Avimimus

In Russia the option to fire volleys generally seems to reside with the pilot's trigger finger. ;) Not sure about the Su-25T - might be a bit more sophisticated. As a Rook pilot I fly the T using the same weapons techniques as the S - so I wouldn't have noticed. The 'cut burst' switch determines whether the cannon automatically stops firing after a certain number of rounds.

The 2S6 can engage with cannon while mobile, correct? I've heard it can also use the 9M311 against ground targets in an emergency...

Hello, I'm pretty (98%) sure that the answer to both questions is a no. However, I may not know what I'm doing.

If I recall correctly it is because the BL-755 has the bomblets in tubes and uses pressurised gas to project the bomblets outward (thus leading to greater and more even spread in the first seconds after being triggered).

As for the PAK-FA - it is largely supposition at the moment. It is supposed to carry at least eight missiles internally - but there is uncertainty as to whether this includes short-range missiles. Two larger air-to-air missiles in the R-37 class per bay seems reasonable, as does 3-4 K-77 sized missiles. There are also side bays which can carry one WVR missile each. Finally, there are reports of six external hardpoints - including two which could potentially carry an anti-awacs weapon. This thread has more information on the prospective missiles: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,283.0.html (The 810 is basically similar in dimensions and shape to the R-37. The K-77M will be similar to an R-77 with conventional control surfaces, improved engine and the ability to fit an IR seeker. The K-74M is a R-73 with improved significantly improved seeker, datalink and engine.)

If I recall correctly it can carry 8xAim-120 on the underwing hardpoints, but it cannot fire them, with the ability to carry them merely acting as an extra reload during medium range transfers. The underwing hardpoints are for fuel in long range transfers and combat air patrols.

Nice review. Missing two minor details: Improved warhead modelling. Improved cluster bomb modelling.

*Groan* I foolishly thought that the DVD release would coincide with the online release and was ready to go early in April. Is there any chance to have a deal where we can pre-order the DVD version and get free access to the online version while we wait? Still - good news for market reach.

You should go pick up copies of Falnker 1 and Flanker 2 ;) Of course, the one critical feature I'd like to see in the patch is extended ability to save edited payloads for the Rook... *had to put that in*

Mind you, there are stories of formations aquiring other formations at much longer ranges (mainly due to having some freak with super-vision among the many pilots in one flight and spotting glints off of the cluster of multiple aircraft).

Hello Little-Dog, My own personal opinion would be to conduct an initial release without the extra content. This will allow more thorough testing of the base-line mod and it will also create a version for people with lower end systems who would like to avoid the new models. However, I am looking forward to the additional work. Thanks for all of the work! P.S. It might also be worth keeping in mind the possibility that some people will eventually want to produce derivatives of the mod with different aircraft in the two new slots (eg. Mig-29k)

IRL Mig-29s can be upgraded to simultaneously attack two targets with R-27. However, I was under the impression that switching targets wasn't a possibility in the non-upgraded version (without losing the first missile anyway). I'd personally like a Mig-31. Do they ever engage multiple targets according to ACMI? In real life they can simultaneously launch and guide in all of their missiles on separate targets (four target engagement). However, only about 7% of the English forum population want's to see a Mig-31 before all other interceptors. :(

Flight sims tend to put a much stronger burden on CPU and ram than on the GPU. It isn't so much that flight-sims don't need rendering capability, but that GPU architecture has been driven by the needs of first-person shooters and various action games which are quite different than the needs of flight simulators. Tests done a few years back showed equal or slightly reduced frame rates on several sims when running on SLI! So, don't use normal assumptions and focus on the RAM, CPU etc. Of course, this may change somewhat with the release of SoW:BoB or a rebuilding of the graphics engine for later DCS series (if they come out). Another basic factor is that most of the major flight sims are running on engines which were first coded over ten years ago! Isn't it nice that they're still so very pretty?

Yes, you're right - I meant helicopters in general. I have a lot of suspicions, but I'm assuming that guided weapon systems will improve and fuel prices will go up. There will still still be room for low-speed or hovering craft, but I suspect that they will be smaller, shorter ranged and probably unmanned systems which travel to the combat area with the ground troops themselves.

I think I'll mainly miss the parachute...

Technically both were developed during the same time period for the same task. A failure to develop small and reliable night attack sensors lead to delays in their production. The Ka-50 was announced as the winner of the competition and offered for export. However, the Mi-28 was further developed and put into production for the army. Having a dedicated WSO is probably highly desirable in a helicopter, if the helicopter isn't going to be used in large formations as a hovering anti-tank platform. However, it is also highly desirable to save weight. It is likely that small numbers of Kamov helicopters (eg. Ka-52 for the special forces) and Mil helicopters will see service. Both are reasonably effective. However, the future of the combat helicopter is somewhat dubious after 2050.

Eurofighter aircraft - I like it!

Ah... darn! ED removed the cluster bombs from DCS:BS so they could rework them. However, they left the ODAB in. Now ED has returned the cluster bombs for FC2 - but they've removed the incentriary/fuel bombs so that those can be reworked. I do hope that they are returned to the sim someday. It would be nice to have these for the Su-25 (especially as the Rook will likely not be returning in the later DCS series)...

Yes, International and CIS convention - but windsock convention thinks otherwise ;) :D

The footage shows much smaller oscillations than I'm tending to get (my piper is much more stable, but inputs easily cause longer and large oscillations). I guess real Kamov drivers actually know to use trim...? :D

Get put in charge of procurement of training systems for your respective country and I'm sure ED would be happy to give you a quote ;) I view the logos as more of an offer than anything else (we'll model anything except dinosaurs ;) ). But, I'm sure someone has to foot the bill for ED to stay in business. P.S. It is very nice of the U.S. military to agree to allow the A-10C product (which has apparently something like 95% commonality with the military trainer)

Falconites ...some things never change eh? I've always been happiest with an R-27, or much better yet, a Su-25...

Now that would be really neat - being able to shut the inlets for low altitude flight...

I can sometimes hit a BTR with a pair of rockets at close range or a truck with a barrage at long range, but it is far from enjoyable. If the aircraft was an acceptable gun platform the rockets have very nice firepower and ballistics/dispersion so as to be quite effective - but this doesn't appear to be the case. I guess I'll have to rely on 9A4172 and UPK pods in the campaign (or simply fly combat missions only in FC2). Freeflight is still fun of course.

I think we should also thank ED as one of the developers. The decision to adopt a more open format made this kind of project possible. I'd always hoped that they'd improve the potential for flyall mods with their last version of FC... I never expected it to happen, though.