Your Nation's Air Force [MKI]

[Itailian Maifias]

Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I am drawing a fighter right now and I was wondering, it is possible to do camo for a plane? If so, how? Random spots?

[Greater Mexicania]

Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I am drawing a fighter right now and I was wondering, it is possible to do camo for a plane? If so, how? Random spots?

You can camo a plane; it's pointless but the paint looks nice. xD

[Satirius]

Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I am drawing a fighter right now and I was wondering, it is possible to do camo for a plane? If so, how? Random spots?

Look at some F-4's and Israeli F-16's. If you want spots the Germans did lots of aircraft flecktarn in WW2.

[Ramsetia]

Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I am drawing a fighter right now and I was wondering, it is possible to do camo for a plane? If so, how? Random spots?

Look at existing aircraft, especially russian air force fighter jets, the A-10 has a variegated camouflage pattern called 'compass ghost' which is two-tone gray, dark on top and pale underneath.

There's also certain tricks you might want to perform, such as Automimicry between top and bottom surfaces of the aircraft.

Don't do Digicam, because it looks completely stupid.

[Itailian Maifias]

Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I am drawing a fighter right now and I was wondering, it is possible to do camo for a plane? If so, how? Random spots?

Look at some F-4's and Israeli F-16's. If you want spots the Germans did lots of aircraft flecktarn in WW2.

Alright, thanks.

Also, Sat, what would be a good number of jets for my nation? I want to say 1,000, but I looked at how many the USA as and well, I need some help


@Ram,
Tell me about it, I hate wearing my Digicam fatigues. Wish they stuck with the old desert one

[Satirius]

"A good number" usually means taking TOE's into account, just saying a number doesn't really work. This is why I haven't finalized my military numbers.

[Itailian Maifias]

"A good number" usually means taking TOE's into account, just saying a number doesn't really work. This is why I haven't finalized my military numbers.

Ah, understandable.

Now, question for you, would red and white camo work?

[Ramsetia]

"A good number" usually means taking TOE's into account, just saying a number doesn't really work. This is why I haven't finalized my military numbers.

Ah, understandable.

Now, question for you, would red and white camo work?

well, since mustard-yellow and brown apparently 'work' for the russians, go ahead.

[Itailian Maifias]

Ah, understandable.

Now, question for you, would red and white camo work?

well, since mustard-yellow and brown apparently 'work' for the russians, go ahead.

Hehe, point taken.

[Itailian Maifias]

So, how does this sound as a preliminary:
- F-16 for land based operations and a supporting air superiority role
- F/A-18 for naval operations and naval air superiority
- F-22 in small numbers for interception and main air superiority.

Meh, honestly, you really don't need the Raptor. F-15E does just a good job. You could even strip it down and re-fit it with NS avionics

[Ramsetia]

So, how does this sound as a preliminary:
- F-16 for land based operations and a supporting air superiority role
- F/A-18 for naval operations and naval air superiority
- F-22 in small numbers for interception and main air superiority.

Meh, honestly, you really don't need the Raptor. F-15E does just a good job. You could even strip it down and re-fit it with NS avionics

Or, apparently, the F-15SE or F-15 ACTIVE if he wanted to run around outside of the standard F-15 framework.

[Minnysota]

So, how does this sound as a preliminary:
- F-16 for land based operations and a supporting air superiority role
- F/A-18 for naval operations and naval air superiority
- F-22 in small numbers for interception and main air superiority.

Meh, honestly, you really don't need the Raptor. F-15E does just a good job. You could even strip it down and re-fit it with NS avionics

Damn you IM! You beat me to it!

(I was literally typing this up, but then I got that preview thing cause IM posted just before me )

[Itailian Maifias]

Meh, honestly, you really don't need the Raptor. F-15E does just a good job. You could even strip it down and re-fit it with NS avionics

Or, apparently, the F-15SE or F-15 ACTIVE if he wanted to run around outside of the standard F-15 framework.

That too, but I was only listing variants that have been put into service

[Itailian Maifias]

- F-15E for land based operations and air superiority
- F/A-18 for naval operations and naval air superiority

Updated, Y/N?

Perfect

[Amerikians]

- F-15E for land based operations and air superiority
- F/A-18 for naval operations and naval air superiority

Updated, Y/N?

Perfect

Seconded. @ Perfect

[Soviet Haaregrad]

- F-15E for land based operations and air superiority
- F/A-18 for naval operations and naval air superiority

Updated, Y/N?

N.

You don't want F-15Es for air superiority. The only reason they're intended to be retired so late by the US, after the other F-15s, is role (tactical strike) and airframe hours.

Some F-15Es for air-to-ground operations would be useful, but offset them with some amount of F-15s equipped for the counter-air role.

Or also consider an all F/A-18 force, with F/A-18 models at sea, F/A-18L models on land and F/A-18E/F/G models as your heavy fighters, and possibly even a Super Hornet stripped down to resemble with L configuration for a heavy land based fighter.

[Itailian Maifias]

Ok so...

FA-18 E/F Superhornet for naval air superiority and naval general use
FA-15 for land based general use and air superiority
FA-15E for land based attack

Yes, looks good, Perfect rather

[Soviet Haaregrad]

Ok so...

FA-18 E/F Superhornet for naval air superiority and naval general use
FA-15 for land based general use and air superiority
FA-15E for land based attack

Sounds good.
If you decide you need something lighter/cheaper to offset the F-15s, look into the F-16XL.

[Grays Harbor]

Fleet Air Arm
Royal Air Force

[Narexia]

Fleet Air Arm
Royal Air Force

Very nice GH, very nice!

[Nerotika]

We use what we designate the SF71 which is basically the YF-23 but with slightly more advanced radar systems and EMP protective systems. Usually armed with an array of multipurpose missiles and lightweight chemical based bombs.

http://www.ericksmodels.com/gallery/f22yf23/yf23-2.jpg

[Lykosia]

Hmmm....
well, the Royal Lykosian Air Force mainly uses these jet fighters:

>SU-27 Flanker

>F-35 Lightning

>F-16 Fighting Falcon

[Svobodnyh zemel]

Svobodnyh Zemel's main fighter is the Sukhoi PAK FA.

[Lubyak]

The primary fighter aircraft of the Dominion's mighty Naval Fleets is the VTOL MiG-33 Fighter.

http://portal.commandandconquer.com/SiteAssets/factions/images/units/RA3_Mig2.jpg

The primary land based fighter is the Su-27

[Arkinesia]

These are MODIFIED specs NOT THOSE OF THE REAL WORLD AIRCRAFT!

We use a very extensive range of combat aircraft all of which are based off of Russian/ former Soviet designs
Abbreviations: QTY: quantity R = recon, LR= long range, LRB = long range bomber, LRR = long range recon, LRI = long range interceptor, EWS = electronic warfare/surveillance, AB = afterburners, SV = standard variant, TU = training unit, LRI-LRB = combination variant, LRAS = long range anti-shipping

I shall start with the mig's!

MiG-21N: QTY: 1,275

Specs:
Crew: 1 SV or 2 TU
Engine: 1 R-35 @ 20,000 lbs/foot thrust w/AB
Range: 3,500km
Speed: mach 2.5
Payload: 8 pylons 12,000 lbs
Gun: 1 GSh-23L with 540 rounds and 1 NN-37 with 60 rounds


MiG-23N: QTY: 2,540

Specs: (windened for two engines)
Crew: 1 or 2 on EWS, LRI, LRR, TU
Engine: 2 Vi-221C's @ 33,700 lbs/foot thrust each w/AB
Range: 3,500km internal fuel except R (recon) 4,800km
Speed: mach 3.2 A & TU, 3.5 all other variants
Payload: 10 pylons 17lbs of payload all except "B", 14 pylons for 20,000 lbs "B"
Gun: 1 GSh-23L with 720 rounds "A" & "TU", 1 GSh-23L with 900 rounds and 1 NN-37 with 80 shells "B", 1 GSh-6-23 with 1,200 rounds all others.

MiG-25N: QTY 550

Specs:
Crew:1 SV or 2 on TU, LRI, LRR & LRB (long range bomber)
Engine: 2 DF-31's @ 48,000 lbs/foot thrust each w/AB
Range: 4,400km SV & TU, 6,000km LRI, LRR & LRB
Speed: Mach 2.2 low altitude, 3.8 high alt. SV & TU and - mach 2.5 low, 4.25 high LRI, LRB, LRR variants
Payload: 6 pylons for 10,000 lbs
Gun: 1 GSh-23L with 360 rounds on SV & TU, 1 GSh-6-23 with 1,000 rounds all others

MiG-27KN: QTY: 485

Specs:
Crew:1 or 2 TU
Engine: 2 Vi-221C's (same as MiG-23N)
Range: 4,000km on internal fuel
Speed: mach 3.2
Payload: 12 pylons for 24,000 lbs load
Gun: 1 GSh-6-30 with 800 rounds

MiG-29N: QTY: 3,770

Specs:
Crew:1 SV or 2 TU
Engine: 2 La-21's @ 25,000 lbs/foot thrust each w/AB
Range: 2,500km on internal fuel
Speed: mach 2.5
Payload: 9 pylons 14,000 lbs ordinance
Gun: 1 GSh-30-1 with 275 rounds

MiG-31NBM QTY: 350 + 50 more on order

Specs:
Crew: 2 all versions
Engine: 2 SD-50's @ 58,750 lbs/foot thrust each w/AB -
OR - 2 SD-53's @ 71,250 lbs/foot thrust each w/AB LRI-LRB
Range: 4,800km SV and 7,350km LRI-LRB
Speed: mach 4.6 SV - OR - mach 5.4 LRI-LRB
Payload: 8 pylons for 20,000 lbs load
Gun: 1 GSh-30-2 with 600 rounds

MiG-35N: QTY: 120 + 40 more on order

Specs:
Crew: 1 SV or 2 TU
Engine: 2 AL-31N's @ 32,770 lbs/foot thrust each w/AB
Range: 3,200km int. fuel
Speed: mach 2.75
Payload: 10 pylons for 20,000 lbs
Gun: 1 GSh-30-2 with 350 rounds

And now the Sukhoi's!

Su-15N: QTY: 675

Specs:
Crew: 1 SV & 2 TU
Engine: 2 R-37B's @ 24,000 lbs/foot thrust each w/AB
Range: 5,400km
Speed: mach 3.5
Payload: 6 pylons 10,000 lbs
Gun: 1 GSh-30-2 with 400 rounds and 2 NN-37's with 80 rounds each

Su-27N: QTY: 5,480

Specs:
Crew: 1 SV or 2 TU
Engine: 2 La-24's @ 30,000 lbs/foot thrust each w/AB
Range: 4,000km
Speed: mach 2.5
Payload: 12 pylons for 18,500 lbs
Gun: 1 GSh-30-2 with 400 rounds

Su-30N: QTY: 3,275

Specs:
Crew: 2 SV, 3 TU & LR
Engine: 2 SL-44's @ 37,500 lbs/foot thrust each w/AB
Range: 4,800km or 6,400 km LR
Speed: mach 2.5
Payload: 17 pylons for 25,000 lbs
Gun: 1 GSh-30-2 with 600 rounds

Su-33N: QTY: 400 + 50 more on order

Specs:
Crew: 1 SV
Engine: 2 SL-44's
Range: 4,000km
Speed: mach 2.85
Payload: 14 pylons for 21,000 lbs
Gun: 1 GSh-30-2 with 400 rounds

Su-34N: QTY: 875 + 120 more on order

Specs:
Crew: 2 on SV - or - 4 on TU, LR, LRB, LRAS, EWS
Engine: 2 SL-45's @ 41,250 lbs/foot thrust each w/AB
Range: 6,000km SV - OR - 9,000km LR, LRB, LRAS
Speed: mach 2.5 ~ 2.8 depending on fuel and payload carried
Payload: 16 pylons for 30,000 lbs load
Gun: 1 GSh-6-30 with 1,000 rounds

Su-35N: QTY: 330 + 70 more on order

Specs:
Crew: 1 only
Engine: 2 SL-44's
Range: 4,000km
Speed: mach 3.25+
Payload: 14 pylons for 22,000 lbs
Gun: 1 GSh-30-2 with 500 rounds

Su-37N: QTY: 120 + 60 more on order

Specs:
Crew: 1 only
Engine: 2 SL-45's
Range: 5,300km
Speed: mach 3.6+
Payload: 16 pylons for 24,000 lbs
Gun: 1 GSh-30-2 with 600 rounds

PAK-FA (T-50) QTY: 12 + 36 more on order

Specs:
Crew: 1 only
Engine: SL-50's @ 50,000 lbs/foot each thrust w/AB
Range: 6,700km
Speed: mach 4+
Payload: 16 pylons for 21,000 lbs
Gun: 1 GSh-6-30 with 800 rounds

As a fighternik, I'm going to be a picky little son of a bitch and tell you why your air force is sheer crap.

1. With Fulcrums, what the FUCK do you have Fishbeds, Su-24s, and MiG-25s for? I mean damn.
2. Su-15 Flagons are shit, and they were shit when new. They were a plane designed for interim use until a better interceptor came along. The Fishbed had superior avionics.
3. The Su-27, Su-30, Su-33, Su-35, Su-37, MiG-35, and Sukhoi T-50 do the same thing so why do you have all of them? The Flanker is a shitty series of jets anyway. Stick to the T-50 or Terminator, and junk the rest, or just do the smart thing and scrap all seven and use the MiG Project 1.44, which is the odds-on favorite as the base for the FGFA (the real jackpot of Soviet fighter development).
4. The T-50 is not even aerodynamically capable of mach 4+. I don't even claim that on my mildly wanked X-02 Wyvern, which is about 2040s in terms of tech. I feel antsy claiming the Mach 3.2 I claim for it.
5. What kinds of missiles do these rickety shitbuckets carry?

- F-15E for land based operations and air superiority
- F/A-18 for naval operations and naval air superiority

Updated, Y/N?

N.

You don't want F-15Es for air superiority. The only reason they're intended to be retired so late by the US, after the other F-15s, is role (tactical strike) and airframe hours.

Some F-15Es for air-to-ground operations would be useful, but offset them with some amount of F-15s equipped for the counter-air role.

Or also consider an all F/A-18 force, with F/A-18 models at sea, F/A-18L models on land and F/A-18E/F/G models as your heavy fighters, and possibly even a Super Hornet stripped down to resemble with L configuration for a heavy land based fighter.

Why blow all the cash on F/A-18s when you could do NS F-14Ds? Or F-16E/F|F-16 Block 60 (which are in service irl)?

With Tomcats in the air superiority role and Vipers in ground attack role you could have an awesome air force for pennies. Plus the F-16 carries AGM-65 Maverick.