Read it. And as usual, the airedales completely ignore and discount everything done by Reactor Department…
I mean, if Homer Simpson can do it…
It is not only the reactor guys. In most aviation books not even the crew chiefs get more than one mention.
It is always the high-profile guys who get all the praise, but having been part of the military makes me know that there are lots and lots of guys behind such an effort, without them there would be no pilots/special ops/whatever running or flying around being “heroes”. 
It is a machine, and they are just the visible parts. Most work is being done by the invisible guys. And we have to thank them for their work.
Indeed. Whenever I’m in the hangar, I offer to buy our mechanics a soda or snack from the vending machine, and I try to make sure to get them gift cards for Christmas. Less because I think it will help the quality of their work, but more to help me out when I get in trouble with something mechanical on the road (or if I screw up a write-up or MEL in the AD&D…they will help me fix it…)
Aviation books are inherently that way. Which may explain why I really enjoy grunt books a bit better. The selfless attitude of Nathaniel Fick in One Bullet Away and how he recognizes everyone that contributes to the effort (while pointing out the ridiculousness of some of the higher ups) is a great read.
I’ve also found some good books by engineer/pilots like Milton Thomas At the Edge of Space and Ben Rich’s Skunkworks - both really good reads.
I’m currently struggling through Dan Hampton’s Viper Pilot which is pretty good from the flying standpoint, but his brash and dismissive attitude of all the people that helped him do what he did is pretty off-putting. I mean, I get that the fighter pilot has to be that kind of guy…but the way he writes about makes you sorta not like him, but then he tells some self depricating stories that make you sorta like him. Plus I did like the political incorrectness of some of his tales…
Any-who…oh…F-5E Tiger. Yeah. Sign me up. LOL
Well, to be fair, you could probably write a book about the Reactor Department, but then you’d have to kill us all.
Yeah, I also read Hampton’s book, and he comes across pretty arrogant. Almost as bad as Chuck Yeager.
I have a couple of buddies who were enlisted in the Air Force and worked fighters, one ordie, one Airframes, and they seem convinced this is pretty standard for a lot of the fighter types because of the massive separation in the Air Force between fighter pilots and the maintainers- but never having experienced that world, that’s third -hand.
As for the Navy Airedale types, it just always rankles me when they proclaim that the skittles on the roof are the hardest working, most professional sailors in the fleet- they always forget that there’s a whole score of folks who keep that boat moving pointy end first through the water, whether or not there are planes onboard, and whether or not those planes are flying.
Anyway, rant complete.
I don’t think that you can throw a blanket over all flight crews and say that they don’t appreciate their maintenance crews. At least living with a fight pilot for 18 years, I never heard dad mention them with other than admiration and appreciation. It depends on the professionalism of the organization I suppose. Can’t speak for the Navy, but I imagine that it’s pretty much the same, especially in time of war. The mission is usually not completed satisfactorily without teamwork all the way around.
Dad when he was Ops Officer of the 335th.
Is it wrong I want to fly navy just so I can write a book after I get out and purposefully neglect to mention the reactor department?
By then the carriers will be solar powered or run on urine or something…
That needs to be funded. Now. To extend range you’d stock the ship with additional coffee and beer. Morale would skyrocket. The Navy would never need to run another recruitment ad.
Sorry to turn back on topic 
is there a list of weapons that are to be modelled with this module?
Just wondering if this will fix my fast jet mud mover itch until the f18
http://www.belsimtek.com/news/1558/
News
Home > News > F-5E Tiger II. The armament that is planned to develop
F-5E Tiger II. The armament that is planned to develop
The light tactical fighter F-5E Tiger II is developed primarily for air combat with enemy fighters, bombers, reconnaissance planes, and helicopters. Two 20-mm caliber cannons with 280 rounds per barrel and two air-to-air heat-seeking missiles AIM-9 can be used for this task.
At the same time, capabilities of onboard weapon systems and the presence of five hardpoints, allow employment of unguided and guided (external laser source) bombs, cluster bombs and unguided rockets in airstrike missions.
The following armament is planned to be available for the player:
- Two 20-mm caliber M-39A3 cannons with rate of fire of 1500-1700 rounds per minute and ammunition of 280 rounds per gun;
- Two heat-seeking missiles (AIM-9B or AIM-9P) (currently we are considering these versions);
- Unguided bombs:
· 5x Mk-82
· 3x Mk-83
· 1x Mk-84
· 5x Mk-82 Snakeye
· 5x M-117
· MER-5 5x Mk-82
· MER-5 5x Mk-82 Snakeye;
- Cluster bombs:
· 5хCBU-52B;
- Guided bombs:
· 4x GBU-12 (buddy lasing or ground laser designator);
- Unguided rockets:
· 4x LAU-61 (x19) (LAU-3 or LAU-60 could be added later)
· 4x LAU-68 (x7);
- Flare dispenser:
· SUU-25C.
All the items, mentioned above, at this moment, have different status of readiness, but we are already sure that it will be a very interesting and playable module!
Well, you can do some damage with all that stuff. Does anyone know if it has any type of CCIP or is it Kentucky windage?
HUD doesnt have any CCIP…so probably just like L-39ZA.
Here’s a nice documentary about F-5
And here I am in the back seat cause I can’t afford to buy it this month
Z tables. Z tables for daaaaaaaaays
Its a shame this never sold.
F5 live on youtube right now!
