Kira

My thoughts exactly. I'll learn it later, first thing is to take it up and wring it out. See what it can do.

Old news. NASA F-106B takes 714 lightning strikes on a single flight. https://theaviationgeekclub.com/this-f-106b-was-struck-by-lightning-714-times/?fbclid=IwAR0q-Qx5OgVpsqdtxgri1d2eWvm5pmTWKOVBg0mcS7DT3egzxreIvc0VU3w

No, not a 7 Days blood moon! Just a lunar eclipse: https://www.npr.org/2019/01/17/686227606/heads-up-for-sunday-a-super-blood-moon-is-on-the-way?fbclid=IwAR0XTHd95ycJe_HVw-2IsxFKBgENI4MHaSLcxBzWHr4FYOcIH_1KG040ZJQ

VFA-34 flew the last deployment with the Legecy F/A-18C. They'll transition to the E before deploying again. https://theaviationgeekclub.com/last-u-s-navy-f-a-18c-legacy-hornet-squadron-returns-to-nas-oceana-after-historic-deployment/?fbclid=IwAR0pN6o2U6dTj7qT7nDSNHOum3M5FBLiq3QSguN6OGPkwNQuPNFwq4tA1-A

Painless et al, if you're serious, then I rather recommend the acquisition of the F/A-18 sooner rather than later. It doesn't have the bomb trucking capability of the A-10C, but it is a carrier aircraft and can get you "in the groove" of carrier flying before moving to the Tomkitty. I will say that it is considerably more advanced than the F-14, (late 70's early 80's tech vs mid 60's early 70's tech) but on the other hand, real world pilots were required to have serious hours in the F/A-18, F-16, or one other (which I don't remember) before even being put on the selection list for Tomcat training.

Note the glove vanes, just aft of the cockpit in the drawing at 4:50. More glove vanes at 8:45. Fun fact: It's widely believed that the F-14B and GE-110 engines came about from a flight by SecNav John Lehman with a legendary F-14 pilot, callsign Hoser. He took the SecNav up for a mock dogfight, had BOTH TF-30s stall out in the middle of the fight (glider time!), but did as they'd been doing all along: a quick restart, without even enough time lost to loose position in the fight. Hoser (Joe Satrapa)'s statement over the ICS was something along the lines of "Mr. Secretary, this is the bullshit we have to deal with all the time with these damn TF-30s."

Nah, Crash, I think this is even better. It's what happens when you take that one a little too seriously.

A major point. Altitude can be transferred into airspeed. It wasn't until the advent of radar and radar guided missiles aboard fighters that the advantages of starting a fight low came into play in earnest. Case in point, one (or both) of the F-14 engagements against the Libyans in the 1980s saw the F-14s going low on purpose, both to mask themselves against the sea from the Libyans' radars, but also giving their own radars a clean, uncluttered background upon which to see the Libyans. Absolutely. There are numerous accounts of pilots getting shot down over their own territory who were up flying and fighting again within days, sometimes the same day.

Already done, Gypsy. It's the only stick that will already be mapped upon release. Others will follow, but the Warthog will be read out the gate.

I tried it during a free weekend. Understand that I'm running 8GB (for now) which is bare minimum for DCS, if not actually below. I could get it to load, most of time time; and run, most of the time, with one aircraft on the map. My impression was that it's just more sand. On the other hand, it will be the go to map for F/A-18 and Tomcat types, more than likely, as it is a global hot spot. For me, though, Caucasus it is. Plenty of, I perceive, more varied terrain, plus a map that runs fairly well. Personally, I'll wait for a sale, and spend on any good planes to come by instead. It was interesting, but in the end, it's just sand and water with a few admittedly pretty, cities interspersed.