 crash landed 11 times. It fell, German could note it as kill, we restored it the next day, it is flying, we think it is battle damaged. But of course everybody lied. We shot down German pilot who had pilot log with him. There were 7 kills on a day when the entire front was on the ground.

Please disscuss

How much of that claims were propaganda?
Could you please specify? I'd say everything is propaganda in some sort. But here is a little something - both sides are right!

Xiolablu3
05-01-2006, 03:59 PM
Thanks Ivan.

'Q: which type do you think is most dangerous, Me-109 or FW-190?
A: Messerschmitt was fast and agile. FW-190 was shot on sight, if pilot was not too good. It was too slow and weighted too much. Actually it was heavier than Il-2. I can€t understand how it can be called a €œfighter€€¦ Interceptor of bombers maybe, but fighter€¦ If they jumped us, they had success, but if we saw them first, we were all over them'

It seems FW190 without its speed or height advantage is very vulnerable.

faustnik
05-01-2006, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:


It seems FW190 without its speed or height advantage is very vulnerable.

Reminds me of a certain flight sim.....

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

luftluuver
05-01-2006, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Thanks Ivan.

'Q: which type do you think is most dangerous, Me-109 or FW-190?
A: Messerschmitt was fast and agile. FW-190 was shot on sight, if pilot was not too good. It was too slow and weighted too much. Actually it was heavier than Il-2. I can€t understand how it can be called a €œfighter€€¦ Interceptor of bombers maybe, but fighter€¦ If they jumped us, they had success, but if we saw them first, we were all over them'

It seems FW190 without its speed or height advantage is very vulnerable. Most 190s in the East were of the fighter-bomber variety, with the emphasis on bomber for both the a/c and its pilot. That did not stop some FB pilots from becoming double digit aces.

Airmail109
05-01-2006, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by FPSOLKOR:
Originally posted by horseback:
Before I start this, let me make it clear that my 'beef' is not with FPSOLKOR personally, but with some of his misconceptions about the west in general, and the United States specifically. He still apparently believes a great deal of what he was taught by the old Soviet system. No doubt I have my own misconceptions, but I have no fear of being corrected when I'm wrong.

Glad to hear that, but my beliefs (which still may be wrong, of course) are based on more than just propaganda. Or lets say not only on russian or soviet propaganda. I used to live in Manchester for 2 years, i was in RSA, USA, whole europe, except romania and spain. So i had quite a loooot of time and possibilities to study and find facts. I do not drink from visible source of water...

Hopefully, we can clear up both of our misconceptions with honest debate.

Lets try...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FPSOLKOR:
Really? What would have happened if the Fast Frigate I served on in the late 1970s had taken out the two Bears and the late model Fitter that overflew us on our WESTPAC cruise in 1978/9?
Someone would post a topic like this one nowadays http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif I try to respond with what I know and saw for myself whenever possible. Personal experience has more validity and impact than hearsay.

Ok. But i still think that there would be some chit-chat behind stage, and most likely we would find thinngs about what happened about now.


At no time were we in the USN told that we had the legal right to fire on these provocateurs in international waters. It seems that your commanders wanted to avoid international problems. But speaking from the law point, you had a right to do so Believe me, it wasn't my commanders, it was the civilian leadership-in this case, the demonstrably execrable Jimmy Carter.
And yes, we were in international waters on all three occasions. A ships deck and airspace above it IS the territory of a correrspondent state, even if it is in a foreighn harbour. In port, there was a general recognition of that principle, but in international waters, it's almost impossible to delineate the "Territorial Airspace" (and silly to try) above a moving ship less than 140m long, particularly in an age of air launched standoff weapons. Any aircraft within 100 km is a potential threat.

Hmm. Presence of the foreighn state in such case is also a threat to US that should be eliminated? Actually, there is the law, DURA LEX, SED LEX, and untill its changed, it is this way. When you have a weapon above your deck it is violating the airspace... You CAN shoot down aircraft if it has Vilolated space, or if it used weapon agains @state@ territory. That is, if your ship was fired upon, but weapon never hit it, or passed above or below your ship, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO USE WEAPON. If it did hit, then you can use whatever means necessary to retaliate. Not attack, retaliate. Speaking of warzones: a bit different issue. war zone is defined after conflict is begun, and all other nations are given coordinates to avoid.

To claim the right to fire on these potential threats in peacetime is specious at best; to actually do so is paranoid.

If the West had responded in kind, shooting down rescue aircraft and passenger liners in international air space, as well as violations of our domestic airspace, we'd still be hearing the whining. There were regular flights out of Cuba by Soviet military a/c that 'wandered' over Florida and the Eastern seaboard as well as all kinds of 'navigational errors' by Aeroflot, so it's hardly as though we lacked for opportunities.Same as Western planes, and does date 3 july 1988 rings the bell? Do you know what happened on the next day after Korean war officially ended (speaking of airplanes)? I'd say that both powers were equally moronic. Only russians tend to do something and keep silent later, and west is tending towards doing nothing and building loud-mouth what-if scenarios I'm quite familiar with the VINCINNES incident; as I recall, the Aegis cruiser VINCINNES was in a running shootout with Iranian gunboats at the time that a pair of aircraft approached it, with at least one of them 'squawking' the IFF codes for an Iranian AF F-14 (this I got directly from an Operations Specialist who was in CIC at the time, and it's certainly consistent with my training experiences with the Iranians before the Shah fell).

Some history first. There was no Declared military zone. Flight controls were continuouselly threatened by US that no plane should fly in this zone BELOW 9000m. This was at all times used as a directions. At the same time ship commander was well known at this time to systemically interfere in ground-to-air traffic regulation, what lead to at least 3 occasions when it almost caused mid air collisions. It lead to forbidding communication between aircrews and American taskforce. Ground control ALWAYS sent information to task force abut flights going above TF for oncoming day.

The Captain had literally less than 20 seconds to decide whether to fire on the approaching a/c or risk an air attack (even with just a strafing run with its 20mm cannon, the ship would have taken serious casualties, and the IRIAF was known to have mounted air to surface weapons on their Tomcats).

Ok, now exactly what happened: Flight was going at an alt 9500m and CLIMBING. Captain thought that it was going down. As far as i know ship had a new system of defence installed, which was capable of determining actions of an aircraft. Aegis it was? Can you imagine difference between f14 and airbus at least in size?

He chose to protect his ship, and an off-schedule airliner flying over a combat zone was shot down.

This is US pozition. Further investigation was forbidden by Raegan administration. But ALL other data shows that off-schedule flight was actually late 3 minutes, what is rather normal for civil aviation...

As I recall, there was a huge investigation, the Captain's family was threatened (their family vehicle was fire-bombed here in San Diego with his wife and kids in it -fortunately, they escaped safely), and while he was officially exonerated, that officer was passed over for promotion and retired shortly after.

Glad that they made it (wife and kids)

Were those Warsaw Pact warships in a firefight with Swedish fishing boats when the recon aircraft approached? Were the two civilian Korean Air flights shot down by the Soviets in the 1980s 'threatening' a ship or ground unit already under fire?

Look above for law. They were in territoreal airspace. and for korean airlines in both cases they were off course 200km. If i would make 20km mistake i would get my licence recalled...

I'm not familiar with the 'day after the Korean War', because hostilities there are only suspended, not ended. Again, however, if you refer to an incident immediately after the 'truce' was called, any provocation or suspicious action would have been met quite forcefully, as were suspicious activities by Japanese or German ships & aircraft in the immediate aftermath of WWII.

The incident was when OVER China soviet Il-18 (if i'm not mistaken with plane type, i'll check it later) carrying children and hospital personnel with patients bound for Vladivostok was deliberately shot down by 4 F-86. No survivors. This is not a single case either, you know...

Soviet propagandists were quite noisy and provocative most of the time. They only tended to go silent when their minions went over the line and commited obvious atrocities.


Same as US, no difference...

It was the policy of the western democracies to demonstrate their tolerance and restraint as opposed to the barbaric (the Russian word is 'nekulturnii' isn't it?) Well, we would say that barbaric is the one who shouts from the mountains "Stop, soldiers, we are showing you on cnn, our mujaheddin friends are comind down to cut open your abs...). I was among those down there, and we were NOT soldiers... Accusations in barbaricism is not something to be tolerated by me from people who have no culture of there own

cheers
Same to you What does CNN have to do with it?

They were working among terrorists, and hunting for sensation.

They barely existed at that time, and the mujaheddin weren't watching a satellite feed that wouldn't exist until 1990.

Event took place in 1996, Russian Federation. Can you guess where?

Maybe you should place the blame where it belongs, on the government that invaded an unthreatening Afghanistan, pissed off those tribesmen (and every other Muslim in the world, after the Soviets spent so much effort arming and training them for fighting Israel and the 'crusaders'), and then put you there without a serious thought for your wellbeing or support. I don't recall a lot of tears spilt in the USSR on behalf of the American soldiers and airmen killed in Vietnam.

I'm a muslim as well, but Islam has nothing to do with what they did in Afghanistan or Chechnia. And i could tell you some tales, but it is OT here.

Cold war or not, our systems were at war, and I believe that my side held itself to a higher standard. It certainly held me to one.

Hmm. Not sure who actually won... And what was the prize. I was taught in USSR time, and i'm both expert doc, as well as expert killer (in military meaning of word), and fact that i'm alive proves it. On the other hand those who were taught and trained now are no match for even me now...

THAT's culture.

THAT'S progress. Culture is something different. You know, Darwin was right when he said that we all came out of monkeys, and the first human was a monkey that took a stick in it's hand and made the rest of the herd work. US nowadays is the most human state in this meaning. But it is not a culture state by no means. It has to pass couple of centuries more, befor you will develop culture. Given, that we will not destroy our planet, that is.

On the other hand, to be totally fair, I'm REALLY sorry for a lot of Hollywood, rap and hip-hop...

Well, we can make friends over this bit http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

cheers


S
horseback </div></BLOCKQUOTE>[/QUOTE]

o you guys shot down western planes just before the war ended in the pacific? After wed helped you industrially? Pfft we shouldve declared a ceasefire with Japan and dropped the A-bombs on Moscow....would have saved a lot of hassle

carguy_
05-01-2006, 04:44 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
It seems FW190 without its speed or height advantage is very vulnerable.

Especially if it is a Jabo variant with 4 cannons, added armor plates,external racks and reduced ATA rating http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

ploughman
05-01-2006, 04:52 PM
So the only 190s that count are the ones that aren't a Jabo variant with 4 cannons, added armor plates,external racks and reduced ATA rating?

Yawn.

Xiolablu3
05-01-2006, 04:58 PM
It seems the more cynical among us regards what I said about the FW190 as a put down. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif


All I meant was that compared with the fearsome reports from the Western front, where the FW190 had a speed advantage over most of the fighters it faced. When it was slower than the competition it was far less of a fearsome opponent.

Whether that be in Jabo config or whatever.

carguy_
05-01-2006, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Whether that be in Jabo config or whatever.


That word makes quite a difference though.

horseback
05-01-2006, 05:18 PM
Man, this is getting really unwieldy, so I'm not going to try to requote all of your quotes of my quotes. It just takes up too much time & space.
Ok, now exactly what happened: Flight was going at an alt 9500m and CLIMBING. Captain thought that it was going down. As far as i know ship had a new system of defence installed, which was capable of determining actions of an aircraft. Aegis it was? Can you imagine difference between f14 and airbus at least in size?

He chose to protect his ship, and an off-schedule airliner flying over a combat zone was shot down.

This is US pozition. Further investigation was forbidden by Raegan administration. But ALL other data shows that off-schedule flight was actually late 3 minutes, what is rather normal for civil aviation... This is where the average person's ignorance of radar comes in--the data telling you when a flight is climbing or diving is usually provided by the IFF system, and as a matter of normal practice, it is fast and accurate. HOWEVER, if there is a conflict with the radar's data, or if there are two aircraft in close proximity (and they can be hundreds of meters apart vertically but their 'tracks' are right on top of each other in the radar operators' display), these systems get confused, and it takes time to clear it up. Let me state categorically that the 'radar' display immediately available to the captain of that ship was digitized. He didn't see a raw radar reflection on his screen, but a computer icon, and one that symbolized an Unknown contact. In any case, radar is not like looking at a video picture, and it would not surprise me in the least if an Iranian early-build Tomcat had a bigger radar reflection than an Airbus.

AEGIS systems today have had twenty five years' worth of development and improvement. In 1988, it was a very new system, controlled by physically enormous, slow computers (they had 10Mb hard drives, to give you a clue), and it had not gotten all the bugs out. In any case, if the situation described above took place today, it would still take some operator actions to make the radar picture clear-and that takes time.

Real-life systems aren't anywhere near what you see on movies and TV shows--which is why I offered apologies for their influence. 90% of what they tell you is cr*p, and the rest is made up.

Now, put yourself in that captain's spot; your ship has been under repeated attacks from gunboats, and your weaponry is set up for heavy surface or antiaircraft warfare (5 inch guns and missile launchers. At that time, there was a very limited provision for heavy machine guns or rapid firing cannon to defend against people in fast motor boats mounting light cannon or HMGs). At the same time you're being fired upon by these gunboats, radio traffic and your radar display indicate that these gunboats are calling for air support and are being assured it's on the way.

There's an air track reported approaching from a mixed use (civilian and military) air field, apparently with a military IFF transponder. It will close on you in approximately half a minute, during which the gunboats are still milling around and taking the occasional shot at your ship. Do you have time to consult the schedule the Iranians sent you to see if the incoming track is a scheduled civilian flight, and can you trust a schedule sent by the very people who are shooting at you?

Now, about that statement about the Reagan administration blocking further investigation: when I googled VINCENNES to confirm the date, the second item on the list I got was the Senate hearing, which took place in 1993-during the Clinton administration.

In July 1988, Reagan was in his last six months in office, and the opposition party would have made a great deal of political capital out of any attempt at what we call 'stonewalling' during an election year in which the outgoing president's vice president was the candidate. No investigation was 'blocked'; that's one of those things that our 'free press' gets wrong from time to time.

You say you lived in Manchester, England for a time? It wouldn't surprise me if you got that from The Guardian, a subsidiary of TASS if ever there was one.


The incident was when OVER China soviet Il-18 (if i'm not mistaken with plane type, i'll check it later) carrying children and hospital personnel with patients bound for Vladivostok was deliberately shot down by 4 F-86. No survivors. This is not a single case either, you know... ...and yet this is the first I've heard about it. I have to be very cynical about this claim--it sounds too much like the Japanese claims about the Doolittle raid on Tokyo in 1942, where all they managed to hit was schools, hospitals, and ...a church, in Buddhist/Shintoist Imperial Japan.

I don't know specifically that it happened as you describe, but as the son of a career Air Force senior enlisted man, it sounds very 'off' to me.
Event took place in 1996, Russian Federation. Can you guess where? I'll assume Chechnia, but there has been a hodge-podge of claims and counterclaims about atrocities on both sides of that conflict. It would take more time than I have to dig through that morass with my limited Russian skills and try to determine who has the 'truth' and who has the right to govern there. It appears to be a deeply emotional thing for all involved.

It would be like you trying to understand the current immigration controversy here in the Southwestern United States, if it were to erupt in mass murders by bands of Mexican 'reconquistas' and the US government were to retaliate by bombing say, Tucson, Arizona.

I have no great faith in CNN myself; it has long been a conceit of modern media journalists that only they can be evenhanded or fair about the events they report, but I believe that it is impossible not to have a point of view or personal prejudice color their reporting. It would be more honest in every way to be clear about your own point of view, and let the viewer or reader make the adjustment.

Again, to judge the majority of Americans by what you have seen on TV may not be the wisest course...
THAT'S progress. Culture is something different. You know, Darwin was right when he said that we all came out of monkeys, and the first human was a monkey that took a stick in it's hand and made the rest of the herd work. US nowadays is the most human state in this meaning. But it is not a culture state by no means. It has to pass couple of centuries more, befor you will develop culture. Given, that we will not destroy our planet, that is. What is culture but a world view built on an accumulation of language, history and tradition? We built on the basis of English and western European traditions, but because of the large numbers of immigrants who came here with a limited understanding of English, our basic form of communicating has become very direct. In a frontier with hostile natives shooting at you, communication became more important than diplomacy, and it stayed that way.

From what I read and see, Russian culture has taken big chunks from Europe as well, but it seems as much a 'frontier' culture in some ways as ours.

However, we do have some 'homegrown' culture. If you read Mark Twain (Huckleberry Finn is the best place to start) in the original English, I believe you'll soon have a similar appreciation for him as the one I have for Tolstoy after reading (parts of) War and Peace in the original Russian (translations are generally hideous). There must be something good about our music, because our jazz, rhythm & blues, country & western, rock & roll and (God forgive us) 'disco' music are copied and played all over the world.

I like to think that it's the absence of accordians that makes our music so popular, but that's a purely personal prejudice.

We have what we think are worthwhile ideals, and it looks as though much of the world agrees with us, because our success proves that those ideals work pretty well. Do we pretend that we live up to those ideals all the time? I don't think so. I do think that the fact that you and the rest of the world have been aware that we have faults has kept us fairly honest, and the openness of our society makes it easier to reveal hypocrisy and correct it.

As for your 'monkey with a stick' analogy, I think you miss the reality of our system; the herd can and does vote the stick out of the first monkey's hand when he gets too full of himself, and gives it someone who they think will look after the herd better. We change employers regularly here, as well as political leaders, when we think we have a good reason to.

As a practice, it gives the herd overall better living conditions, and there's no way to prevent one or two monkeys from getting their own sticks and setting up to create their own 'herd' to compete with the original herd's stick holder.

While there are big companies here, most Americans work for small businesses, and the large majority make a better living than their European counterparts. I'm speaking in terms of personal space, goods and services, quality of living-I distrust comparisons of wages, because of tax rates and currency exchange rate discrepencies. I've been to Europe and the Far East several times, and they simply don't have it as good as their average American counterparts do. What other country can identify its 'poor' by their tendency for obesity?

My answer to your 'who won?' question is another question: who was changed by its ending?

cheers

horseback

tigertalon
05-01-2006, 05:53 PM
Here and there still amazes me, how strong american anti-soviet propaganda during cold war must have been, to have such an impact to people even now, 15 years after the end of Soviet Union.

It seems some people are considering every Russian (or ex. Soviet if you want) as a lower form of life that is not capable of basic logic thinking that every kind of ape is. Learning history and using own brain may help...

crazyivan1970
05-01-2006, 05:56 PM
Next time i`ll think twice before posting something with cold war flavor in it. You guys are something else http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

LEXX_Luthor
05-01-2006, 06:03 PM
Cold War recon was a hot shooting war, with high stakes strategery. USA was very agressive in overflying Soviet territory, and for good reason. Almost all that landmass was totally unkown, and General LeMay wanted to know it all, and he did it.

No, its nothing at all for Soviet planes shooting down any aircraft coming even remotely near its airspace even in a Panic, 007 for example, as USA was very agressive even to the extent of sailing balloons across Soviet territory that caused aviation accidents. Anyways, these losses of life (RB-29s, RB-47s, even including 007) are considered a small price to pay by the strategic war planners for the great strategic recon that, among other things, buried the Soviet generated myth of the Bomber Gap and later Missile Gap. The busting of these myths allowed much greater USA confidence in foreign policy.

Some good stuff here...

Long story ~> http://www.rb-29.net/HTML/77ColdWarStory/01.01birthofcw.htm

another, http://www.afa.org/magazine/june2001/0601overfly.asp

Awsum stuff http://www.spyflight.co.uk/main.htm

horseback
05-01-2006, 06:26 PM
Originally posted by Bogun:
To be really fare I have to admit €" Horseback€s appologies for the €œHollywood, rap and hip-hop€ go the long way, but still not enough to cover all the inconsistencies left after reading his post€¦

First €œVINCENNES incident€ €" please read this:
http://ocw.mit.edu/NR/rdonlyres/Aeronautics-and-Astrona...43C7/0/vincennes.pdf (http://ocw.mit.edu/NR/rdonlyres/Aeronautics-and-Astronautics/16-422Spring2004/40763DF2-1797-48D5-9D5C-136DFE8D43C7/0/vincennes.pdf)
and pay special attention to pages 12 and after€¦ It would be nice for you Horseback to call f&$*ups their own name and not try to justify or find excuses what captain of Vincennes has done.

Yes, those were systems at war, even a Cold one but war nevertheless, and American side (with all those presumably regards to adherence to higher values) did not behave any better but to equal to Soviets (who we all know from Hollywood movies had no values at all)€¦

Soviets were paranoid even without US incursion into Soviet mainland but non-ending stream of American recognizance planes over Soviet territory (everyone of which could have been a bomber caring nuclear bomb) really did not do anything to build trust.
Here is a link to an article describing how it looked like from the Russian side:
http://www.airforce.ru/awm/hotsky/hotsky.htm
So please refresh my memory Horseback - How many Russian planes were shot down over American mainland?

So don€t even start about €œside held itself to a higher standard€ €" those words just do not stand even a little scrutiny €" war is the war and to win it both sides did what it took. I think I've already clarified the situation about the VINCINNES' capabilities and limitations in my last post more than the scholarly types at MIT did in your link. It looks to me like a student project, and embarassingly incomplete. The system as it was did not actually have the capabilities that its operators thought it did, and the ship and crew were not ready for prime time-because of its fancy radar, the ship was rushed into a troublespot to 'showcase' its abilities.

As to the Soviet paranoia, it seems to me to be very much a part of Russan culture, and you are playing into the "see what you made me do" game I spoke of earlier.

You've also misunderstood my comments about Soviet incursions over US airspace. It is a fact that Soviet long-range aircraft like the various models of Bear (TU-95 and similar) made many flights originating from Cuba and somehow 'strayed' over Florida and the Eastern US seaboard, and that Aeroflot flights had a tendency to 'miss' their intended destinations in New York and Washington DC and just coincidentally fly over or near military installations. I have clear memories of photos taken by a lady in central Florida from her front yard of a recognizable Bear overhead; I think it was in the late 1970s, and I was annoyed because the caption ID'd the escorting US fighters as F-15s when they were clearly F-14s with their swing wings extended...

My youngest brother, a former crewman on P-3C Orions during the 1980s, has a photograph he took from his crew position of a MiG 31-with the US island of Attu in the background. It is clear from the angle and focus that the aircraft in question was well within US airspace-and from the sh*t eating grins on the pilots' faces, they were quite aware of it.

Apparently, they weren't aware of the two F-15s closing in from behind them. Rumor has it that pilots stationed in Alaska's western bases were taught to say 'Check your six, @sshole' in Russian, and got to use it a lot before the 1990s.

On no occasion, after these violations of our 'sacred airspace', were these intruders shot down or even forced to land. Whenever possible, they were given the benefit of the doubt and 'escorted' out of the area by fighters and a diplomatic protest was filed with the Soviet Embassy and promptly forgotten.

It is my understanding that Norway, Sweden, and the British Isles had similar situations to a greater or lesser degree. Other countries' citizens may add their testimonies if you like...

If we had shot down even a tenth of these flights, the screaming would never have ended, and more than one cemetary would be full of 'People's Heroes'...

Contrast that with intrusions into even the vicinity of Soviet or Warsaw Pact air space. Even once the offender had cleared that airspace, the likelihood was that if the Soviet or Warsaw Pact fighters or SAMs could reach it, it would be shot down, regardless of whether it was civilian or military or if the incursion was intentional or not.

And then the propaganda machine would start up, warning everyone about messing with The People's Sovreignty, and how the victims had it coming. It was sickening, it was crude, it was grossly hypocritical, and to defend it is to perpetuate it and endorse it.

I expect better of you.

horseback

LEXX_Luthor
05-01-2006, 06:46 PM
Indeed, I don't *know* of any Cold War shooting down of Soviet recon aircraft over USA or close to USA. But, the Soviets had infinitely more to lose in the recon game, as the mysterious Soviet interior and potential SAC nucular targets were much less known than in the more open western nations.

With nations less able to intercept Soviet recon aircraft, the Soviets were just as agressive as the USA. This is why the Shah managed to get his hands on F-14 and Phoenix, to (successfully) stop aggressive MiG-25 recon over Iran. Before that, MiG-25s repeatedly overflew Iran, and Iran had no nucular armed Hercules SAM defences.

LEXX_Luthor
05-01-2006, 06:56 PM
crazyivan::
Next time i`ll think twice before posting something with cold war flavor in it. You guys are something else http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


V!
Regards,
http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d178/Lexx_Luthor/6b01b8f6.jpg
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d178/Lexx_Luthor/db278455.jpg

3rd Party aircraft, I made the cirrostratus
Or
how
I
learned to
stop
worrying
about my Online
kill score
and love
teh open sim

~ http://www.thirdwire.com/projects.htm

Leadspitterr_
05-01-2006, 07:06 PM
I have to wait and see if carguy and kurfurst can authenticate this interview before i believe it.

carguy_
05-01-2006, 07:30 PM
Originally posted by Leadspitterr_:
I have to wait and see if carguy and kurfurst can authenticate this interview before i believe it.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif


Sentence:The guy is talking out of his ***.

marc_hawkins
05-01-2006, 08:56 PM
Next time i`ll think twice before posting something with cold war flavor in it. You guys are something else

aww don't ivan, the natives will always find something to argue about in this jungle. Most people come along and read what is posted and go away quietly with some nice info after all.

FPSOLKOR
05-01-2006, 11:24 PM
and west is tending towards doing nothing and building loud-mouth what-if scenarios you guys shot down western planes just before the war ended in the pacific? After wed helped you industrially? Pfft we shouldve declared a ceasefire with Japan and dropped the A-bombs on Moscow....would have saved a lot of hassle[/QUOTE]
Another perfect example.

msalama
05-01-2006, 11:35 PM
You guys are something else http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Hey Ivan, it's just a case of too much testosterone, too little brains. As always around here http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Xiolablu3
05-02-2006, 12:02 AM
I think that Stalin and his government held it against Britain and the US for waiting until after the Soviets had done most of the work before they bothered to land in France/Italy.

Cant remember what year the Sicily invasion was but I think they waited for over a year before they made the torch landings?

I am sure Stalin felt that the Western Allies were going to wait until the Russians and Germans had weakened each other before they made landings.

Plus its pretty true that the Russians had pushed the Germans back all on their own by the time the Western Allies had made their landings. The end of the war was never really in doubt after Stalingrad/Kursk.

Whether the Western Allies are guilty of this, we will never truly know, but safe to say that Churchil hated Stalin, and once Truman came in , he wasnt the skilled diplomat that Roosevelt was. Relations quickly soured after Roosevelts death.

Both sides are guilty of terrible propaganda upon their own people, and of aggressive acts. How this Russian guy can call Gorbachov a 'moron' when he did so much for world relations, I will never know. From a different time I guess. We should sometimes be glad that old people die, there would be a lot of grudges held if they did not.

Jatro13th
05-02-2006, 12:09 AM
Mmmmmmmm, I love the Cold War... Things were so much better than they are now...(this is no irony)

SithSpeeder
05-02-2006, 12:45 AM
GReat find. Thanks Ivan.

* _54th_Speeder *

rnzoli
05-02-2006, 01:20 AM
Originally posted by Blutarski2004:
Important words to remember from the V A Tikhomirov interview: his answer to the last question -


Quote -

Keep peace, in time of war do not hesitate, but be a man, not a beast, when war ends, stop, do not take anger with you, forgive, but forget nothing!

- Unquote

When FPSOLKOR posted his interview for the first time, I also though: if there is just one thing to remember from this interview, THIS is it. The really essencial conclusion.

(PS. Some people still appear to take the anger with them... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif)

rnzoli
05-02-2006, 01:23 AM
Originally posted by Jatro13th:
Mmmmmmmm, I love the Cold War... Things were so much better than they are now...(this is no irony)

Maybe it depends on which side of the iron curtain you lived?

Somehow I don't miss the fear of seeing my children burn to death in a nuclear explosion, just seconds before I burn to death, too.

This is no irony either.

FPSOLKOR
05-02-2006, 01:54 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Thanks Ivan.

'Q: which type do you think is most dangerous, Me-109 or FW-190?
A: Messerschmitt was fast and agile. FW-190 was shot on sight, if pilot was not too good. It was too slow and weighted too much. Actually it was heavier than Il-2. I can€t understand how it can be called a €œfighter€€¦ Interceptor of bombers maybe, but fighter€¦ If they jumped us, they had success, but if we saw them first, we were all over them'

It seems FW190 without its speed or height advantage is very vulnerable.

Compared to better pilot may be. I'd say any fighter is vulnerable without speed...

jermin122
05-02-2006, 02:19 AM
If I16 had flown like that in the game. WWII would have ended before 1940.

CaptainGelo
05-02-2006, 02:21 AM
can we please stop discussing politics, and who did what and who's father is stronger, it have been discussed many times be4, and never ended good http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif



btw, russians could get to spain be4 US could do a thing after WW2, actuly they could owe whole europe, US is way 2 far away to do anything ( no they would use A-bomb, uz russians got it few years later and would use agains US also)

FPSOLKOR
05-02-2006, 02:35 AM
Real-life systems aren't anywhere near what you see on movies and TV shows--which is why I offered apologies for their influence. 90% of what they tell you is cr*p, and the rest is made up.

Now, put yourself in that captain's spot; your ship has been under repeated attacks from gunboats, and your weaponry is set up for heavy surface or antiaircraft warfare (5 inch guns and missile launchers. At that time, there was a very limited provision for heavy machine guns or rapid firing cannon to defend against people in fast motor boats mounting light cannon or HMGs). At the same time you're being fired upon by these gunboats, radio traffic and your radar display indicate that these gunboats are calling for air support and are being assured it's on the way.

There's an air track reported approaching from a mixed use (civilian and military) air field, apparently with a military IFF transponder. It will close on you in approximately half a minute, during which the gunboats are still milling around and taking the occasional shot at your ship. Do you have time to consult the schedule the Iranians sent you to see if the incoming track is a scheduled civilian flight, and can you trust a schedule sent by the very people who are shooting at you?

You know what i can see between the lines? Oh well, **** happens...

In July 1988, Reagan was in his last six months in office, and the opposition party would have made a great deal of political capital out of any attempt at what we call 'stonewalling' during an election year in which the outgoing president's vice president was the candidate. No investigation was 'blocked'; that's one of those things that our 'free press' gets wrong from time to time.

yes, but as usual, some data missing, some reports missing, Iranian representatives forbidden to see the remains and give testimony... Not a fair trial to me. Sorry. And by the way, what thw HELL ship was doing in IRANIAN territoreal waters? May be this caused trigger happiness?

You say you lived in Manchester, England for a time? It wouldn't surprise me if you got that from The Guardian, a subsidiary of TASS if ever there was one.

No, i don't like this newspaper.

...and yet this is the first I've heard about it. I have to be very cynical about this claim--it sounds too much like the Japanese claims about the Doolittle raid on Tokyo in 1942, where all they managed to hit was schools, hospitals, and ...a church, in Buddhist/Shintoist Imperial Japan.

No surprize, as it was forbidden to discuss this incident in the "free press". I know what happened because one of my relatives was serving at the Vladivostok AB at the time, and he was clarifying the passenger list. He also was one of representatives of the Soviet Union at the crash site, and you know what? he almost gone mad when first thing he found was baby's head torn away... As usual, this incident was used for politics, so we are getting to know it NOW, and such attrocities do cause some scepticism.

I don't know specifically that it happened as you describe, but as the son of a career Air Force senior enlisted man, it sounds very 'off' to me.

Do not think so, since quite a lot is not really pleasing to remember, and some things that one do is sometimes a lot more different from what you expect it to be.

I'll assume Chechnia, but there has been a hodge-podge of claims and counterclaims about atrocities on both sides of that conflict. It would take more time than I have to dig through that morass with my limited Russian skills and try to determine who has the 'truth' and who has the right to govern there. It appears to be a deeply emotional thing for all involved.

I'm not speaking of who is right or wrong, since i still do not know my self, i'm speaking of AMERICAN citizens in RUSSIAN federation SUPPORTING antigovernmental actions. And the leader of the government they call friendly. Oh, and our soldiers killed those reporters week later, when they intercepted and destroyed drug and weapons convoy.

US government were to retaliate by bombing say, Tucson, Arizona.

That would not surprize me

It would be more honest in every way to be clear about your own point of view, and let the viewer or reader make the adjustment.

Agreed on that.

Again, to judge the majority of Americans by what you have seen on TV may not be the wisest course...

I've been in US, seen US and i can say following - US citizens in majority are normal people, but government of this country is nowadays is a collection of most corrupt, disrespectful, dishonoured and greedy S.O.B's of the world. Last American president who was worth of mentioning to my taste was JFK. His fate is well known.

What is culture but a world view built on an accumulation of language, history and tradition? We built on the basis of English and western European traditions, but because of the large numbers of immigrants who came here with a limited understanding of English, our basic form of communicating has become very direct.

But communicational approach does not leave you the great opportunity to understand the covered meaning of things. American English is more suited to describe things physically, rather than in emotional way

In a frontier with hostile natives shooting at you, communication became more important than diplomacy, and it stayed that way.

Oh, yes, and who made them hostile? Do not say Europeans, as you are their descendents?

From what I read and see, Russian culture has taken big chunks from Europe as well, but it seems as much a 'frontier' culture in some ways as ours.

Not exactly. We already had a culture of our own, and further addons ajusted some flavour, while US culture at a given time is a complete mess

However, we do have some 'homegrown' culture. If you read Mark Twain (Huckleberry Finn is the best place to start) in the original English, I believe you'll soon have a similar appreciation for him as the one I have for Tolstoy after reading (parts of) War and Peace in the original Russian (translations are generally hideous). There must be something good about our music, because our jazz, rhythm & blues, country & western, rock & roll and (God forgive us) 'disco' music are copied and played all over the world.

I did not say that You are not developing. Normal process is going on... But it will take time.

We have what we think are worthwhile ideals, and it looks as though much of the world agrees with us, because our success proves that those ideals work pretty well.

What we think is the key word.

As for your 'monkey with a stick' analogy, I think you miss the reality of our system; the herd can and does vote the stick out of the first monkey's hand when he gets too full of himself, and gives it someone who they think will look after the herd better. We change employers regularly here, as well as political leaders, when we think we have a good reason to.

What you failed to notice, US is by no means the only state in the world. Trying to export democracy with a stick is the biggest mistake you could do. The point is, if people do not want it, they canobey when you are there, but they will hit you when you turn your back on them 11.9. is a good example of that.

As a practice, it gives the herd overall better living conditions, and there's no way to prevent one or two monkeys from getting their own sticks and setting up to create their own 'herd' to compete with the original herd's stick holder.

Isn't american political system consisting from 2 parties, and weren't there some official communist member party thrown in to jails?

My answer to your 'who won?' question is another question: who was changed by its ending?

You know, BOTH! And by many means US lost as much as Russia... if not more

cheers

FPSOLKOR
05-02-2006, 02:43 AM
Originally posted by oleg86:
can we please stop discussing politics, and who did what and who's father is stronger, it have been discussed many times be4, and never ended good http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif Lets stop stop where we are now. This thread is open for any comments in regard of the interview. Sorry to cause flaming. Oh yes, we have some new photos there.

rnzoli
05-02-2006, 03:21 AM
there's a link error on the page, the correct link to the new photos: http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/pilots/tikhomirov/tikhomirov6.htm
(IMO)

FPSOLKOR
05-02-2006, 03:24 AM
Originally posted by rnzoli:
there's a link error on the page, the correct link to the new photos: http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/pilots/tikhomirov/tikhomirov6.htm
(IMO) More photos to come in a near future (a few days), mostly of pilots. And BTW, there you will be able to see a man who shot catalina down in1952, that caused all the flaming. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

msalama
05-02-2006, 03:24 AM
If I16 had flown like that in the game. WWII would have ended before 1940.

If they had given me a penny every time some blockhead opens his/her stinking mouth and spews out all kinds of unproven touchy-feely bulls**te all over these boards, I would've been a millionaire a looong time ago. 'nuff said 'bout the Zoo...

Oh yeah, catching any?

FPSOLKOR
05-02-2006, 03:37 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by HelSqnProtos:
Quite intersting what he had to say on fw flight profile/gun performance. It confirms what the 'blonde knight' wrote in his book.

QUOTE]Could you remind me, please?

joeap
05-02-2006, 03:48 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I think that Stalin and his government held it against Britain and the US for waiting until after the Soviets had done most of the work before they bothered to land in France/Italy.

Cant remember what year the Sicily invasion was but I think they waited for over a year before they made the torch landings?

I am sure Stalin felt that the Western Allies were going to wait until the Russians and Germans had weakened each other before they made landings.

Plus its pretty true that the Russians had pushed the Germans back all on their own by the time the Western Allies had made their landings. The end of the war was never really in doubt after Stalingrad/Kursk.

Whether the Western Allies are guilty of this, we will never truly know, but safe to say that Churchil hated Stalin, and once Truman came in , he wasnt the skilled diplomat that Roosevelt was. Relations quickly soured after Roosevelts death.

Both sides are guilty of terrible propaganda upon their own people, and of aggressive acts. How this Russian guy can call Gorbachov a 'moron' when he did so much for world relations, I will never know. From a different time I guess. We should sometimes be glad that old people die, there would be a lot of grudges held if they did not.

Well some truth in what you say, but I can't agree 100%. Don't forget in 1942 the US had no real army, still had to stabilise the situation in the Pacific and there was the Battle of the Atlantic to be won. I do think D-day might have been possible in 1943, yet also think without the Western, or more precisely USA, involvment the war would have gone on longer. Final point, the Brits and Commonwealth could say a similar thing ot the Soviets, they waited and even helped Hitler economically between 39-41 with the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. As did some US companies.

Yet don't let any of our Russian friends think I am not aware the Wehrmacht was broken in the East...and they made the biggest sacrifice yet won.


I just wish our Russian and American friends would say "our side sucked because..." a bit more often.

FPSOLKOR
05-02-2006, 04:56 AM
Originally posted by joeap:
Yet don't let any of our Russian friends think I am not aware the Wehrmacht was broken in the East...and they made the biggest sacrifice yet won.

I just wish our Russian and American friends would say "our side sucked because..." a bit more often.

Thank You for your letter, I really appreciated reading the stuff. The MC vets are almost forgotten now. BTW, Omsk is my native city. I'd do my best to keep up, but there are so few left... Although some still wish them to die out.... Take a look in a pacific forum, same thread for more stuff

WOLFMondo
05-02-2006, 05:19 AM
Dunno about you guys but I found the interview about the Russian Naval MBR2 and PBY Catalina aviator more interesting.



Originally posted by Leadspitterr_:
I have to wait and see if carguy and kurfurst can authenticate this interview before i believe it.


Its Leadspitter! How did you get back in? :P

FPSOLKOR
05-02-2006, 05:32 AM
Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Dunno about you guys but I found the interview about the Russian Naval MBR2 and PBY Catalina aviator more interesting.


Well, i was about to write about lack of comments on that one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

luftluuver
05-02-2006, 06:54 AM
Q: You think you would be successful in Korean war?
A: Yes. Unlike Americans we fought for an idea, not for money. We were going to defend weak from strong. But we were loading for shipment when the war ended. I served under the command of Vitaliy Popkov then.

Q: but I heard that kill was rewarded by money?
A: <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Yes</span>.

Never heard of American pilots being rewarded with money for 'kills'. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

jermin122
05-02-2006, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by msalama:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If I16 had flown like that in the game. WWII would have ended before 1940.

If they had given me a penny every time some blockhead opens his/her stinking mouth and spews out all kinds of unproven touchy-feely bulls**te all over these boards, I would've been a millionaire a looong time ago. 'nuff said 'bout the Zoo...

Oh yeah, catching any? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Did I hurt your feeling???

Well, it seems that some one is using foul language here. <span class="ev_code_RED">It is allowed?</span> OK, that was an opinion of my own. Do I have to prove everyhing to you b4 I post here, Mr. msalama? It is easy to understand. You can daydreaming everying you like in this board. No one will disturb you, that is your bisiness. If you want me to proove it, I'd like invite you to join my 1 on 1 test. You fly any German fighters before 1941, I fly I16. But, do you even know that China air force had once applied I16 in wwii?

Finally, it is fun to talk to you.

Jatro13th
05-02-2006, 11:10 AM
Originally posted by rnzoli:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jatro13th:
Mmmmmmmm, I love the Cold War... Things were so much better than they are now...(this is no irony)

Maybe it depends on which side of the iron curtain you lived?

Somehow I don't miss the fear of seeing my children burn to death in a nuclear explosion, just seconds before I burn to death, too.

This is no irony either. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rnzoli, I respect your fear, and I know we all had it, even I, who was only eleven when 'the wind of so called change' blew, but I can still remember it as if it were yesterday.. I remember as a small kid having fears of the two super powers clashing. I remember the sigh of relief from most of the people when things changed in the old Soviet Union, but more than most, I remember the foretelling by my parents when they said that the time has come for the planet to suffer...

There was no chance whatsoever of a nuclear war, none. Many times the systems of both sides had false alarms, and no one dared press the button. A person, no matter how crazy, delusional, or psychopathic he or she may be, will not attempt to destroy society. Maybe change it, through various methods, but never destroy it.

I lived in between the two sides of the curtain. Nowadays, the war tolls have increased with many smaller scale wars. In my country and especially in my neighbouring countries which were affected by the post Cold War wars, cancer rates have risen due to the pollution caused by the use of depleted Uranium 'conventional' weapons in the previous years. It seems that almost every day a new war spawns at some far off country that we cannot even pronounce. It has become a habit to everyone to see wars as something not so alienating... The globe, at this moment is in a state of continuous war, in such a way, that war itself loses its meaning... If war is continuous, then there is no war...

You might find all this not applying to you, since you probably are a rationaly thinking person, as are probably most of the people in this forum... But what happens with the rest of the planet's population, a great majority of which lives under the border of poverty? In what ways do they think? How much effort can they put down to thinking, and how much could they care about the planet's troubles? My worst fear is that people will, in the not too distant future, look upon war as something natural.

But, this will go down to contemporary politics discussion, which as we all know, is forbidden. So, let's end it here.

crazyivan1970
05-02-2006, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by msalama:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If I16 had flown like that in the game. WWII would have ended before 1940.

If they had given me a penny every time some blockhead opens his/her stinking mouth and spews out all kinds of unproven touchy-feely bulls**te all over these boards, I would've been a millionaire a looong time ago. 'nuff said 'bout the Zoo...

Oh yeah, catching any? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

PM me and let me know for how long you would like to be suspended http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Xiolablu3
05-02-2006, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by jermin122:
If you want me to proove it, I'd like invite you to join my 1 on 1 test. You fly any German fighters before 1941, I fly I16. .

I will take you up on that offer and you will not even get near me.

I am sure most experienced pilots here will kick you into next week in a 109E vs I16. I am not even that good, but I know the basics.

Either you must be very new to the sim or not have grasped the basics of air combat yet.

Same alt, same speed start, any pilot worth his salt should slaughter you in a 109E. If the 109 pilot is using real life tactics, the I16 has no chance.

I have seen you posting this kind of rubbish a few times now, are you new to this game?

Monson74
05-02-2006, 12:07 PM
Interesting stuff - especially the part about fighting being extremely exhausting - even just three minutes - food for thought for future sims perhaps?

msalama
05-02-2006, 12:07 PM
Did I hurt your feeling???

Not in the slightest, Mr. Vermin, Sir, rest assured on that. As an adult I'm not really disposed to taking offence over something as childish as PC games, i.e. bunch of kiddies like yourself trying to kill opposing pixel blobs AND then getting their pants in a mess yelling "BIAS!!!" whenever those said opposing pixel blobs shoot them down. I hope this clarifies my POW a bit, Sir http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

But Sir, you haven't answered my question yet: is it a good day for fishing?

msalama
05-02-2006, 12:09 PM
PM me and let me know for how long you would like to be suspended http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

That's a good question Ivan. Dunno - what would you suggest?

PS. I'm leaving for Barcelona tomorrow, will be back next Sunday http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

carguy_
05-02-2006, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Same alt, same speed start, any pilot worth his salt should slaughter you in a 109E. If the 109 pilot is using real life tactics, the I16 has no chance.


Real life tactics usage is irrelevant in this game.

HelSqnProtos
05-02-2006, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by carguy_:

Real life tactics usage is irrelevant in this game.

S~!


This unfortunately is true for both sides.

rnzoli
05-02-2006, 12:53 PM
There was a good reason why I-16 remained in service for so long. Therefore real life tactics was never to meet them on the same altitude and speed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

By the way, I recently had a fight with one, while flying the blue über Bf-109G2. I had to climb before the merge and then patiently B&Z the I-16, until getting a clean shot at the cockpit, and killing the pilot with the first burst. It must have been only the tactics that won, because I am a poor pilot otherwise.

faustnik
05-02-2006, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by HelSqnProtos:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:

Real life tactics usage is irrelevant in this game.

S~!


This unfortunately is true for both sides. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What RL tactic can't you use? Are you saying a Bf109 can't maintain a speed and energy advantage over an I-16?

What exactly are you guys complaining about?

Xiolablu3
05-02-2006, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by carguy_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Same alt, same speed start, any pilot worth his salt should slaughter you in a 109E. If the 109 pilot is using real life tactics, the I16 has no chance.


Real life tactics usage is irrelevant in this game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am unsure what you mean by this , Carguy. I see Aces using real life tactics in this game all the time and being extrememly succesful. What I meant by that is using proper energy tactics, thats all. Maybe I should have explained it better.

Do you not agree that you should be able to slaughter an I16 in a 109E in this game unless you were very very unlcuky and he got a lucky shot in as you zoomed back up?

I am not even a very good pilot, but I feel confident enough that I could kill an I16 90% of the time, if I was patient and used proper tactics. Surely you can totally dictate the fight using your speed and climb rate?

I am unsure if you guys can see this if not reguistered, but a pilot on UKded uses proper Luftwaffe Me109 energy tactics and is incredibly succesful. See his stats.

http://www.il2hq.com/Stats/playerdetails.php?id=288

^In his plane of choice the 109 he regularly get 5 or 6 kills in a sortie. KD of 12:1


Another Ace I have watched (and marvelled at)before is Flying Finn, uses real life tactics, see his KD and Hit Percent. See he doesnt just fly 'uber' fighters either.

http://www.il2hq.com/Stats/playerdetails.php?id=242

^If you can't see this, its a KD of 22:1 and a hit percentage of 22% bullets hit.

I disagree that realife tactics are irrelevant. They work extremely well in this sim, on the proper historical scenario maps, and I am striving to learn more.

carguy_
05-02-2006, 07:06 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I am unsure what you mean by this , Carguy. I see Aces using real life tactics in this game all the time and being extrememly succesful.

In a DF server.Nuff said. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif



What I meant by that is using proper energy tactics, thats all. Maybe I should have explained it better.

Planes like ,I16,Spitfire,FW190,Ta152,Mosquito,P47,P51 prove that energy fighting is modelled incorrectly.
Has been debated many times and agreed upon.


Do you not agree that you should be able to slaughter an I16 in a 109E in this game unless you were very very unlcuky and he got a lucky shot in as you zoomed back up?

In real life positively yes.In the game I16 has an advantage of stealth,absence of pilot fatigue,radio and benefits basicly from all shortcomings of the FM.Both have good chances depending on DF conditions.



I am not even a very good pilot, but I feel confident enough that I could kill an I16 90% of the time, if I was patient and used proper tactics. Surely you can totally dictate the fight using your speed and climb rate?

Again this DF mentality...Sheesh you guys really need to open your eyes.There was rarely anything like 1v1 in real life.Performance is just another factor.In summer maps I16 benefits from flawed pixel rendering and exploits the inability of LW pilot to trace him.



I am unsure if you guys can see this if not reguistered, but a pilot on UKded uses proper Luftwaffe Me109 energy tactics and is incredibly succesful. See his stats.

http://www.il2hq.com/Stats/playerdetails.php?id=288

^In his plane of choice the 109 he regularly get 5 or 6 kills in a sortie. KD of 12:1


A DF sortie,isn`t it? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

He`s little above average.Not impressive though.


Another Ace I have watched (and marvelled at)before is Flying Finn, uses real life tactics, see his KD and Hit Percent. See he doesnt just fly 'uber' fighters either.

http://www.il2hq.com/Stats/playerdetails.php?id=242

^If you can't see this, its a KD of 22:1 and a hit percentage of 22% bullets hit.

Very good K/D ratio and impressive accuracy %.
I`d be very excited if he`d join CAD/EIF or IL2War to show what he`s got.



I disagree that realife tactics are irrelevant. They work extremely well in this sim, on the proper historical scenario maps, and I am striving to learn more.


Hmmmm
proper historical scenario maps = DF server.

I`m trying to make up my mind bout this.Is it funny,pathetic.....sad maybe? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

jermin122
05-02-2006, 10:22 PM
I am sure most experienced pilots here will kick you into next week in a 109E vs I16. I am not even that good, but I know the basics.

GMT 13:00 05/03/06, server and TS address will be PMed to you. Do I have to repeat the rules?


Either you must be very new to the sim or not have grasped the basics of air combat yet.

I didn't say I am a veteran, did I? But in my opinion, a real ace wont hang up one the forum all day long. I have to mind you that never look down upon any enemies before you have fought with him seriously.


Same alt, same speed start, any pilot worth his salt should slaughter you in a 109E. If the 109 pilot is using real life tactics, the I16 has no chance.
How can you imagine I wont use so-called real life tactics in I16? And mind you that I am a luftwaffe pilot. If you let a 109 pilot to fight my I16 in a 109, I have to say that is not even a bit unfair.


I have seen you posting this kind of rubbish a few times now, are you new to this game?

Very very new.

crazyivan1970
05-02-2006, 10:50 PM
Real tactics could be easily applied in this sim...big question is, whether people apply them or not. Sometimes they think they do.... but in reality they jump anything that moves and has foe markings on it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

HelSqnProtos
05-02-2006, 11:28 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HelSqnProtos:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:

Real life tactics usage is irrelevant in this game.

S~!


This unfortunately is true for both sides. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What RL tactic can't you use? Are you saying a Bf109 can't maintain a speed and energy advantage over an I-16?

What exactly are you guys complaining about? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


S~!

I was speaking more generally, than in the specific case of the I16.

However, It is well recognized by the competitive pilots that no one uses historical tactics in the sim for a variety of reasons. Including the fact that it it very difficult to spot planes from high up (lod issues) bfs had strict orders not to dogfight because of energy bleed and superior numbers, yet in the sim its all tnb, small calibre rounds could and did knock the very very vulnerable bf engine out. Yet in game they are useless ect............... ect....... I can go on and on.

WTE_Galway
05-02-2006, 11:35 PM
In the end its all opinion. But the opinion of the people who were really there should count for more.

For example I have a quote somewhere from a LW pilot (one of the aces) from the BoB who had flown a Mk I Spit stating that in his Personal experience the Emil was better in turning and "seemed" faster than the Spit but the Spitfire .303 armament was far more effective against fighters than the Emil's. In particular he claimed it was hard to hit anything with the Emil cannon due to its low ROF. I am sure a lot of people here would rubbish that statement immediately, but for me .. he was there so I give it full credence.

The same book talks extensively about the ITALIAN bombing of London, something we never seem to hear about here.

rnzoli
05-03-2006, 12:30 AM
Originally posted by jermin122:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I am sure most experienced pilots here will kick you into next week in a 109E vs I16. I am not even that good, but I know the basics.
GMT 13:00 05/03/06, server and TS address will be PMed to you. Do I have to repeat the rules?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Record the tracks, both of you. Would be interesting to see the outcome, whatever that'll be.

jermin122
05-03-2006, 02:41 AM
It seems that Xiolablu is on the board but reluctant to reply in this thread. Scared? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

rnzoli
05-03-2006, 03:03 AM
Hey jermin, you certainly posess one of the skills of good fighter pilots, namely agressiveness, so you actually scare me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I would rather prefer this issue handled in a gentleman's way, dueling it out, maybe not just once, but let's say 3 times in a row, then share the tracks (I volunteer posting them)

Then we can discuss together what factors won/lost the fights, and whether it was a problem with the plane (sim), or the pilot, or a mixture of both.

WOLFMondo
05-03-2006, 03:19 AM
Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Real tactics could be easily applied in this sim...big question is, whether people apply them or not. Sometimes they think they do.... but in reality they jump anything that moves and has foe markings on it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

This is the good and bad thing about a DF server or co-op. The players can choose to use tactics or not. I don't know why Carguy makes a mockery of DF servers because its really down to the players themselves what they want to do. If everyone flew on DF servers with squad mates with iron military discipline DF servers would be just like real life.

jermin122
05-03-2006, 03:21 AM
np.

I've said that I'm very very new to this sim. So I wont feel humiliating if I was defeated by him. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

DoubleTap2005A
05-03-2006, 06:44 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I think that Stalin and his government held it against Britain and the US for waiting until after the Soviets had done most of the work before they bothered to land in France/Italy..

I feel the need to point out that it was the British and French, and then just the Brits, who were fighting the Germans alone before the Russians even got into it. The Russians only got into it because their pact with the Devil expired and were attacked.

Had the Brits not kept up the fight against the Germans, everything the Germans used, and lost, while fighting the Brits would have been turned on Russia. Had that happened, the Russians would have most likely lost the war.

Also, Britain and the USwaited to land in Italy and France because 1) They were busy fighting elsewhere, 2) moving entire mechanized divisions via ship is not actually like going to the beach, 3) alot of equipment and resources they might have used were being shipped to Russia to aid their war effort.

I've said it before, and I will say it again; WWII was an ALLIED effort. No one country WON THE WAR, and sorry to say, that includes the Soviet Union. In a straight match-up, Germany and Russia, Russia loses. Sorry. This has nothing to do with the bravery or quality of Russian soldiers, or the Russian people, but all to do how Bolshevism and Stalinism left the country badly weakened and ill-matched for the German onslaught. In fact, Stalin was forced to rely on the courage and deaths of millions of average Russian soldiers to keep his stinking neck out of a noose.

In any event, it was a great interview, and certainly illuminating. Thanks for going to the trouble wish your friend well for me.

jermin122
05-03-2006, 07:01 AM
Xiolablu3, don't let us wait too long!

joeap
05-03-2006, 07:27 AM
Originally posted by Jatro13th:
Mmmmmmmm, I love the Cold War... Things were so much better than they are now...(this is no irony)

Dude read your answer, but....we would not have this game now would we? We wopuld not talk with guys lik FPSOLKOR, Crazy Ivan (who lives in the US now) etc. It was not all good.

joeap
05-03-2006, 07:32 AM
Originally posted by luftluuver:
Q: You think you would be successful in Korean war?
A: Yes. Unlike Americans we fought for an idea, not for money. We were going to defend weak from strong. But we were loading for shipment when the war ended. I served under the command of Vitaliy Popkov then.

Q: but I heard that kill was rewarded by money?
A: <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Yes</span>.

Never heard of American pilots being rewarded with money for 'kills'. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

AVG in China yes, but not Korea AFAIK. However this chap is talking about Soviet pilots who also got bounties for kills but I read about this practice in WWII to try to encourage pilots aggressivity. Never heard of this practice in Korea ...

joeap
05-03-2006, 07:37 AM
Originally posted by FPSOLKOR:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> and west is tending towards doing nothing and building loud-mouth what-if scenarios you guys shot down western planes just before the war ended in the pacific? After wed helped you industrially? Pfft we shouldve declared a ceasefire with Japan and dropped the A-bombs on Moscow....would have saved a lot of hassle </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Another perfect example.[/QUOTE]

Dudes...it was a stupid remark from Aimail101, but FPSOLKOR ...much as I like Russian history, culture and people from my point of view, it seems Russians can't admit mistakes easily. Gotta understand if having d-day come 2 years after Barbarossa is a sore point for you...well stuff like this as well as the Pact don't sit well with many westerners. That is the preception...as always subjective.

jermin122
05-03-2006, 07:38 AM
30 mins have passed. The test is canceled due to Xiolablu3's absence.

Some advices to You: Please do NOT act as a jack of all trade while is actually a turtle retracting its head into its shell.

jermin122
05-03-2006, 10:22 AM
OK, after that my squad mates and I have test the performance of the I16. Here's the track:

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">I16vsBf109</span> (ftp://up:dofuper@sky.dof.cn:8021/record/I16vs109E_F_G.rar)

Our test rusult is that I16 is a very good turner, but there is sth wrong with I16's FM--it hardly loses energy when turning, even in High G. You can refer to the track, note that During the time I pulled the stick fiercely out of a dive, The speed remained 410km/h. Another serious problem of I16 is its climb rate --It can catch up with up to 109F series in a zoom climb. It is known that Bf is a E-fighter, sometime it can be a turner, sometimes it can be and BnZ fighter. I16 can already outturn any 109, then it can outclimb up to F serious. what do you think we should use to defeat that monster? Same problems exist on I153.

I am a Chinese, most of my mates and I (and I guess most of Chinese) is friendly to Russia. A lot of Russion stuffs are attractive to us. We love the 60th anniversary of the victory in the Great Patriotic War very much and have been seeing it again and again. Everytime we are agitated to tears. We have been flying Russion modern fighter like Su 27, Mig 29 since Flanker. We have been collecting Russian musics during the wartime which are very encouraging. In my eyes, Putin is a attrative leader. <span class="ev_code_RED">I have to tell you, Mr.Oleg, that Russion planes' bad performance won't keep USSR (Russia) from being a great country.</span> I sincerely hope you understand us and abandon any bias in the sim-making, try your best to show us the very history of World War II.

crazyivan1970
05-03-2006, 10:53 AM
Sorry mate, Track proves nothing to me, i`ll take on I-16 in any 109, any day. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

BTW, one of the pilots of Baltic Fleet, who flew I-16 all the way till early 1944...shot down 24 planes in that thing. Including 12 BF109s. So, even clearly superior plane can lose its battles

Jatro13th
05-03-2006, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by joeap:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jatro13th:
Mmmmmmmm, I love the Cold War... Things were so much better than they are now...(this is no irony)

Dude read your answer, but....we would not have this game now would we? We wopuld not talk with guys lik FPSOLKOR, Crazy Ivan (who lives in the US now) etc. It was not all good. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Gotta give you this one mate!!

luftluuver
05-03-2006, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by joeap:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by luftluuver:
Q: You think you would be successful in Korean war?
A: Yes. Unlike Americans we fought for an idea, not for money. We were going to defend weak from strong. But we were loading for shipment when the war ended. I served under the command of Vitaliy Popkov then.

Q: but I heard that kill was rewarded by money?
A: <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Yes</span>.

Never heard of American pilots being rewarded with money for 'kills'. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

AVG in China yes, but not Korea AFAIK. However this chap is talking about Soviet pilots who also got bounties for kills but I read about this practice in WWII to try to encourage pilots aggressivity. Never heard of this practice in Korea ... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>The AVG were employed by the Chinese. They were not 'employed' by the American government.

Western aviators did not need monitary incentives to be agressive.

Rammjaeger
05-03-2006, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Anyways, these losses of life (RB-29s, RB-47s, even including 007) are considered a small price to pay by the strategic war planners for the great strategic recon that, among other things, buried the Soviet generated myth of the Bomber Gap and later Missile Gap. The busting of these myths allowed much greater USA confidence in foreign policy.


AFAIK the "Bomber Gap" and "Missile Gap" were not myths propagated by the Kremlin but fixations of the Pentagon. In short, these weren't cases of Soviet disinformation but another examples of the Pentagon's tendency to grossly overestimate Soviet military and economic potential (not to mention that a larger defense budget can be justified by exaggerating foreign military threats - the Pentagon has been doing that for decades AFAIK).

faustnik
05-03-2006, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Sorry mate, Track proves nothing to me, i`ll take on I-16 in any 109, any day. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Maybe Jermin122 can get together a small group to fly 4 x I-16s against 4 x Bf109s? I'd be happy to fly the Bf109 side with you Ivan. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

joeap
05-03-2006, 02:38 PM
Originally posted by jermin122:
OK, after that my squad mates and I have test the performance of the I16. Here's the track:

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">I16vsBf109</span> (ftp://up:dofuper@sky.dof.cn:8021/record/I16vs109E_F_G.rar)

Our test rusult is that I16 is a very good turner, but there is sth wrong with I16's FM--it hardly loses energy when turning, even in High G. You can refer to the track, note that During the time I pulled the stick fiercely out of a dive, The speed remained 410km/h. Another serious problem of I16 is its climb rate --It can catch up with up to 109F series in a zoom climb. It is known that Bf is a E-fighter, sometime it can be a turner, sometimes it can be and BnZ fighter. I16 can already outturn any 109, then it can outclimb up to F serious. what do you think we should use to defeat that monster? Same problems exist on I153.

I am a Chinese, most of my mates and I (and I guess most of Chinese) is friendly to Russia. A lot of Russion stuffs are attractive to us. We love the 60th anniversary of the victory in the Great Patriotic War very much and have been seeing it again and again. Everytime we are agitated to tears. We have been flying Russion modern fighter like Su 27, Mig 29 since Flanker. We have been collecting Russian musics during the wartime which are very encouraging. In my eyes, Putin is a attrative leader. <span class="ev_code_RED">I have to tell you, Mr.Oleg, that Russion planes' bad performance won't keep USSR (Russia) from being a great country.</span> I sincerely hope you understand us and abandon any bias in the sim-making, try your best to show us the very history of World War II.

Why do you think Russian plane's were "bad"? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

joeap
05-03-2006, 02:40 PM
Originally posted by Jatro13th:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeap:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jatro13th:
Mmmmmmmm, I love the Cold War... Things were so much better than they are now...(this is no irony)

Dude read your answer, but....we would not have this game now would we? We wopuld not talk with guys lik FPSOLKOR, Crazy Ivan (who lives in the US now) etc. It was not all good. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Gotta give you this one mate!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed, (sorry for the typos). http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif Anyway , I understood what you meant...and agree with the points you brought up. I wish we could have kept a balance in the world with free exchange..heck like China and the West. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

georgeo76
05-03-2006, 03:10 PM
+1



Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Sorry mate, Track proves nothing to me, i`ll take on I-16 in any 109, any day. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Maybe Jermin122 can get together a small group to fly 4 x I-16s against 4 x Bf109s? I'd be happy to fly the Bf109 side with you Ivan. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

crazyivan1970
05-03-2006, 03:27 PM
I`m in http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

zugfuhrer
05-03-2006, 03:39 PM
This is a long thread, maybe this is questioned before, and answered.

FPSOLOKOR can you please give us the source of information about what swede and when they confirmed that the DC-3 was in Soviet airspace during this day.

Dont you mix up that they admitted that they where equipped with American radar?

There is an examination done about the kill of the Swedish DC-3, and the Soviet pilot admit that he attacked over international water, and the DC-3 was never in Soviet airspace. There is an swedish reporter asking him about all this.

I can give you this info if you want.

Here are some links

http://www.iol.co.za/?click_id=29&art_id=qw1086684301938S356&set_id=1
and

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/932267/posts

According to a main swedish newspaper Daily news of 18:th of june 2003 "in 1991 the Soviet Union admitted that they had shoot down the DC-3 over international airspace "

It would as mentioned before, very interesting to get the source, from where you got the information from.

WWMaxGunz
05-03-2006, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by Rammjaeger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Anyways, these losses of life (RB-29s, RB-47s, even including 007) are considered a small price to pay by the strategic war planners for the great strategic recon that, among other things, buried the Soviet generated myth of the Bomber Gap and later Missile Gap. The busting of these myths allowed much greater USA confidence in foreign policy.


AFAIK the "Bomber Gap" and "Missile Gap" were not myths propagated by the Kremlin but fixations of the Pentagon. In short, these weren't cases of Soviet disinformation but another examples of the Pentagon's tendency to grossly overestimate Soviet military and economic potential (not to mention that a larger defense budget can be justified by exaggerating foreign military threats - the Pentagon has been doing that for decades AFAIK). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exaggerating? Not really except when they tried to say US was even or ahead. Sorry,
no. Russians were first in space and in missiles from the start. They cancelled their
manned moon shot in late 1968 over tech concerns and then the US ran Apollo 8 at risk
to be first to the moon but not to land. It was a huge gamble NASA took, something not
widely known here.

I grew up all through those years, even heard the sneers about Russian jets being 10 to
20 years behind and they were certainly not. When the MiG 29's were at the Brit airshow
it was a huge shock for most western 'experts' just how advanced they were, and those
MiG's were not brand new then.

The best we had may have had an edge in MIRV and targetting and may not but when Russia
had over 10:1 in numbers it was moot. Star Wars was supposed to stop them? Scientific
American had an article where the math was laid out; over 10,000 satellites to cover the
sky minimally with each taking certain time and for some ammo per missile, one satellite
could get maybe 10 missiles and the missiles would be fired in waves of 1000-2000. It
was money down the drain unless the drain led to your pocket. Same goes for the current
'missile shield', it won't stop a moderate wave of missiles and worse won't stop a boat
or plane with say a dirty bomb. Yeah, we're SO advanced........

Worst part is that many people here think that Star Wars and the cold war bankrupted
Russia and caused the revolution. Funny but I saw Russian people revolt when it was
revealed how Party members were living high while the rest lived hard. Russians have
for very, very long been able to live hard and pull for common goals past what makes
riots here. Far past. Read on the Siege of Leningrad to see an example of the true
heart of Russia, the land and the winters have forged a very hard people who do go
through hardships, but not for the New Royalty that the Party had become. NOT the USA
but the Russian People made the revolution. Hope they get to keep something for it.

faustnik
05-03-2006, 08:42 PM
Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
I`m in http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

It's pretty easy to get a simple COOP together. I'll make a couple.

crazyivan1970
05-03-2006, 09:12 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
I`m in http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

It's pretty easy to get a simple COOP together. I'll make a couple. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sounds good http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

FPSOLKOR
05-03-2006, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by Kuna_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Next time i`ll think twice before posting something with cold war flavor in it. You guys are something else http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif They are something else in many ways http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

But... this thread rox. I don't remember seeing so much fiction, fantasy wannabees etc. from the times when I've read Flash Gordon comics. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hey, Kuna! Havent seen You in a while.. What is Your oppinion on the topic? Oh, Please, do not bother reading the rest, i think Ivan should close the thread, as it has gone way too far from the origin.

AKA_TAGERT
05-03-2006, 11:21 PM
Q: do you believe in kill tolls by Germans?
A: difficult to answer. We had an I-2 crash landed 11 times. It fell, German could note it as kill, we restored it the next day, it is flying, we think it is battle damaged. But of course everybody lied. We shot down German pilot who had pilot log with him. There were 7 kills on a day when the entire front was on the ground. Who Knew!

WWMaxGunz
05-04-2006, 12:25 AM
Good Q Tagert, when we've both seen it posted that the LW had airtight claims rules.
Right? From our good friends with more books than anyone. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

luftluuver
05-04-2006, 12:57 AM
Isn't there a difference between the calendar the Russians used (Julian) and the calendar the Germans (Gregorian) used?

rnzoli
05-04-2006, 01:09 AM
there was, but before the Soviets took power.
the calendars were the same during World War II

rnzoli
05-04-2006, 01:10 AM
Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
I`m in http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

It's pretty easy to get a simple COOP together. I'll make a couple. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
the trouble is that they are located in China, so expect moderate->terrible lag/ping problems

i haven't been able to download the track due to very slow 1KB/s DL speed

carguy_
05-04-2006, 04:15 AM
Originally posted by faustnik:
It's pretty easy to get a simple COOP together. I'll make a couple.

Lemme think bout it.A I16vs109 coop made by someone flying a Bf109.Does that ring a bell?

My suggestions:It should be LW trasport Ju52 escorting mission.
4xJu52 cruise 50km route to an airfield about 30km behind blue frontline at altitude of about 2500m.
LW equipped with4xF2,VVS equipped with 4xI16type24.
I16 intercept,takeoff from airfield 20km behind red frontline.

Summer map,clouds @ 750m,hours 11-16.

Both teams should have good pilots.


Good luck and please send me the track.

Xiolablu3
05-04-2006, 05:05 AM
Originally posted by carguy_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I am unsure what you mean by this , Carguy. I see Aces using real life tactics in this game all the time and being extrememly succesful.

In a DF server.Nuff said. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif



What I meant by that is using proper energy tactics, thats all. Maybe I should have explained it better.

Planes like ,I16,Spitfire,FW190,Ta152,Mosquito,P47,P51 prove that energy fighting is modelled incorrectly.
Has been debated many times and agreed upon.


Do you not agree that you should be able to slaughter an I16 in a 109E in this game unless you were very very unlcuky and he got a lucky shot in as you zoomed back up?

In real life positively yes.In the game I16 has an advantage of stealth,absence of pilot fatigue,radio and benefits basicly from all shortcomings of the FM.Both have good chances depending on DF conditions.



I am not even a very good pilot, but I feel confident enough that I could kill an I16 90% of the time, if I was patient and used proper tactics. Surely you can totally dictate the fight using your speed and climb rate?

Again this DF mentality...Sheesh you guys really need to open your eyes.There was rarely anything like 1v1 in real life.Performance is just another factor.In summer maps I16 benefits from flawed pixel rendering and exploits the inability of LW pilot to trace him.



I am unsure if you guys can see this if not reguistered, but a pilot on UKded uses proper Luftwaffe Me109 energy tactics and is incredibly succesful. See his stats.

http://www.il2hq.com/Stats/playerdetails.php?id=288

^In his plane of choice the 109 he regularly get 5 or 6 kills in a sortie. KD of 12:1


A DF sortie,isn`t it? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

He`s little above average.Not impressive though.


Another Ace I have watched (and marvelled at)before is Flying Finn, uses real life tactics, see his KD and Hit Percent. See he doesnt just fly 'uber' fighters either.

http://www.il2hq.com/Stats/playerdetails.php?id=242

^If you can't see this, its a KD of 22:1 and a hit percentage of 22% bullets hit.

Very good K/D ratio and impressive accuracy %.
I`d be very excited if he`d join CAD/EIF or IL2War to show what he`s got.



I disagree that realife tactics are irrelevant. They work extremely well in this sim, on the proper historical scenario maps, and I am striving to learn more.


Hmmmm
proper historical scenario maps = DF server.

I`m trying to make up my mind bout this.Is it funny,pathetic.....sad maybe? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



I have no idea what you are talking about.

Your excuses about the i16 sound just like excuses for being shot down to me. I can see an I16 as easily as I can see a 109E.

Proper = Something like Kursk/BOB/Italy , ie it actually happened
Historical = Historical planesets
maps = a map maybe?

See where I get proper historical map from now? As opposed to AFJ or 334th servers where each side has the same planeset. This is what I see as a DOGFIGHT server.

Servers with historical planesets/bombers with ground targets, dont equal a dogfight server to me. How are you supposed to 'dogfight' in a B25?

WHat are these 'other' servers you are talking about? What is so different?

The more I see you post, the more I think you are just a **** who is very far up his own ***. Arent the veterans supposed to help out the newbies, not take the p*ss?

Xiolablu3
05-04-2006, 05:15 AM
Originally posted by jermin122:
It seems that Xiolablu is on the board but reluctant to reply in this thread. Scared? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I havent been on the forums for 2 days mate, since I posted my last post, if I had seen Carguys 'post' I would not have kept quiet, trust me!

I didnt mean to insult you, but I have seen you post about slower planes like the SPitfire V or I16 running rings around 109F4 or 109E4 which I disagree with massively.

I thought oyu might be new to the sim, since I used to do better in more manouvrable planes when I first started flying.

I think we should all listen to 'know it all' Carguy tho, he obviously knows everything about this game.

Xiolablu3
05-04-2006, 05:20 AM
Sorry to make 3 different posts, but I am replying to 3 different things.

How can a Coop with AI pilots be anything like a human flying?

Does both sides have human pilots? If they dont then I dont see the point.

On the servers I fly on fighters escort bombers to the targets and the aim of the map is to destroy the other teams ground targets or planes, so whats the difference?

Xiolablu3
05-04-2006, 05:27 AM
Maybe I should read the whole threaed before replying next time http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Jermin, I will fly against you in a 109E, but since you are new to the sim, I think that explains everything to me.

I think you will learn that the faster plane can usually counter the more manouvrable plane in time. (as you get more experienced)

I will however fly against you if you still want. Although I think it should be the best of 5 or something to stop any 'freak' result happening.

I would more like to fly against Carguy in a 109E and him in an I16 so that he can prove what he was saying to me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

mynameisroland
05-04-2006, 06:02 AM
Originally posted by jermin122:
OK, after that my squad mates and I have test the performance of the I16. Here's the track:

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">I16vsBf109</span> (ftp://up:dofuper@sky.dof.cn:8021/record/I16vs109E_F_G.rar)

Our test rusult is that I16 is a very good turner, but there is sth wrong with I16's FM--it hardly loses energy when turning, even in High G. You can refer to the track, note that During the time I pulled the stick fiercely out of a dive, The speed remained 410km/h. Another serious problem of I16 is its climb rate --It can catch up with up to 109F series in a zoom climb. It is known that Bf is a E-fighter, sometime it can be a turner, sometimes it can be and BnZ fighter. I16 can already outturn any 109, then it can outclimb up to F serious. what do you think we should use to defeat that monster? Same problems exist on I153.

I am a Chinese, most of my mates and I (and I guess most of Chinese) is friendly to Russia. A lot of Russion stuffs are attractive to us. We love the 60th anniversary of the victory in the Great Patriotic War very much and have been seeing it again and again. Everytime we are agitated to tears. We have been flying Russion modern fighter like Su 27, Mig 29 since Flanker. We have been collecting Russian musics during the wartime which are very encouraging. In my eyes, Putin is a attrative leader. <span class="ev_code_RED">I have to tell you, Mr.Oleg, that Russion planes' bad performance won't keep USSR (Russia) from being a great country.</span> I sincerely hope you understand us and abandon any bias in the sim-making, try your best to show us the very history of World War II.

Glad that such a Russia/China patriot sees fit to have a British icon in his sig http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

mynameisroland
05-04-2006, 06:08 AM
Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Sorry mate, Track proves nothing to me, i`ll take on I-16 in any 109, any day. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

BTW, one of the pilots of Baltic Fleet, who flew I-16 all the way till early 1944...shot down 24 planes in that thing. Including 12 BF109s. So, even clearly superior plane can lose its battles


Id be happy to take part in a Bf 109 E4 vs I-16 dogfight. Full real or whatever, in an escort scenario at 2500~3000m the E4 can and will own the I-16. The Rata certainly used to be uber but now it is not the force it once was.

FPSOLKOR
05-04-2006, 06:13 AM
Originally posted by zugfuhrer:
FPSOLOKOR can you please give us the source of information about what swede and when they confirmed that the DC-3 was in Soviet airspace during this day.

Dont you mix up that they admitted that they where equipped with American radar?
One of the sources: Stefan Lindgren, Folket and build magazine, Nov.1994. Not sure if i got the spelling right though

faustnik
05-04-2006, 09:33 AM
Originally posted by carguy_:


Lemme think bout it.A I16vs109 coop made by someone flying a Bf109.Does that ring a bell?

Is it your practice to intentionally pork missions for one side? What a cheap tactic. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Missions are very simple with both sides taking off, no objective other than dogfight, empty winter map.

2 missions:

4xBf109E4 vs. 4xI-16 Type18

4xBf109F4 vs. 4xI-16 Type24

Sounds like we have plenty to fly the Bf109s, where are the volunteers to fly the "uber" I-16s??????

Carguy,

Can I put you on the list to tear us up in your Soviet uberplane?

rnzoli
05-04-2006, 10:22 AM
empty winter map
Uhhmm... that may alone explain why there are fewer takers for the I-16 seats http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Make it a summer map and I'll hop into an I-16, with which I can hide among the leaves on the trees, if needed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

crazyivan1970
05-04-2006, 10:34 AM
carguy, what does it have to do with escorts? Plain and simple... you take off, you fight, you land. I am confused lol.
So who`s ringing the bell here http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

carguy_
05-04-2006, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
....


I apologise for not replying.The post program just ate my whole reply.20 minutes of writing all gone!
I don`t see myself repeating the whole thing one more time!



Originally posted by Faustnik:
Is it your practice to intentionally pork missions for one side? What a cheap tactic. Blink

FYI this is a typical Online War mission in either year.Be it CAD,VOW,VEF,IL2War or EIF.



Missions are very simple with both sides taking off, no objective other than dogfight, empty winter map.

Sorry,I get the feeling that you`re trying to piss me off with meaningless talking.
If you hawkeyes see everything the map will be summer with green ground.Prove it.Anyone can fly in winter.

And the clouds.YES!The clouds.They existed in real world fight.Why not?

No objective?
Aside from pure air superiority missions which were rather rare,taking no goal into mission gives absolutely no meaning for the fight.For the past 2 years minimum I have been explaining that in eastern front missions,the game promotes VVS planes as they benefit from game`s flaws and are much easier to adapt to missions,meaning they do whole lot better at achieving their goal.
I do not understand the mentality of comparing plane performances on paper.The plane is as good as good it is completing the mission and taking you home alive.Aside from you,I don`t give a **** on the performance because it is just a part of planes abilities/features.If the plane is good at fulfilling its task and adapts easily to changing situation it`s the most valuable to me.So performance-wise the 109 beats I16 overall.This means hardly all for a mission that involves a goal rather then meaningless dogfighting.The mission goal determines how much the plane is worth.



2 missions:

4xBf109E4 vs. 4xI-16 Type18

4xBf109F4 vs. 4xI-16 Type24

As I see both 109 have 20mm cannons.You seem to ignore the F2.Why?Having trouble with downing anything?I imagine how`d you do in a E3 then.
And I NEVER said that F4 vs I16 is hard.It`s a walk through the park to be true.Too easy.
Therefore as a proof of your abilities I eagerly await for you to succesfuly fly in a plane equipped with a 15mm cannon.What?It`s the plane`s performance ou care about,right?

Emil E4?It`s good vs the I16type18 DF wise.Add a goal to the mission and I16 takes all.


Oh yes.Maybe someone will make a mission
4xF2(E4) to cover ground attack of their tanks
4xIL2 early series to destroy German tanks attacking red camp in sector
4xI16type24(type18) covering IL2 ground attack

Let`s see how well you do.
You said nothing I don`t have good arguments for.
If you want to do a pure dogfight,I don`t care.Generic,unhistorical scenarios don`t interest me and what`s more,don`t give a picture how good is the pilot taking part in such a mission.

I had no idea you and Ivan were such n00bs.Really!
An average Joe pilot flying in CAD is better than you.


I apologise to Xiolablu,again.

faustnik
05-04-2006, 01:38 PM
You are obviously an evasion veteran.

crazyivan1970
05-04-2006, 02:13 PM
Carguy, you are lost lol. Gentleman made a statement that I-16 is a super-plane. I am willing to prove him wrong. Why are you swinging into COOP style? When call was made for DF mission, using COOP engine. Also, there is absolutely no reason to get personal with me either. If you think that we are bunch of noobs, please by all means, show us how it`s done. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Or you dont have what it takes, eh?

carguy_
05-04-2006, 02:38 PM
Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Carguy, you are lost lol. Gentleman made a statement that I-16 is a super-plane. I am willing to prove him wrong. Why are you swinging into COOP style? When call was made for DF mission, using COOP engine.

Rgr that,you`re right,I guess.I was trying to get a different point across then jermin and thought you were negating that.Still you will never show how good is a plane overall by organising a DF.
I guess the only thing you gentlemen are trying to prove is performance.



Also, there is absolutely no reason to get personal with me either. If you think that we are bunch of noobs, please by all means, show us how it`s done. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Or you dont have what it takes, eh?

I understand you took it as a personal insult then.Or maybe you see me chestbeating,right?Why?Cuz I`m saying none of you could do great in a realistic scenario?
Dunno bout you but I have a distance to things like being either good or bad in a game.You guys obviously get hurt when someone calls you n00bs,lol.

Well if I really was to doing chestbeating here then I was nothing but a hypocrite.There are many virtual pilots I look up to flying-wise.Should I crawl at their feet cuz I get half the kills/points they do?Heheheh.FYI my most respect I have for IL2/Ju87/He111 drivers.They get owned most of the time cuz they`re the wroking horses of online wars.Fighter boys play just a background role.You better face it if you really let it get all to your heart.

Yes,you bet I don`t have what it takes to beat you noobs flyin F4 or Emil with such planes in a pure DF.I`d be owned in no time.I don`t care though,cuz in real life there was nothing like that.

faustnik
05-04-2006, 02:41 PM
You are graduating to evasion ace! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

georgeo76
05-04-2006, 04:16 PM
I'll make a coop.

4XI16s 4X109e 4XIL2. AI IL2s have a mission to bomb group of soft targets w/o any AAA cover. I16s escort IL2s on the deck, while 109s dive from 3k to attack sturmos. winner decided by how much damage the IL2s are allowed to do.

luftluuver
05-04-2006, 05:39 PM
So there was never any fighter sweeps looking for enemy a/c in WW2/GPW? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

luftluuver
05-04-2006, 06:39 PM
Originally posted by HelSqnProtos:
S~!

I have to jump to carguy's defense and say that fightersweeps do NOT win wars.

Groundpounding does. Take the ground - Win the war. It is only one single mission not a campaign or war.

by faustik
Maybe Jermin122 can get together a small group to fly 4 x I-16s against 4 x Bf109s? I'd be happy to fly the Bf109 side with you Ivan.

Sounds like he is saying a fighter sweep. carguy wants to make a mountain out of a molehill.

WTE_Galway
05-04-2006, 11:04 PM
A lot of talking at cross purposes going on everything seems to have moved way off topic yet again.

I am not sure about other countries but anyone displaying the typical online dogfighter gung-ho attitude in the RAAF would either be grounded or retrained in transports very smartly.

Xiolablu3
05-05-2006, 12:22 AM
Could one of you nice guys please exp[lain the difference between saay a server like Winds Of War or Warclouds where there are historical planesets and ground targets for both sides and these 'CAD/IL2 war' things these 2 are talking about?

The only thing I can gather is that they go on for longer, but surely a sortie lasts no longer because 109s/Yaks/Spitfires can only carry just over an hours worth of fuel, so how can an average sortie be that different?

WTE_Galway
05-05-2006, 01:19 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Could one of you nice guys please exp[lain the difference between saay a server like Winds Of War or Warclouds where there are historical planesets and ground targets for both sides and these 'CAD/IL2 war' things these 2 are talking about?

The only thing I can gather is that they go on for longer, but surely a sortie lasts no longer because 109s/Yaks/Spitfires can only carry just over an hours worth of fuel, so how can an average sortie be that different?


Online wars are not single missions .. they are more like an online campaign often running for months or years real time. In some cases its D.I.D. ..... if your pilot character dies you start again, in other wars you just loose rank but keep your skill levels etc.

I have not played in an online war since the VEF days but back then you usually needed to be in a squad to play.

Xiolablu3
05-05-2006, 01:59 AM
Thanks for that Galway,

so basically they are the same as Winds OF War, with ground targets for each side, fighters covering the bombers, except last for longer and your pilot dies when he is dead?

I guess the front may move around a bit too as each side wins a map?

I dont see how the sorties can be THAT much different to say Winds OF War. That server is great when you get a lot of fighter and bomber pilots working together on Teamspeak. I would have thought you needed skill to do well in both equally. I would like to try one tho.

I guess I will get the p*ss taken out of me for saying this tho by the 'L33t' brigade. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

WOLFMondo
05-05-2006, 03:35 AM
Originally posted by HelSqnProtos:
S~!

There is absolutely NO CORRELATION between online war and a df server.

Online war pilots look down on df and rightly so. The skill and planning required in online war will NEVER be replicated in a df server.

Theres nothing different about an online war and a DF server apart from one thing, the players mentality. While there are some pure airquake DF servers there are also others which are set up like an online war, its whether or not the players choose to plan things out and fly as a group or go for personal glory and just dogfight. Its 100% down to the players.

Its extrememly close minded and arrogant to assume everyone who flies in a DF server is in some way lesser than someone who flies in an online war. Its also a bit of an assumption that all DF servers are the same.

Brain32
05-05-2006, 03:59 AM
DF server and online wars huh? I can only say that the difference is we in a DF server are not tied to mission objective, we either follow it or decide to simply DF to death. The thing is that if the teams are even we will do our best to win the map and coordinated efforts are nothing unusual. Sometimes we even organize using chatbar http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif It also depends a lot on who is on the server if only two dedicated groundpounders are on, the mission will look a lot more like a coop. So basically like Xiola said there is not much difference.

Kurfurst__
05-05-2006, 06:11 AM
Originally posted by Leadspitterr_:
I have to wait and see if carguy and kurfurst can authenticate this interview before i believe it.

*Stamps 'INTERVIEW APPROVED FOR READING'*

Von_Rat
05-05-2006, 07:56 AM
On many nights when there are 1000+ pilots in the lobby. You will ussually not see more than 100-125 in df servers.

The vast majority of the rest are playing online war. - GOOD LADS !!!
__________________________________________________ ____



in online wars, aren't you fighting against ai alot of the time?

do all online war player numbers show up on hyperlobby? every time i look at the numbers, df room player numbers waaay outnumber the coops and online wars player numbers listed on hyper.

rnzoli
05-05-2006, 08:51 AM
in online wars, aren't you fighting against ai alot of the time?
AFAIK the AI is present only when shortage in human players. Moreover, the AI is under the control of a human wing leader - sometimes more controllable than a human, sometimes more stubborn http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


do all online war player numbers show up on hyperlobby? every time i look at the numbers, df room player numbers waaay outnumber the coops and online wars player numbers listed on hyper.
where do you see the coop (and online war) players listed in HL? Coops don't appear as DF servers, so I think you can only deduct their numbers from the number of people in game (~800) minus the number of people in DF servers (e.g., ~200). The difference is playing hosted coops of some form (training, closed fun DF, squad missions, inter-squad competitions, online wars etc.).

carguy_
05-05-2006, 01:36 PM
Oh puuuuuuhleeeease!

Xiolablu3
05-05-2006, 01:36 PM
Peace and Love

Xiolablu3
05-05-2006, 01:37 PM
Why cant we all just be friends

crazyivan1970
05-05-2006, 01:39 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

carguy_
05-05-2006, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Ooo sorry, are compliments not allowed on this board?


I dunno.I never said so.


Are you really siding with this fool Protos?

Yeah!He`s cool.I`m cool.We`re fiends for life.I hope he knows I`m not gay though. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif

flockzap
05-05-2006, 02:58 PM
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jksonc/ir655-pa103.html

Radio transcriptions

Von_Rat
05-06-2006, 12:34 AM
Originally posted by rnzoli:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">in online wars, aren't you fighting against ai alot of the time?
AFAIK the AI is present only when shortage in human players. Moreover, the AI is under the control of a human wing leader - sometimes more controllable than a human, sometimes more stubborn http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


do all online war player numbers show up on hyperlobby? every time i look at the numbers, df room player numbers waaay outnumber the coops and online wars player numbers listed on hyper.
where do you see the coop (and online war) players listed in HL? Coops don't appear as DF servers, so I think you can only deduct their numbers from the number of people in game (~800) minus the number of people in DF servers (e.g., ~200). The difference is playing hosted coops of some form (training, closed fun DF, squad missions, inter-squad competitions, online wars etc.). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hmm don't like ai, ever.

as for where im seeing those rooms. click on general room, its right under trackir ad. you'll see a coop room and various online war rooms. every time i look df players way out number the people in these coop and online war rooms.

rnzoli
05-06-2006, 12:54 AM
I see... but if I understand it correctly, the General Room also has a coop room. So not everyone in the General Room plays DF. The number of people in-game is much more than the player counters beside the DF servers.

Von_Rat
05-06-2006, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by rnzoli:
I see... but if I understand it correctly, the General Room also has a coop room. So not everyone in the General Room plays DF. The number of people in-game is much more than the player counters beside the DF servers.

you can see how many are in dogfight servers, or coops in the general room.

the numbers don't match up its true, even if you count the people in df severs and all the online wars, coops etc. i don't think you can assume the differance is theyre all playing coops. maybe someone else knows why numbers don't add up.

if i had to guess, the differance in numbers is caused by people who are in games that are listed in hl, but didn't join through hl. i know that players who join df servers through direct ip or ase aren't listed in the individual df servers totals. whether their counted in the ingame totals is what i don't know.

zugfuhrer
05-06-2006, 01:40 PM
A comment on PFSOLKOR statement on that Sweden has confirmed that the DC-3 that was shoot down in 1952 was in Soviet airspace.

It was hard to find the source "Folket and build magazine", and I think this is what you are referring to

http://www.fib.se/

Do you read/speak Swedish or is it published in any other language, perhaps has someone translated the article to you.

Does any official gouverment department, like foreign afairs or defence ministry, publish this publication?

If it is a common newspaper, it is known for good scientific articles where the sources are prime sources?

You know there are so many "odd newspapers" in countries with free press, they can say anything they want and what they write can have little to do with truth, but the written word is free.

They can almost write any things without being arrested put into exile, closing the paper down or send the journalist into labour camps. They can even publish restricted material, and the journalist can€t be forced by the police to tell them who gave them this restricted information.

Isn€t the world a odd place where these things can happen in one country and not in others?

Xiolablu3
05-06-2006, 05:44 PM
About half of the people playing dont use Hyperlobby at all too connect, so HL numbers are not true of numbers playing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

HelSqnProtos
05-06-2006, 06:30 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
About half of the people playing dont use Hyperlobby at all too connect, so HL numbers are not true of numbers playing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

What are you talking about................ http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

The VAST majority of people are using the lobby. Direct connect by ip and ubi client are a tiny fraction of pilots. You really have to stop posting such misinformed drivel .................. more flying will help.

Xiolablu3
05-06-2006, 07:16 PM
Hehe, the clueless one is back http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

You made such a fool of yourself earlier that you can safely say not too many people will listen to you now. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Take no notice of this fool. Many people connect through direct IP and many join using All seeing Eye and other browser programs.

NO hard feelings Protos, its quite obvious that you are mentally challenged, or maybe very young with much to learn.

AnaK774
05-06-2006, 07:51 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:

NO hard feelings Protos, its quite obvious that you are mentally challenged, or maybe very young with much to learn.

Well, all I can say he aint very young http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

But then to what carguy has been pointing out.

Dogfights rarely happened just for dogfighting.
Usually fighters were there for some mission, wich they tried to accomplish. Accomplishing mission didnt neccessarily mean shooting down all opposition, but hindering their capability to interfere with friendly troops.

S! cya up there, Ana

MadRuski
05-06-2006, 08:07 PM
is this another one of those topics were one normal person put something interesting up, but then 2 or 3 morons came in here and started arguing about nothing? if so... then i hope this pic helps

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h254/MadRuski/arguing.jpg

Xiolablu3
05-06-2006, 08:21 PM
Originally posted by MadRuski:
is this another one of those topics were one normal person put something interesting up, but then 2 or 3 morons came in here and started arguing about nothing?


I am afraid this Protos guy posted something before which was so clueless, it left everyone just astounded at his foolishness. It went something like this.


Originally posted by HelSqnProtos:
Online War pilots look down on normal server pilots and rightly so..

There was other daft stuff he posted too, but this was the worst I think.^

Luckily CrazyIvan deleted his post and the responses from pilots with a brain, so he was saved without looking too much of a fool, before most could read it. But seeing as he just attacked me for no reason, I will post it again, just so people can see. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

HelSqnProtos
05-06-2006, 10:01 PM
S~!

Sure little kid........ whatever makes you feel good.

When you start a Squadron with ALL the ammenities including websites,forums, teamspeak servers, ftp servers ect....... and an Online War come talk to me. Till then you and your girlfriend (which hand was that again?) can get to know eachother a little better. Cause thats ALL you do in here. Your clueless about this sim and it really shows. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Oh and kiss CI's posterior all you want....... it further shows what a noob you are. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">P.S.

If you have a problem take it to PM or better yet TS. If your a man that is???</span>

georgeo76
05-07-2006, 12:18 AM
what was this thread about again?

Protos: I agree in principal what you say about the cooperative format, but I don't look down on people that enjoy the game differently.

I welcome anyone who wants to buy the game and play it. Even if it's wonder-woman-air-quake in a pink La7. Because all we have in common is that we like to fly a desk. We like to pretend. If you think value judgments apply to pretending then your the one doing it wrong.

Regardless of your age, when I read your claim that your preferences make you a superior flight sim enthusiast, what I picture in my mind is a boy stomping one foot in frustration, smashing his toys and exclaiming: "some people just don't play right!"

Von_Rat
05-07-2006, 01:03 AM
i don't really want to get involved in a off topic argument.

but all you have to do is look at numbers of people in the various severs using all seeing eye. then look at how many show up in the HL individual server totals. somtimes theres a LOT more people showing up on all seeing eye than show up in HL individual server totals.

my off topic question was, do the hl in game totals, not server totals, reflect how many are really playing the game. if this is so, then the differance reflects people joining by other means, not the number playing coops.

sorry for the drive by hijacking.

rnzoli
05-07-2006, 01:06 AM
Xiola, the truth is that no matter how hard the DF server admins try (and they try very well, it's also true), coop and online campaign missions are much more feature-rich, I could give about 10 reasons, but I just give one now: how many times you see a recon Storch or a supply DC-3 in DF rooms. So playing only DF is really missing out on a lot of goodies that Il2 can offer.

On the other hand, the online wars and the participating squads need more pilots, but the nose-up (elitist) attitude of Protos is not exactly attracting in any way. But never forget that he is a Greek, I love Greeks, very nice and helpful people, just don't argue with them about things they are passionate about http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif it's pointless http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I think flying a few coop missions with him and his squad (maybe on their side against other guys) would sort things out, because in this arguing both of you look a little more stupid than you really are... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Just like difficulty settings, or hardware setup, the different server types are personal preferences, too, both have advantages. The DF has the huge advantage of hopping in/out any time during the course of events, inlcluding refly. The coop has the advantage that everything starts at a given time, making the events unfold in the coordinated way (+ no spawn lag, hehe).

rnzoli
05-07-2006, 01:12 AM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
my off topic question was, do the hl in game totals, not server totals, reflect how many are really playing the game. if this is so, then the differance reflects people joining by other means, not the number playing coops.

sorry for the drive by hijacking.

I am quite certain that if we look at the right-side "IN GAME" counter, that reflects people that joined a server via HL, not by other means.

So if someone is in-game, but not on any DF, he must be playing a coop (not necessarily in online war, maybe just 1 vs 1 DF training).

If someone logs onto HL, but connects direct IP or ASE, he will be on the left side column (not IN-GAME), and not shown on the server connect counter either.

So in short: HL is representative how many people join DF or coop via HL only.

HelSqnProtos
05-07-2006, 01:48 AM
S~!

Georgio,

Glad you like coop. Don't really look down on anyone...... I just refuse to allow the constant complaints of the DF crowd here at these forums to stand uncorrected. THEY are the minority.

Squadrons and thier activities make up by FAR the largest and most active part of the online community. To hear you and those that support DF as equal to online war and the predominate flying style we are supposed to believe that its the other way around. IT MOST DEFINETLY IS NOT.

Even your 'Sqn Leader' has had to concede that one. And getting him to concede anything with regard to sqns is a minor miracle.

It is high time that Sqns and Coops were recognized as the PREDOMINATE - what is the appropriate word.... Venue? for online play. DF is as mzoli said quick. Thats it. Air Quake.

The problem imo is that the boards are dominated with non sqn based 'personalities' who wish to spin DF as the end all and be all of the sim. Its not, IT HAS THE LEAST online participation. At about a 10-1 ratio. Coops are and will continue to be the preferred method of flying.

Just wait till we get Dedicated Coop Servers for online war with B.O.B. - The DF servers will once again drain away to nothing.

Or perhaps you don't remember when Bellum was running and the lobby was flooded past its 999 player limit. Those pilots werent flying DF. They were flying online war at a better than 90% ratio. Only reason DF servers have half the pilots they do now is because there is no 'new' online war to fly.

As for your opinion about:

Regardless of your age, when I read your claim that your preferences make you a superior flight sim enthusiast, what I picture in my mind is a boy stomping one foot in frustration, smashing his toys and exclaiming: "some people just don't play right!"

It is not my preferences that make me a superior flight enthusiast - but my knowledge of the online aspects of the sim.

For instance I am not ******ed enough to believe that more people play online through ASE or direct ip - because I can actually do math and read the counters in hyperlobby. Nor am I noob enough to believe that the same flight experience can be had in a DF server as in an online war. - How do I know???? Because unlike the people who are posting in this thread pretending they know - I HAVE ACTUALLY DONE AND DO BOTH.

Whereas the 'personalities' your defending have openly stated that they DON'T HAVE A CLUE. Beause they never tried online war. So how can you possibly comment to compare the two? You have to be ******ed or a pretender. Xioblu has shown that he is both.

Wow !!!! Logic its a magical thing.

So before making any judgements, take a long hard look in the mirror - if you can remember which alias you are wearing today that is and rethink your statements. You may not like the way I say what I say. But there is no denying the TRUTH of it.

P,S.
I love it that the DF boys and Squadronless ones get annoyed http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif
It makes me all warm and fuzzy inside. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Well its late & I have upset the Sqnless ones and the DF dingbats. My work is done. As the kiddies like to say Peace out.

Von_Rat
05-07-2006, 04:33 AM
Originally posted by rnzoli:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Von_Rat:
my off topic question was, do the hl in game totals, not server totals, reflect how many are really playing the game. if this is so, then the differance reflects people joining by other means, not the number playing coops.

sorry for the drive by hijacking.

I am quite certain that if we look at the right-side "IN GAME" counter, that reflects people that joined a server via HL, not by other means.

So if someone is in-game, but not on any DF, he must be playing a coop (not necessarily in online war, maybe just 1 vs 1 DF training).

If someone logs onto HL, but connects direct IP or ASE, he will be on the left side column (not IN-GAME), and not shown on the server connect counter either.

So in short: HL is representative how many people join DF or coop via HL only. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

anyway you look at it the numbers from the separate room totals, both df and coops don't add up to the ingame totals. i don't see any evidence so far that the reason the totals don;t add up, is because the extra players are playing coops etc. if they were they should be listed in those rooms, if they joined coop through hl.

rnzoli
05-07-2006, 04:44 AM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
i don't see any evidence so far that the reason the totals don;t add up, is because the extra players are playing coops etc. if they were they should be listed in those rooms.

coop rooms or coop lobbies?

if you mean rooms, AFAIK coop hosts are not shown after lauching the gaim, simply because no one can join it after it has started

if you mean lobbies, again, there's a coop game slot grid in general lobby as well, lauchning quite often coops

anyway i am getting confused myself, so the best way is to test it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Von_Rat
05-07-2006, 05:07 AM
i think i might have the answer, the servers themselves count in the ingame totals. just scroll down the ingame list, you'll see all the servers there. if you add up all the real players in all the df server totals and players flying coop , plus all the empty df servers, the numbers add up to the ingame total.

so the difference beteewn numbers isn;t just players flying coops, its the empty df servers showing up in the ingame numbers that cause alot of the differance, i would say most of the differance,even if, as you say, after coops are lauched the numbers no longer show up in the individual room totals.

ill check several times at differant times of day, but i doubt that coop numbers will even come very close to df room numbers.