Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 7 of 10 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10
#4369740 - 07/18/17 08:29 AM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: LOF_Rugg]  
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 797
leaf_on_the_wind Offline
Member
leaf_on_the_wind  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 797
Originally Posted by LOF_Rugg
Tally Ho is "I see my ex girlfriend".


best post in this thread by far



Ferengi Rule of acquisition #1 Once you have their money ... never give it back.

Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#4369748 - 07/18/17 09:34 AM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: heloguy]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Originally Posted by heloguy
Wasn't talking about swapping tally and visual, but correctly using the word CONTACT.

Sorry about that... was replying to both Frederf's post and yours and he was talking about tally/visual.

Originally Posted by heloguy
That's fine in the sim world, but IRL it's not, especially when related to known friendly contacts.

Yeah, I didn't mean KNOWN friendly... it could well be friendly (or Lead!!) but until certain, I call TALLY. Sorry for the confusion, I guess I wrote it that way as it was leading to my next sentence (Lead and smoke).

Originally Posted by heloguy
Originally Posted by - Ice
Again, TALLY bogey and TALLY bandit are both correct.

Again, this is in question. In fact, the pub I reference below uses the word 'CONTACT' to describe a bogey.

It's only in question because you refuse to accept the APP-7 document... in which the (D) version is 2007 but you link me to a document that is dated 2005... interestingly, the FM 1-02.1 that you link defines CONTACT ***exactly*** as I've written above and ***exactly*** as written on the APP-7(D). It also doesn't "describe a bogey," it just says "sensor contact" or "radar return" which can be bogey/bandit/friendly/etc.

Originally Posted by heloguy
The ATP 1-02.1 is now used by all services, and oddly enough specifically states that a bogey is an unidentified air CONTACT.

A BOGEY is an air CONTACT whose identity is unknown (FM 1-02.1) or an unidentified aircraft (APP-07). A BOGEY may be acquired via sensors/radar or visually (FM 1.02.1). TALLY is sighting a target or non-friendly aircraft (FM 1-02.1). We agree on those definitions, right? Therefore, you can TALLY (see) a BOGEY (unidentified or non-friendly aircraft) and once you figure out (identify) that he's actually your Lead, you then call VISUAL.

Originally Posted by heloguy
The pub (and most of the previous references) state that contact is used to describe visual (mk1 eyeball) and sensor acquisition from air-to-surface. Air-to-air doesn't seem to make the distinction, and only references radar.

I fail to see where it says "air-to-surface." It says sensor contact or visual acquisition but doesn't seem to care whether the sensor platform or the individual is airborne or ground-based.

Originally Posted by heloguy
Originally Posted by - Ice

Having said that, I guess CONTACT bogey and CONTACT bandit are both correct too, provided that this is done through a sensor (radar, TGP, FLIR, etc.). CONTACT red car on the parking lot is also correct.

Correct, well done.

Thank you. Maybe now you can drop the patronizing tone?

Originally Posted by heloguy
Originally Posted by - Ice

I think the distinction of CONTACT and TALLY with reference to airborne targets carry with it the indication of the user's range or distance to the target.

This is not referenced anywhere.

Hence the first two words being "I think."

Originally Posted by heloguy
An unidentified aircraft, vehicle, thing, etc is in fact a reference point.

Source?

Originally Posted by heloguy
TALLY is no longer associated with landmarks. As I stated above, it is only used with targets, non-friendly aircraft, or enemy positions.

And a BOGEY is non-friendly... until proven otherwise.


- Ice
#4369750 - 07/18/17 09:37 AM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: Frederf]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Originally Posted by Frederf
If it were my squadron I would push heavily toward tally being used exclusively with enemy status. "I tally bandit to the south." "Looks to be an airliner to the west. You see 'im?" "Yeah I tally." That kind of exchange has bad news written all over it.

Just used an airliner as an extreme example, the airliner being a "target" and not necessarily an enemy....


- Ice
#4369782 - 07/18/17 03:15 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
heloguy Offline
Member
heloguy  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
Originally Posted by - Ice

It's only in question because you refuse to accept the APP-7 document... in which the (D) version is 2007


This is because there is most likely a newer version, with updated definitions in it. I've searched at work, but haven't found it, most likely since it's a NATO pub. I've only been able to find the ATP 1-02.1 (the successor to the FM1-02.1).

Originally Posted by - Ice

but you link me to a document that is dated 2005... interestingly,


I explained at the close of my post that a newer version exists, that it was released last year, and I have had a chance to check the differences with the terms that have been discussed.

Originally Posted by - Ice

the FM 1-02.1 that you link defines CONTACT ***exactly*** as I've written above and ***exactly*** as written on the APP-7(D).


I explained in my earlier post, the definition was changed as of last year in the updated ATP 1-02.1.

Originally Posted by - Ice

It also doesn't "describe a bogey," it just says "sensor contact" or "radar return" which can be bogey/bandit/friendly/etc.


I was referring to the use of the word CONTACT in the definition of a bogey. It does not say sensor in that definition. In fact, it says 'Radar or visual air contact whose identity is unknown'.

Originally Posted by - Ice

I fail to see where it says "air-to-surface." It says sensor contact or visual acquisition but doesn't seem to care whether the sensor platform or the individual is airborne or ground-based.


You fail to see it because it's in the newer pub as I described. The newer ATP 1-02.1 places a A/A or S/A or A/S in front of each definition of a term.

Originally Posted by - Ice

Originally Posted by heloguy
An unidentified aircraft, vehicle, thing, etc is in fact a reference point.

Source?


Unfortunately, reference point is not defined in any of the pubs.

Originally Posted by - Ice

And a BOGEY is non-friendly... until proven otherwise.


This is an interpretation. I'm curious to hear now what the current interpretation is in the USAF.


Sim 1
I7 8700k
Nvidia GTX 1080ti
32gb RAM
Windows 10 x64
Samsung Odyssey
Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, BRD Black Stork, BRD F1 Pedals
Rotary Wing: Microhelis EC-135 Collective, Komodosim Cyclic (135)

Sim 2
I7 3770k
Nvidia GTX 1080
32gb RAM
Windows 10 x64
Oculus Rift
Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, VKB Gunfighter, Slaw Viper Pedals
Rotary Wing: Komodosim Collective (135)
#4369843 - 07/18/17 06:17 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: *Striker*]  
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,599
Frederf Offline
Member
Frederf  Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,599
Just ain't the case, ice.

#4369847 - 07/18/17 06:32 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: *Striker*]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,555
VF9_Longbow Offline
Hotshot
VF9_Longbow  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,555
Tokyo, Japan
standardized phraseology people

#4369899 - 07/18/17 09:49 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: heloguy]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Originally Posted by heloguy
This is because there is most likely a newer version, with updated definitions in it. I've searched at work, but haven't found it, most likely since it's a NATO pub. I've only been able to find the ATP 1-02.1 (the successor to the FM1-02.1).

It didn't match your CAS version so you rejected it.... however, it now meshes more closesly with the other stuff you've linked so maybe you'll open your mind up? It may well be replaced by newer publications, but I can only really go with what's available.

Originally Posted by heloguy
I explained at the close of my post that a newer version exists, that it was released last year, and I have had a chance to check the differences with the terms that have been discussed.

Originally Posted by heloguy
TALLY is no longer associated with landmarks. As I stated above, it is only used with targets, non-friendly aircraft, or enemy positions. CONTACT adds the phrase "either visually or via sensor" to the second definition (I think this is in one of the previous references).

And none of the differences really changes what I've posted before. You can still TALLY a BOGEY.

Originally Posted by heloguy
I explained in my earlier post, the definition was changed as of last year in the updated ATP 1-02.1.

You can still TALLY a BOGEY.

Originally Posted by heloguy
I was referring to the use of the word CONTACT in the definition of a bogey. It does not say sensor in that definition. In fact, it says 'Radar or visual air contact whose identity is unknown'.

And radar is not a sensor? Tell me, what is a sensor then?

Originally Posted by heloguy
You fail to see it because it's in the newer pub as I described. The newer ATP 1-02.1 places a A/A or S/A or A/S in front of each definition of a term.

Er, no. The FM 1-02.1 puts [A/A] or whatever as appropriate. So does the APP-7. So if A/S defines CONTACT as a visual/sensor acquisition from an A-S platform, then what do you call a visual/sensor acquisition from an A-A platform?

Originally Posted by heloguy
Unfortunately, reference point is not defined in any of the pubs.

Interesting how you call me out on something that is not referenced, but yet you do the same thing.

Originally Posted by heloguy
This is an interpretation. I'm curious to hear now what the current interpretation is in the USAF.

If it is a FRIENDLY, then it's FRIENDLY. If it isn't friendly and you don't know if it's hostile or neutral or friendly, what do you call it?


- Ice
#4369900 - 07/18/17 09:50 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: VF9_Longbow]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Originally Posted by Frederf
Just ain't the case, ice.

Which one?

Originally Posted by VF9_Longbow
standardized phraseology people

Indeed, Longbow, but apparently, different groups "standardize" differently smile And different people accept different "standards."


- Ice
#4369949 - 07/19/17 04:19 AM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
heloguy Offline
Member
heloguy  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
Originally Posted by - Ice
Originally Posted by heloguy
This is because there is most likely a newer version, with updated definitions in it. I've searched at work, but haven't found it, most likely since it's a NATO pub. I've only been able to find the ATP 1-02.1 (the successor to the FM1-02.1).

It didn't match your CAS version so you rejected it.... however, it now meshes more closesly with the other stuff you've linked so maybe you'll open your mind up? It may well be replaced by newer publications, but I can only really go with what's available.


I simply haven't accepted your interpretation, and would like to see a newer version of the APP-7 is all. It really is ok to disagree.

Originally Posted by - Ice

And none of the differences really changes what I've posted before.


It gets rid of the part where you can tally a landmark. That is old terminology.

Originally Posted by - Ice

Originally Posted by heloguy
I was referring to the use of the word CONTACT in the definition of a bogey. It does not say sensor in that definition. In fact, it says 'Radar or visual air contact whose identity is unknown'.

And radar is not a sensor? Tell me, what is a sensor then?


I was referring to the fact that it does not exclude the word 'visual' by only including the word 'radar'.

Originally Posted by - Ice

Originally Posted by heloguy
You fail to see it because it's in the newer pub as I described. The newer ATP 1-02.1 places a A/A or S/A or A/S in front of each definition of a term.

Er, no. The FM 1-02.1 puts [A/A] or whatever as appropriate. So does the APP-7. So if A/S defines CONTACT as a visual/sensor acquisition from an A-S platform, then what do you call a visual/sensor acquisition from an A-A platform?


The reference was to the fact that the ATP 1-02.1 places the A/A, A/S, or S/A identifiers in front of each definition specifically for the term CONTACT. It's changed, only slightly, but doesn't really change the definition. You didn't see this in the FM 1-02.1 because the identifiers for each definition in CONTACT are not there for bullets 1 and 2. For bullet 2, it actually says A/S, which I believe supports your claim.

Originally Posted by - Ice

Interesting how you call me out on something that is not referenced, but yet you do the same thing.


Contact/Tally differentiation by definition are not associated with range. I understood reference point to mean a point in three-dimensional space. Unfortunately, as I said, it's not defined in the pubs.

Originally Posted by - Ice

If it is a FRIENDLY, then it's FRIENDLY. If it isn't friendly and you don't know if it's hostile or neutral or friendly, what do you call it?


An unidentified contact, which would be a BOGEY in the air, and plain language on the ground, unless there is a pro-word/brevity term assigned to it. Non-friendly, and enemy are easily interchangeable, and where the ambiguity lies.


Sim 1
I7 8700k
Nvidia GTX 1080ti
32gb RAM
Windows 10 x64
Samsung Odyssey
Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, BRD Black Stork, BRD F1 Pedals
Rotary Wing: Microhelis EC-135 Collective, Komodosim Cyclic (135)

Sim 2
I7 3770k
Nvidia GTX 1080
32gb RAM
Windows 10 x64
Oculus Rift
Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, VKB Gunfighter, Slaw Viper Pedals
Rotary Wing: Komodosim Collective (135)
#4370052 - 07/19/17 08:29 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: heloguy]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Originally Posted by heloguy
I simply haven't accepted your interpretation, and would like to see a newer version of the APP-7 is all. It really is ok to disagree.

What "interpretation"?? You've initially rejected it on the basis of your JP 3-09. Please point out where I've "interpreted" stuff in error.


Originally Posted by heloguy
It gets rid of the part where you can tally a landmark. That is old terminology.

So what? Moot point. We were never arguing about tallying a landmark. I did say this was possible, and it was correct as per the old documentation, and if what you say is true, then that statement about TALLY a landmark is no longer correct.... but bottom line, we were never arguing about TALLYing a landmark.


Originally Posted by heloguy
I was referring to the fact that it does not exclude the word 'visual' by only including the word 'radar'.

What? duh


Originally Posted by heloguy
The reference was to the fact that the ATP 1-02.1 places the A/A, A/S, or S/A identifiers in front of each definition specifically for the term CONTACT. It's changed, only slightly, but doesn't really change the definition. You didn't see this in the FM 1-02.1 because the identifiers for each definition in CONTACT are not there for bullets 1 and 2. For bullet 2, it actually says A/S, which I believe supports your claim.

So A/A or A/S or whatever is placed in in front of the definition.... but is the definition actually CHANGED significantly? If not, then arguing about this is moot.


Originally Posted by heloguy
Contact/Tally differentiation by definition are not associated with range. I understood reference point to mean a point in three-dimensional space. Unfortunately, as I said, it's not defined in the pubs.

And that's why I said "I think." Your statement, however, did not even though this is your INTERPRETATION or UNDERSTANDING of it and is not actually an official definition. Pot calling kettle black.


Originally Posted by heloguy
Originally Posted by - Ice
If it is a FRIENDLY, then it's FRIENDLY. If it isn't friendly and you don't know if it's hostile or neutral or friendly, what do you call it?

An unidentified contact, which would be a BOGEY in the air, and plain language on the ground, unless there is a pro-word/brevity term assigned to it. Non-friendly, and enemy are easily interchangeable, and where the ambiguity lies.

Done! Sorted!

If it isn't friendly (aka non-friendly) and you don't know if it's hostile/neutral/friendly, it is unidentified and is therefore called a BOGEY.
TALLY is, as per your FM 1-02.1 (2005), is defined as Sighting of a target, non-friendly aircraft, or enemy position. Opposite of NO JOY.

TL;DR - you can TALLY a BOGEY.


- Ice
#4370066 - 07/19/17 09:42 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: *Striker*]  
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 467
nadal Offline
Member
nadal  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 467
Tally for Bogey.
IIRC you can even find an example of using tally for bogey in fighter jet employment manual floating on the net.


If you are still not convinced, put it this way.

1: Tally Bogey 10 o'clock high
2: two, contact.
1: (Hmm... my buddy acquired said bogey with radar or IR device...)




Last edited by nadal; 07/19/17 09:44 PM.
#4370244 - 07/20/17 07:16 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: nadal]  
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
heloguy Offline
Member
heloguy  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
Originally Posted by nadal
Tally for Bogey.
IIRC you can even find an example of using tally for bogey in fighter jet employment manual floating on the net.


I searched around a bit for exactly that. I found the transcript for the F-14/Mig-23 fight, which I have listened to, a long time ago. The transcript (I only read it this time, so whoever made it might have made mistakes) makes it sound like they only used the word Bogey the whole time, and they definitely used the word Tally quite a bit, just not together.

Anyway, as I said, I've dealt only with air-to-surface personally, and it was drilled from the beginning that you only Tally targets (ie, something you will shoot). If air-to-air is that different, cool. It may not be as specific, but as I said before, it seems like any reasonable person would understand.


Sim 1
I7 8700k
Nvidia GTX 1080ti
32gb RAM
Windows 10 x64
Samsung Odyssey
Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, BRD Black Stork, BRD F1 Pedals
Rotary Wing: Microhelis EC-135 Collective, Komodosim Cyclic (135)

Sim 2
I7 3770k
Nvidia GTX 1080
32gb RAM
Windows 10 x64
Oculus Rift
Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, VKB Gunfighter, Slaw Viper Pedals
Rotary Wing: Komodosim Collective (135)
#4370255 - 07/20/17 08:54 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: heloguy]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Originally Posted by heloguy
I searched around a bit for exactly that. I found the transcript for the F-14/Mig-23 fight, which I have listened to, a long time ago. The transcript (I only read it this time, so whoever made it might have made mistakes) makes it sound like they only used the word Bogey the whole time, and they definitely used the word Tally quite a bit, just not together.

Maybe because TALLY is "I see XXXX"

Originally Posted by heloguy
Anyway, as I said, I've dealt only with air-to-surface personally, and it was drilled from the beginning that you only Tally targets (ie, something you will shoot). If air-to-air is that different, cool. It may not be as specific, but as I said before, it seems like any reasonable person would understand.

Well, I guess you've been drilled wrong... or you've been very close-minded with your definition that everything else that is outside your "drilled in" definition is wrong.

TALLY - Sighting of a target, non-friendly aircraft, landmark, or enemy position. Opposite of NO JOY. FM 1-02.1 (2005)
So while TALLY can be used on targets, it can be also used on non-friendlies (BOGEYs).
For the upteenth time... you can TALLY a BOGEY.


- Ice
#4370257 - 07/20/17 08:59 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: *Striker*]  
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
heloguy Offline
Member
heloguy  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
No need to say it again Ice. I've explained myself thoroughly. In the air-to-surface world, my definition is not wrong. If it's different in air-to-air, again, cool. You may stop with the close-minded accusations now, and settle down.


Sim 1
I7 8700k
Nvidia GTX 1080ti
32gb RAM
Windows 10 x64
Samsung Odyssey
Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, BRD Black Stork, BRD F1 Pedals
Rotary Wing: Microhelis EC-135 Collective, Komodosim Cyclic (135)

Sim 2
I7 3770k
Nvidia GTX 1080
32gb RAM
Windows 10 x64
Oculus Rift
Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, VKB Gunfighter, Slaw Viper Pedals
Rotary Wing: Komodosim Collective (135)
#4370261 - 07/20/17 09:28 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: heloguy]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Originally Posted by heloguy
I've explained myself thoroughly

I think you meant "wrongly" instead of "thoroughly."

Originally Posted by heloguy
In the air-to-surface world, my definition is not wrong.

That's not the line you were singing until just now. Moving the goalposts, I see....

Originally Posted by heloguy
If it's different in air-to-air, again, cool.

Funny how you're now open to differences in definition between services... You seemed so sure before, and even gave air-to-air examples...

Originally Posted by heloguy
You may stop with the close-minded accusations now, and settle down.

Hahahaha..... I'm the close-minded one now, am I? Mr. No-I-won't-accept-the-APP-7-and-the-AFTTP-because-my-JP-3-09-is-newer-and-more-correct?


- Ice
#4370262 - 07/20/17 09:41 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
heloguy Offline
Member
heloguy  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
Originally Posted by - Ice

I think you meant "wrongly" instead of "thoroughly."


No, thoroughly. The difference here is that for me, this was a discussion. For you, it was an argument, as you stated.

Originally Posted by - Ice

Originally Posted by heloguy
In the air-to-surface world, my definition is not wrong.

That's not the line you were singing until just now. Moving the goalposts, I see....


Whatever perception makes you feel better.

Originally Posted by - Ice

You seemed so sure before, and even gave air-to-air examples...


I've been given air-to-air examples that are similar.

Originally Posted by - Ice

Hahahaha..... I'm the close-minded one now, am I?


I never called you anything.

Not one to bury the hatchet, are you?


Sim 1
I7 8700k
Nvidia GTX 1080ti
32gb RAM
Windows 10 x64
Samsung Odyssey
Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, BRD Black Stork, BRD F1 Pedals
Rotary Wing: Microhelis EC-135 Collective, Komodosim Cyclic (135)

Sim 2
I7 3770k
Nvidia GTX 1080
32gb RAM
Windows 10 x64
Oculus Rift
Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, VKB Gunfighter, Slaw Viper Pedals
Rotary Wing: Komodosim Collective (135)
#4370270 - 07/20/17 10:18 PM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: *Striker*]  
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,943
Nate Offline
Member
Nate  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,943
Dublin, Ireland


Nate

#4370302 - 07/21/17 07:55 AM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: heloguy]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Originally Posted by heloguy
No, thoroughly. The difference here is that for me, this was a discussion. For you, it was an argument, as you stated.

Discussion or argument, it was still wrong. Again, we were talking about correct usage in the air-to-air context, and there is a correct way and a wrong way.
It's not like we were discussing favorite colors or something where there's no wrong answer....


Originally Posted by heloguy
Whatever perception makes you feel better.

Ah, it's my "perception" now, is it? Just like everything about TALLY BOGEY was my "interpretation"?


Originally Posted by heloguy
I've been given air-to-air examples that are similar.

While your air-to-air examples can be correct in a context, the conclusion that you pulled out of it that cannot TALLY a BOGEY was wrong.


Originally Posted by heloguy
I never called you anything.

Originally Posted by heloguy
You may stop with the close-minded accusations now

Really?


Originally Posted by heloguy
Not one to bury the hatchet, are you?

Not one to admit you're wrong, are you? Very funny how you are now doing your best to weasel out of the current corner you're in.
Also, your previous posts had absolutely nothing to do with "bury the hatchet".... or do I have to pull out the definition for that phrase so that you can understand THAT as well? Or maybe that's how you "bury the hatchet" in your "air-to-surface world"?


- Ice
#4370307 - 07/21/17 09:54 AM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: Nate]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
Originally Posted by Nate


Nate


when your contributions to the community actually had merit...


Tester staff

Stephen "Nate--IRL--" Barrett

oh how times change.

#4370308 - 07/21/17 09:57 AM Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon [Re: heloguy]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
Originally Posted by heloguy
Originally Posted by nadal
Tally for Bogey.
IIRC you can even find an example of using tally for bogey in fighter jet employment manual floating on the net.


I searched around a bit for exactly that. I found the transcript for the F-14/Mig-23 fight, which I have listened to, a long time ago.



fire up BMS did we?

Page 7 of 10 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10

Moderated by  Force10, RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
CD WOFF
by Britisheh. 03/28/24 08:05 PM
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0