As this aircraft is neither in the list of aircraft of Canada's air forces nor in the list of of the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) my guess is, that this is one of Top Gun´s fantasy aircraft. As it looks very similar to the North American FJ-1 Fury, and even has the "Fury" in its (fantasy) name, I would use the technical datas of that aircraft.
It was based on the original straight-winged version of the F-86 Sabre and the FJ-2 Fury used by the U.S. Navy. Only 3 were ever built as it lacked the required performance and also access to German data on swept wings lead the U.S. to go with a swept wing version which significantly improved performance. The Canadians built a lot of F-86 Sabres as well. This is strictly a fantasy aircraft.Hi All,
The EGMII version 1.15, which will contain air units. I put units used and built after World War II in this accessory. Now, I compiled and grouped air units according to their type and use. I collect units that are recently used and actually used in the present. I will group is organized by their speed, Mach number, along with their type.
I encountered a little problem that I can't find any data about this aircraft: Canadair CL-10 Fury Mk.I RCN)
ThanksIt was based on the original straight-winged version of the F-86 Sabre and the FJ-2 Fury used by the U.S. Navy. Only 3 were ever built as it lacked the required performance and also access to German data on swept wings lead the U.S. to go with a swept wing version which significantly improved performance. The Canadians built a lot of F-86 Sabres as well. This is strictly a fantasy aircraft.
I don´t think that the mach number is a good scale for combat range. If a plane is faster, it mostly consumes more fuel. A good scale for combat range in my eyes - well - would be combat range.EGMII 1.15 will include helicopter(transport, attack), Turboprop and Jet powered aircraft units(transport, fighter, etc) and stealth aircraft units and UAV
I am in the process of organizing the units. I group Jet powered aircraft according to their speed. Considering the Mach number:
Mach number:
speed:.....................................................................................................
Subsonic= <0.8 (Mach); <609 (mph); <980 (km/h)
transonic= 0.8–1.2 (Mach); 609–914 (mph); 980–1,470 (km/h)
supersonic= 1.2–5.0 (Mach); 915–3,806 (mph); 1,470–6,126 (km/h)
hipersonic=5.0–10.0 (Mach);3,806–7,680 (mph); 6,126–12,251 (km/h)
The mach number in the game will control the size of the operating space, so a transonic type JET will have a smaller operating space than a supersonic type JET.
It's incredible how much you can learn while editing based on the flight description.
Civinator thanks,I don´t think that the mach number is a good scale for combat range. If a plane is faster, it mostly consumes more fuel. A good scale for combat range in my eyes - well - would be combat range.I used that scale in CCM for the range of all classes of aircraft.
Going over the speed of sound or Mach 1, increases your fuel consumption drastically, more than doubling it depending on the engine, while more power does not lead to a corresponding range increase. At Mach 2 you may be burning 4 times the amount of fuel per minute as you would below Mach 1. Once a jet dogfight starts, speed drops to below Mach 1. Combat range is the best judge of combat distance.Civinator thanks,
What you wrote is a good idea, it's worth introducing combat distance, but it seems like both are the same because greater distance also means greater fuel consumption.
The Mach number obviously increases the combat distance and the differences in the armament of earlier JET powered aircraft and newer JETs increase their variability.
There are countries that don't mind using much more fuel because they have such reserves. By variety here I mean the combination of weapon efficiency and speed, which means greater distance. I want to test how the difference in unit speed (which is reflected in distance) and weaponry creates interesting situations in the game.
If what I'm planning doesn't work, I'll consider what you used in CCM.
Yes, CCM 2 and 3 were created by using the Quintillus editor. Especially the values for cultural victory in CCM are far beyond the limits of the Firaxis editors.@Civinator
Another thing... My question is, did you use the Cross-Platform Editor for CCM and did you utilize its capabilities?
Going over the speed of sound or Mach 1, increases your fuel consumption drastically, more than doubling it depending on the engine, while more power does not lead to a corresponding range increase. At Mach 2 you may be burning 4 times the amount of fuel per minute as you would below Mach 1. Once a jet dogfight starts, speed drops to below Mach 1. Combat range is the best judge of combat distance.
Yes, CCM 2 and 3 were created by using the Quintillus editor. Especially the values for cultural victory in CCM are far beyond the limits of the Firaxis editors.
Of course these virtual resources can be used for unit construction. You can even set those virtual resources produced by a building to be available in all cities connected by a trade net to the city with that resource producing building or if that virtual resource will be only available in the city where it is produced. CCM 3 mostly uses the second option to limit the production of certain units (per example battleships) to only some coastal cities. CCM 3 also holds some resource icons for some resources you have mentioned, per example Diesel and steel.the only question is whether these can be set up so that they can be used for unit construction?
As Civinator mentioned this works well. I have the Steel Mill produce steel (requires coal + iron). Steel is required for modern ships, tanks, etc. I might also "steal" Civinator's idea in CCM for electrical power.another topic..., If I remember correctly, @Civinator the only question is whether these can be set up so that they can be used for unit construction?