Avimimus

Hmm... well the Ka-52 can carry additional weapons and the fire control system allows asymmetric loadouts.

Well, FC4 isn't going to happen - but one can think of it as taking over an AI aircraft for use in 'aggressor' training? Alternatively, one can just not use them or can exclude them from server lists!

In the trailer they show it carrying them. In the released version we are limited to V20 pods.

...or the Mi-24P with B8 pods

Su-7B seems to be a gap.

Well we did call them 'widowmakers' for a reason. I didn't know we used Giant Tiger liveries though!

Thank you! I really appreciate this input.

Hello, I'm thinking of trying a gamepad/game controller. However, years of using sim hardware mean that I've always dismissed these entirely (for all purposes). I'm used to the precision of a full sized joystick! What are the most precise gampads? What am I most likely to actually be willing to give a chance (if I were to try it)?

Yes, I know, but, well, two things: 1) A gun which is prone to failures is dramatic (and fun in a sim, if not in real life) 2) When flying as the gunner and looking through the site... I've often had a truck lined up in the scope... and being able to squeeze a trigger... well, I think it would be very useful for taking out two or three soft-skinned vehicles in a single pass. Even if the gun jammed shortly after, it provides a close range flexible firepower that could be very useful. The number of times I've wished I had a Yak-b with just 100 or 200 rounds of ammunition is considerable... so I think it has value.

It'd be great if they offered an Mi-24V module with the release of the Afghanistan map (or at least offered an earlier Mi-24P). I think there is enough to motivate a paid upgrade given the pair of PKT gunners, the MDB-4 FAB-100 combination, UPK-23-250 (export variants), and more S-5 rocket warhead variations... it could be quite attractive. But I've probably said that before

Yes, definitely. I'm just hoping that one of the modules announced will be a license for one of these teams Also, are you sure the IA-58 isn't further along? I was under the impression that the external model and the cockpit were nearing completion.

If the Mig-23ML sells well enough, then maybe...? They do share some systems in common, so it might also have somewhat faster/cheaper development.

I've wondered if the IA-58 will come ahead of the A-29? I recall one of the devs saying that the systems on the IA-58 are much simpler than on the A-29, and that the major effort would be modelling the dynamics of a turboprop. The IA-58 artwork is also further along. So I was wondering if the IA-58 might leapfrog the A-29 to completion? There are at least two dev teams which have made considerable progress towards a Su-22, so it is just a matter of one of them getting a license. As for the Iskra, it isn't being released as a mod but it is being developed without the full SDK by a team which intends to pitch it a full-fidelity module. The systems modelling seems relatively far along and the 3d model looks pretty good. So, I could see them also getting a license. Of course full release for any of these would likely be a year or more away (the possible exception being the IA-58, given that Razbam has more resources). But I could see a couple of them having licenses announced in the new year. P.S. If anyone hears rumour about the other angry tadpole - i.e. a PZL Mi-2URP... let me know

I like that velociraptor purr it does!

Thank you!

I'm hoping the IA-58, Iskra, or Su-22 will be in the module announcements this winter... Out of all of the trainers, the Iskra is the one I want... angry little tadpole... and the team pitching it seem to be pretty competent.

So far as I can tell there might be a slight benefit to conventional (forward-aft) rudder pedals in that they have a larger travel so that precise inputs can be made with larger movements. In contrast vertically moving rudder pedals require smaller movements. Is this true? Does anyone know if this makes a difference (e.g. for precision in hovering a helicopter)? Other than that: It appears that conventional pedals can allow toe breaks, whereas 'anti-torque' pedals can be made lighter and more compact without needing to be attached to anything (and can be used more easily on a swivel chair). P.S. I'm looking at VPC WarBRD Rudder Pedals vs. VKB-Sim T-Rudder Pedals Mk.V - so if anyone has comments on those two, I'd be happy for any advice.

It is available on the Su-25T, and there had been issues with a number of the behaviours of Russian missiles for the Su-25 and Su-25T. I don't think it needs explanation beyond that.

I would. The problem is that, if the service discontinues, it leads to the content you bought being unavailable... the ambiguities of DRM are already bad enough. I would be open to a subscription service to allow some people to receive assets a year in advance though, just so long as they are integrated eventually into the base game (without subscription)... but functionally that is similar to the early access model that already exists ...just with an ability to pay monthly rather than buying into EA.

Well, the first that isn't for rotorheads anyway.

An F-4 variant? I think people might feel a bit cheated. I'd personally go for an F-103, F-107, or F-109... but I don't think any of them could be modelled to DCS standards (even if the F-107 reached flight capable hardware - sort-of anyway, and the F-109 had a technology demonstrator built by the Germans).

Maybe - or he might have just forgotten that those two had already been publicly announced? What is left? The F-102 and F-106 are dedicated interceptors (although the F-106 was also used for ground attack). The F-101 was largely an interceptor and recon aircraft (with the earliest examples also having an escort and then a nuclear strike role). The F-105 is a possibility (but I've heard there are some issues getting enough data)? Does the F-111 count? The other Century Series are quite interesting, but they didn't make it into production!

Technically the F-100 and F-104 are announced Century Series aircraft? Not sure why he was cagey about that? Also, the G.91 and Tornado are both planned to have recon capability (even if ED isn't providing it, third parties appear to be working on it anyway). Honestly, peacetime recon can be boring, but if anyone has read about wartime flying 'alone, unarmed, and unafraid'... there is a lot of drama to recon (and trying to get pictures in spite of weather etc.) I'm not sure why people don't find it exciting. P.S. I do hope that the fragmentation model improvements extend to rockets... and we get a few more warhead types... especially for the Cold War era Soviet designs that rely upon them.

Yeah, it'd be nice to finally see them in the sim... definitely would make me more likely to pick up the F-104 at the pre-order level.

It'd be pretty cool to get the CRV-7... exceptionally high velocity rockets with very high kinetic potential and very low dispersion.