tflash
-
Posts
2886 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by tflash
-
-
Anyways after the last patch I have really difficulties to detect head-on Mig-21's and Mig-23's with the Hornet radar. at 20K I can only start to detect them reliably at somewhat more than 10 miles, whether I do RWS, TWS, HI/MED/Interleave, the contact is faint and the lock almost immediately broken. It is only when I am in boresight mode that I can get a stable lock.
That is a serious degradation over the earlier versions.
-
1
-
-
On the "one design fits all" question: I'm not sure they could have made a navalised version of the F-16. You need to put the bigger gear somewhere, you need strengthened airframe and you need more low-speed controlability hence maybe a bigger wing. So if they would have opted for a one size fits all for 4th gen, it would have been the Hornet. We would have missed out on one of the very best fighters ever!
I also think the F-35A has in some aspects a suboptimal design due to the F-35B requirements. It could have been slicker, and cheaper.
It' still a magnficent aircraft of course, ,and with the future adaptive cycle engine could really come of age.
-
I must say I like the ATFLIR very much! Don't know why really, but it's interface seems more natural. (I have no clue of course how it would be in reality). OK less zoom, but I find keeping a broader overview also important. And yes, if you fly Navy / carrier based then you should load the ATFLIR!
-
Maybe add that Dubai Runway 12L doesn't have active ILS regardless of the wind, You should use runway 30R to land, as the radio correctly indicates. Maybe it's because they always want to take off over the sea?
-
Well, I guess it's official now: https://www.airforcemag.com/usaf-to-cut-f-35-buy-in-future-years-defense-plan/
It's a boondoggle. Good engineering offers capability at an anticipated cost. That's not really the case here. F-35 is for sure a better Harrier and an excellent F-117 - both niche aircraft - but simply too costly to replace the F-16 in substantial numbers. Overhyping "first day of war" in an century of decades-long conflicts is a bit tricky. Don't forget Pearl Harbor was a "first day of war".
-
Same here ! Too bad, current combat operations are heavily intertwined with civilian traffic so ILS should work, and should be a priority since eg in situations where you have two parallell runways often IFR rules always apply for safe separation and this requires ILS.
-
Was really funny, I was practicing some landings at Batumi in IFR with several aircraft, and when I tried to land with the Mig-29G, it bounced like hell and I always crashed. What I found so strange was that I tried to land at about 250 km/h on the HUD (Mi-g-29 landing speed), until I noticed something strange: it indicated a desired landing speed of only 140 !
Now that seemed to work. It is only then that I realizd the Mig-29G displays the HUD speed in knots, not km/h !!!
A flight in the Mig-29A confirmed everything: here I could easily land at 250 on the HUD!
-
1
-
-
Oops just found out: WP increment *long*, sets T0; I was always pressing WP increment short!
-
1
-
-
Sorry but I do no longer manage to get the JDAM symbology, and cannot get a launch authorisation anymore for teh JDAM. I'm in TPOD DES / TPOD DES with a target designated. What do I press next?
-
On 4/8/2021 at 12:17 AM, Pilotasso said:
My take on this, and ignoring all sensationalism on youtube, is that I always felt that there was a fighter gap below the F-35 on the USA and indeed many of European countries, and others in Asia.
There is a strong demand for a lighter jet that can perform QRA, Intercept, dogfighting and lighter A-G tasks better and cost far less per hour. The Gripen now occupies that slot but it is the only option, and is a bit too light for some requirements, a slighter heavier plane that could be a true F-16 successor is perfectly viable complement type.
If we ever see live images of planes taking off for the first night of a new conflict, those will be the F-35's for countries that can afford them, then F15EX's and then the new light jet as the work horse after advanced threats have been taken out.
I agree. It's simple: there will in the end be less F-35's fielded than originally planned, which is not so unusual (I remember this was hotly debated on this forum years ago) , and aircraft will be continued for which the F-35 was claimed to be also a replacement. They are already on the lookout for an A-10C replacement, a SpecOps light aircraft, and as you say a lighter, true F-16 follow-up (such as Gripen E ? ) or something based on the Boeing T7 RedHawk would make a lot of sense. The Navy is already planning a next gen Super Hornet replacement. It is absolutely not clear what the role of the F-35C is in this all, I guess they will also reduce the order. Btritain is rumoured to think about cutting down their F-35B follow-on order also.
The only reason Belgium, one of the 4 first European F-16 countries, bought the F-35 is because the Dutch already bought them and we work closely together. In reality we will normally never fly First Day of War missions, and we simply cannot afford to fly +35.000 $ / flight hour jets. That will very soon become a major problem once the F-35 gets delivered.
-
I think the most positive thing that came out of the F-35 development is that they now know how they would do everything differently!
- No more mixing incompatible requirements such as USAF F-16 replacement and Marines V/STOL requirement, once you realize that all doesn't fit in one you understand that one doesn't fit all!
- Ditch the concurrent development model that yielded one of the most protracted development cycles in fighter history
- Rapid Digital prototyping - man 1995 is soooo long ago, another century really !
- Forget the ALIS system outright: a good old mechanic is what you need!
- Only design a pilot into an aircraft when they are absolutely needed and have added value over drones and networks
-
1
-
Hi, I noticed that when I target individual vehicles with the TPOD, while a Waypoint is active in the vicinity, and drop LS-500's, somehow magically the WP is also bombed by an invisible extra bomb.
You see this clearly in this track, where I drop 2 bombs, and two targets are destroyed + one extra, the building on the Waypoint.
Kind weird!
FT JF-17 CH SL LS-6.miz FT LS-500 JF-17 strange hit on WP.trk
-
I guess i just flew too high trying from 6 to 7K; I did a run now for the track at about 4K and that seemed to work! see track & mission included.
-
I tried trucks as well as BTR-80
-
I cannot manage to hit anything with the CBU's or Rockeye's in the Hornet lately. I do nothing new, but they just don't seem to hit anything even when they explode right on target?
I only have the problem in the Hornet. In the F-16 it works like a charm, same mission! (So I just replace the Hornet with an F-16 in a simple ME mission, an it takes out most targets in one run, in the Hornet nothing happens, only some dust! ) Mfuze VT, HT 1500, 2 pairs CBU or Rockeye, I tried heights between about 6000 to 8000, no wind.
I thought it worked before on the Hornet also.
-
Absolutely one of my favorite aircraft! It's damn fast, and flies so well! I also have the more complex planes like the Hornet, but the F-5E is for me more fun, it's really about flying dangerously! Nothing better than some low-level CAS evading AAA's for an adrenaline-filled afternoon! And it's a decent dogfighter too! Not an F-16 but still bonkers!
-
1
-
-
Oh my! What happened to the forum! I really struggle to adjust: I do not clearly see what is new, I find it difficult to read and generally absolutely unattractive. I liked the previous forum very much. I'll adjust over time of course, but damn, what a strange experience!
-
1
-
-
There seems to be a problem on the map to embark troops in helos. The troops simply do not embark. Exact same mission in Caucasus works.
-
There are mappings for the new handles: Left Arming On - Right Arming On
(So NOT Left Wing Bomb Arming On - Right Wing Bomb Arming On)
-
Yes there are mappings for the new handles: Left Arming On - Right Arming On
(So NOT Left Wing Bomb Armin On - Right Wing Bomb Arming On)
-
Indeed quite confusing, you have to turn and pull the handles on the new left panel,
and I had the impression I also had to open cover and engage the switches on the main panel as before.
But then it works!
-
PS after the latest patch the bombs do no longer explode?
Did I miss something? I open cover, then arm ? Is there something else to do? Worked before the patch!
-
This works, many thanks! I got the wrong command mapped first. "IR FRAMSTEGN" is normally mapped to the somewhat unhandy combo "RCtrl-RShift-M", I mapped it on a stick button and works fine now!
-
Hi,
When you have multiple sidewinders loaded, is it possible to switch active station? I often have both HB-24J and RB-74 loaded, and depending on the dogfight situation I want to be able to switch missiles.
Searching for proof of underperforming AN/APG-73 radar
in DCS: F/A-18C
Posted
Anyway something is just clearly wrong with the latest patch: Against AI Mig-23's at 20K altitude I have relatively useful detection range when I narrow my sweep, but I loose lock continuously (in whatever mode). The AI Migs can engage me first 100% of the time. They are actually not really manoeuvring as they are AI.
It is only when I boresight the radar when the bandits are within 10 NM that I can lock and engage.