Falcon 4 Allied Force Mac Torrent
Garcia Miller
Are those the 3 main Falcon 4 big mods? Are there others? If those are all of them then I'd like to ask the question: which one would you say is the best, or if there isn't an outright winnner then what is each ones strengths and weaknesses?
--Allied Force is the last and only official patch since Micropose went down. It is (comparative speaking) easier to connect on line but 10 year behind any other game (big surprise coming from a 10 year old game :D ). It is easier to access and more available since it is still in stores. Graphics are awful and so are the avionics compare to other mods.
-- Open Falcon is the avionics mod. Some people have been successful using this mod on line. I have problems with the program that lunches it online ( repace luncher). The avionics are very complicated, to the point that the game comes with a avionics manual (BMS-34, same format as the real aircraft) Radios have to be working properly to fly online ( or so I hear).
-- Red viper strong point is the graphics. Great effects (I know, It can not compare to other game, blah, blah) and cool features like 6DOF HUD and really cool JADAM utilization. You can lunch them to coordinates and the bomb will tell you when in range. Very hard to play online and again some other problems.
Both OF and RV require original Falcon 4.0 CD which is kind of hard to find now a day. Some people have been successful installing them over allied force but not sure if it is true. A lot of people had very different experiences with the mods. Some run RV because it runs better on their comp, some prefer OF.
Both RV and OF have quite good 3d models and skins are dds, with AF though its more stable less ctds and works very well online. OF is good online when it works the data link works in mp allowing you to send and receive air and ground tgt data to other players. The IVC(In game Voice Comms) is optional in MP but if you setup your data cartridge right it doesn't become much of an issue.
Inflight refuelling is good in AF you can refuel as a package and also the AI will refuel in sequence they are also good for missions. Quite reliable to hit tgts and fly back to base only drawback is a lack of detailed tgt assignment and popup execution. Another good thing for AF is dynamic weather where you can take off and the weather can be worse or better over the tgt area.
OF includes IVC (Internal Voice Communication. Basically, you have to manually tune your VHF and UHF radio to be able to talk to the tower and hear your package. Same when you fly between humans. If you're not on the same frequency, you won't hear your buddy. It works like in real life. The Dash34 is well made and it's easy to understand and very immersive.
That's right, during the briefing, you can build up your Data Transfert Cartridge which will display on your HSD the informations that you want. You can place threat circles (yellow circles), HSD lines to square a zone or a no-flight zone. You can set some radio frequencies and set default pres-elections (so you don't have to manually tune the frequency but just choose the preset, which is quicker, you can also build your counter measure system (#chaff drop, interval, repeat ; same with flares). This again is well explained in the Dash34.
Also you can manually control the Datalink, you can send your wingman (human or AI) a bandit position on the air, on the ground, you can see where your package is. You can add a max number of 8 planes to send and receive informations from. Same, read Dash34.
I personally fly Open Falcon. I look for an advanced avionics. I'm impressed by this sim everytime I fly it. The realism provided by the ability to set your DTC before flying, change frequencies in multiplayer, control the datalink and so on is really amazing.
So my F4 and my F2 have been sitting in packing for the best part of a decade. Recently I upgraded LOMAC FC and have quite enjoyed the immersion, however after seeing persistent accolades of Open Falcon, I downloaded 4.5 and installed it.
I can unequivocally state that I'm now (again) experiencing the immersion I haven't felt since flying D.I.'s Tornado and ED's Flanker 1.5.; and I thought I was over American planes :music_whistling:!
IMO Falcon 4 with it's ascendancy to Open Falcon is THE masterpiece of flight simulation, that turns out to be the greatest there ever was ... I sincerely hope the DCS experience will continue along that vein.
Wishlist Modules - A variety of utility aircraft to better reflect the support role. E.g. Flying the Hornet ... big yawn ... flying a Caribou on a beer run to Singapore? Count me in. Extracting a Recon Patrol from a hastily prepared landing strip at a random 6 figure grid reference? Now yer talking!
i am flying free falcon 5.5 at the moment..its very good... install on to XP.. thou ..as it crashes some time with win7..ff5..is getting better, you can almost fly any aircraft ..graphics are good to ..
Yes its an old thread... thank you to all for giving input. I always played Longbow 2 during 1998 I heard of falcon 4 but never got to try it. I Just bought it online amazon. Allied Force. I will try open falcon soon. I'm sure plenty has changed since these last 2 years an this discussion. But I really want to see what this falcon is all about:)
To get IMO the best Falcon experience until now go to benchmarksims.org , grab BMS 4.32, update 1,2,3 and you are on for a BIG surpirse. If you need help getting your hands on an original CD contact me over on the BMS forums...my username is mykinge
An F-16 Fighting Falcon from the 36th Fighter Squadron at Osan Air Base, South Korea, lands here after a mission during Commando Sling 04-3. U.S. and Singaporean Airmen trained together using realistic dissimilar aircraft air-to-air combat tactics. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Val Gempis)
An F-16C Falcon fighter jet assigned to the 64th Aggressor Squadron, taxis prior to a Red Flag-Nellis 21-3 mission at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev., Aug. 4, 2021. Aggressor pilots are highly skilled in U.S. and adversary tactics. They provide realism to U.S. and allied forces during training exercises. (U.S. Air Force photo by William R. Lewis)
An F-16C Fighting Falcon assigned to the 85th Test Evaluation Squadron shoots an AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile, or AMRAAM over testing ranges near Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., March 19, 2019. The AMRAAM is a modern beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile capable of all-weather day-and-night operations. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Joshua Hoskins)
An U.S. F-16 Fighting Falcon flies towards Rimini, Italy to join with the Italian air force in a training mission. U.S. Air Forces from the 510th Fighter Squadron, Aviano Air Base, Italy and Italian Air Forces from the 83rd Combat Search and Rescue Squadron, Rimini, Italy, participated in a 4-day training mission from Feb. 5 to Feb. 8, 2001. The mission involved U.S. F-16 aircrews locating and authenticating survivors and coordinate pickup with Italian rescue crews. F-16s were also tasked with escorting helicopters to protect them from air and ground threats. This is the first ever tasking of a full-time combat search and rescue mission for F-16s from the 510th Fighter Squadron. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Dave Ahlschwede)
Lt. Col. Mike Cosby, 177th Fighter Wing commander, flies an F-16C block 25 aircraft from here to Atlantic City International Airport, N.J. The wing participated in Combat Archer training at Tyndall AFB, Fla. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Don Taggart)
An F-16 Fighting Falcon maneuvers into a refueling position after an air-combat maneuvering sortie over Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex June 18, 2021, in support of exercise RED FLAG-Alaska 21-2. Approximately 1,500 service members are expected to fly, maintain and support from more than 100 units during the exercise. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Mario Calabro)
A U.S. Air Force F-16 Fighting Falcon flies over Afghanistan, March 17, 2020. The F-16 Fighting Falcon is a compact, multi-role fighter aircraft that delivers war- winning airpower to the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Matthew Lotz)
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) launched Operation ALLIED FORCE in response to Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic's campaign of ethnic cleansing of Kosovar Albanians. While the complex roots of ethnic tensions and violence in Southeastern Europe date many hundreds of years, Slobodan Milosevic initiated a new campaign of ethnic violence in 1989. This violence had taken the lives of more than 250,000 people by 1995, and spurred Kosovar Albanians desire for independence. When violence between Serb forces and Kosovar Albanians continued to escalate, the United Nations Security Council warned of an "impending humanitarian catastrophe" if action was not taken. Although a United Nations team travelled to Kosovo to observe the situation, they were helpless while Serbian forces attacked unarmed civilians. When peace negotiations were held in the spring of 1999, Milosevic massed forces along the Kosovo border. The Serbian President ultimately rejected all peace proposals and directed 40,000 troops into Kosovo, resulting in a massive refugee crisis.
Although NATO Secretary General Javier Solana did not authorize air strikes against Serbia until January 30, 1999, U.S. Air Force planners had worked out nearly 40 unique campaign options since the summer of 1998. The final air campaign plan was a "coercive operation," its primary purpose to force Milosevic's withdrawal from Kosovo. NATO leaders also rejected the use of ground troops, believing that air power could achieve the operation' s objective. The air campaign consisted of three phases: phase one focused on Serbian air defense systems; phase two called for strikes against military targets in Serbia below the 44th parallel and south to the Kosovo border; and in phase three airstrikes would seek targets north of the 44th parallel, including striking Serbia's capital Belgrade.
The first attacks occurred on the night of 24 March 1999, using 250 U.S. Aircraft, including 120 land based fighters, seven B-52s , six B-2s , ten reconnaissance aircraft, ten combat search and rescue aircraft, three airborne command and control platforms, and nearly 40 aerial refueling tankers. In addition, thirteen NATO member countries contributed aircraft. B-52s launched conventional air launched cruise missiles (CALCM) while U.S. and British ships and submarines fired Tomahawk land attack missiles (TLAMs). During the first night, the U.S. and NATO flew 400 missions, including 120 strike missions against 40 targets. On the second day of operations, U.S. Air Force F-15s shot down two Serbian MiG-29s, while another F-15C scored a kill the next day. Air Force and NATO aircraft faced significantly more effective air defenses than what they had recently encountered in Iraq, and pilots were initially instructed to stay above 15,000 feet to minimize risk.
When the phase one strikes did not achieve their intended effect on Milosevic, NATO proceeded with phase two strikes south of the 44th parallel. During this phase, the U.S. Air Force introduced B-1 bombers while NATO forces also averaged just 50 strikes per night. Realizing that it would take a more intensive effort to force Milosevic to withdraw his troops from Kosovo, NATO moved to phase three on the ninth day of the air offensive. U.S. Navy aircraft joined the operation on April 6, with the arrival of the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt. Operation ALLIED FORCE had struggled to meet its objectives for several reasons, including poor weather, difficult terrain, and problems inherent in coordinating 18 allied air forces.
By the end of the third week, Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, General Wesley K. Clark, had a force of nearly 1,000 aircraft, 54 percent of which belonged to the U.S. Air Force. NATO's master target list reflected the pressure to escalate the air offensive as it grew from 169 to more than 970 targets by the time the campaign ended in June. The increased pressure also included strikes in Belgrade to demonstrate to Milosevic that the air campaign had reached a new level. For example, U.S. Air Force F-117 stealth fighters struck the electrical plant at Novi Sad, which cut off electricity to 70 percent of Serbia. Additionally, destruction of infrastructure targets resulted in more than 100,000 Serbians losing their jobs. Although there were flaws in target selection and verification, as well as civilian casualties during the air campaign, NATO tried to minimize the loss of life through strict rules of engagement, such as requiring positive visual identification before launching weapons.
During the 78-day campaign, sorties peaked in late May and early June. For example, on May 26, NATO aircraft flew nearly 900 sorties, and by June 2, 1999, Milosevic agreed to end the conflict. The terms of the agreement stipulated that Milosevic would withdraw his forces from Kosovo, a NATO-led force would provide security for the province; refugees would be allowed to return to their homes, and Kosovo would be granted self-rule under Yugoslav sovereignty. On June 10, the Serbian government ratified the agreement and Serbian forces began their withdrawal from Kosovo as elements of the Kosovo Force (KFOR) began to arrive. During ALLIED FORCE, NATO aircrews flew 38,004 sorties, 10,484 of which were strike sorties. During ALLIED FORCE, 29 percent of munitions dropped were precision guided, although 90 percent of aircraft were capable of employing them. The Air Force struck 421 fixed targets, 35 percent of which were destroyed. Overall, the U.S. Air Force flew 30,018 sorties, including 11,480 airlift, 8,889 fighter, 322 bomber, 6,959 tanker, 1,038 Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR), 834 Special Operations, and 496 unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) missions. Perhaps more importantly for the Air Force, the Air Expeditionary Force (AEF) concept was successfully used for the first time during ALLIED FORCE as units rotated into Aviano Air Base, Italy, under the AEF construct. Operation ALLIED FORCE also witnessed the first combat use of the B-2 Stealth bomber and the first significant employment of remotely piloted aircraft.
Capt Gregory Ball, USAFR, Ph.D.