Time To Do Away With AWACS Datalink?

[popeye]

The only problem I have with inflight dot dar is that it substitutes for SA.  I think a reasonable compromise would be to update dot dar at 15 (?) second intervals.  That way you could use it to find a fight, but not to instantly evaluate threats in a furball.

The delay could <cough> simulate the time it took information to get from the radar operator, through the ground control chain, to the pilot.

[DingHao2]

Obviously Runny only read the first three sentences of my post.  Read it, runny, don't spew worthless rhetoric.  And try harder to pull my argument at the seams.

[pbirmingham]

Originally posted by Ding_Hao:
Obviously Runny only read the first three sentences of my post.  Read it, runny, don't spew worthless rhetoric.  And try harder to pull my argument at the seams.

Why should I pull at the seams, when you've pitched your rhetorical tent in quicksand?

You say the emphasis is on strategy, I say you're stretching one sentence from the web page a bit too far.  Your argument sucks, therefore, and forgive me for commenting more on the turd in that punch bowl than on how great the punch tastes.

Ground control was a common feature of many air forces.  If we're not to force someone to sit in the tower and call out vectors to interceptors, there has to be some sort of in-flight display, else people will be *more* blind than in reality.

None for me, thanks.

[pbirmingham]

Originally posted by popeye:
The only problem I have with inflight dot dar is that it substitutes for SA.  I think a reasonable compromise would be to update dot dar at 15 (?) second intervals.  That way you could use it to find a fight, but not to instantly evaluate threats in a furball.

The delay could <cough> simulate the time it took information to get from the radar operator, through the ground control chain, to the pilot.

I like this.  Radar is good, but not excessively so.

[Tac]

EXCELLENT idea on the 15 second delay.

Now, get rid of the bar dar for planes below 500ft.

And once the night fighters are added, make the night fighters have the dot dar we have now.    

[hblair]

Originally posted by Runny:



If we're not to force someone to sit in the tower and call out vectors to interceptors, there has to be some sort of in-flight display, else people will be *more* blind than in reality.

Wrong.
Noone is forced to sit in the tower. It is a voluntarily thing. Read the link. If you have questions, ask them on that bbs.

 http://agw.dogfighter.com/agw//Forum3/HTML/025127.html

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: hblair ]

[sling322]

Keep on tryin HB....but its not gonna happen.  If you think the endless questions coming from the new guys now are tiresome just wait until you turn off the dar in the MA.    I would however agree that below 500 ft no dar bar would be cool, if and only if that does not include ground vehicles.  Make planes below 500 feet not show up on dar, but make ground vehicles show up and I am with you.

[Maverick]

Given the current congestion of the text buffer in the MA, I can only say the concept of getting fighter direction from some player in the tower is the height of absurdity. There are already far too many posting on the text buffer to follow it now. There have been NUMEROUS players who claim to have to squelch the buffer just to keep up with squad coms.

I recall many of the players posting complaints about the "generals" trying to direct players to "hot spots" to save fields or whatever the "general" feels is critical. Now someone actually proposes making this a virtual requirement for game play?!?!?!?!

No thanks. I will fly as I wish and not at the whim of some other player in the tower.

I can just see the team changers now using this as an oportunity to game the game and give misdirection to the enemy.

 

[hblair]

Originally posted by sling322:
Keep on tryin HB....but its not gonna happen.  If you think the endless questions coming from the new guys now are tiresome just wait until you turn off the dar in the MA.      I would however agree that below 500 ft no dar bar would be cool, if and only if that does not include ground vehicles.  Make planes below 500 feet not show up on dar, but make ground vehicles show up and I am with you.

I'm not necassarily saying lose in-plane radar completely. There's far too many lightweights in the main arena to handle that without a march on Grapevine.  

I was correcting Runny in his assesment.

Warbirds has been without in-plane radar for years, and it has never been an issue. Aces High was without enemy radar (in-flight and even in the tower) for almost a week and it was not an issue, wasn't even mentioned on channel 1 that I recall, certainly didn't affect numbers. It's mostly just furballers that want to keep it an easy furball. For example, mav, you have 9 bomber sorties since March of this year. Come on man. You can't know much about taking fields. Therefore, how much can your arguement here mean? You, as most others who want dar out the wazoo, like lazs, etc. don't even know half of the story. You only know what you see in your fighter. That's just one part of the main arena. People need to take this into account when they read your opinions on strategy.

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: hblair ]

[Zigrat]

hblair give up. most of aces high players are childish babies who only fly the best plane available and need every crutch they can get to survive. its sad   but since they pay hitechs bills he has to listen to them.

really the ONLY solution is for the intrepid of us to go populate the combat theatre. if we can get pledges from a bunch fo squads to "form the seed" i think CT will grow. it just takes some strength to ignore that 330 number and login to the 20, which is why squads have to lead the way.

[Seeker]

"hblair give up. most of aces high players are childish babies "

Is that why you do your best to cheat at WW, Zig?

[SELECTOR]

maybe Dar dots can go..but dar bar are ok.
I would like to see planes identity icon visual distance brought down. i think its at 6k at moment, like to see that halfed to 3k

[hblair]

There's nothing to give up on. Just giving my input on how radar affects the arena. I'll prolly fly the CT when it gets modified, but it's got a long way to go before its an alternative to the main. I don't think the majority of Aces High pilots are babies, or even mav or lazs.   They are just dillusioned is all.

Seeker, go explain that goofy "109f" thread. And if you're implying that our squad wings together on WW's you're wrong. Just because it appears that way to you on one occasion doen't mean it's so.

[YardBird]

Originally posted by Nifty:
It'd increase "pucker factor" because you wouldn't know if that dot that just popped in your visual range was a bandit or a friendly.

I used to fly in the CT most of the time for awhile, because there was NO dot dar at that time. It was nice to be able to set up a bogie by hiding in the clouds and executing a perfect bounce. The "pucker factor" was a definite plus, IMHO, always scanning the sky for the one that is looking to bounce you. When the dot dar was reinstated, I moved back to the MA for the planeset - might as well.
My vote? Dot dar in the tower, bar dar only inflight. If you can't "find the fight" with that, you probably shouldn't be flying.  

[Kieran]

Put me in the "No-Dar" camp. There are types of play right now that are impossible because of it.