Fairey Gannet

I had encountered that problem yesterday. After some testing (I thought, that maybe I did miss or swap some steps in cockpit pressurisation procedure), it turned out, that oxygen shut-off valve is in the open position during cold start. Rotating it clockwise closes oxygen supply, leaving the valve in default position makes high-altitude flights possible.

About that - I remember that some time ago there were also fresh cockpit liveries - I think both Chineese and Russian variants had option for "Factory new" and "Weathered". But they disappeared. I know it is EA, so maybe they were not happy with the result, and took them back for some more work?

Thanks. And don't get me wrong, I am all in about 19S. In fact, 19P was my first DCS module. Flying it without tracker or joystick was kind of, er, traumatic. Anyway, I would like to see P out of Early Access first - but that can wait a bit, considering how much work devs put into other modules lately. If S will become an option for full module, I will most likely buy it, as I like the plane. Also, imagine having PM! That would be both awesome and borderline crazy.

I agree, in comparing airframes regarding energy and manouvers, I would say it is a close call - like in many comparisons it boils down to pilots knowing strengths and weaknesses of both own and enemy's plane and ability to play on those. In he grand scheme of things, I usually tend not to lean heavily on comparisons, though, as it takes away some pretty important points, it gives somewhat tunnel vision, if you will. Even flawed plane like Fairey Fulmar was able to score some kills in the Med, because CAP altitude was raised to mitigate abysmal climb rate this poor navalised Battle had. P-39 was shunned in the Pacific because it was used in A6M's comfort zone, while it shone on Eastern Front, where operational altitude played to it's advantage. North Vietnam used mixed composition of MiG's, where 21's were pouncing and 17's or 19's could tangle in dogfight, not to mention creative GCI to compliment rather short range radars. Even in the 80's MiG-17 (or licenced variant) could be seen here and there as ground attacker or recon. And so on. I guess my point is that in thinking in 1 vs 1 categories we can make some solid arguments, but when we switch from air jousting into air operations, results may vary. Having said that, I still hope we will get 19S one day. When P will be finished, maybe it will be easier to consider another variant be it free or paid. I really like those older jets, and having more would not hurt.

Sorry, I was a bit absent, and I just figured, that you responded. About 19P being not in league of the F-5E, or vice versa - yes. F-5 is more capable plane in terms of what it can do. It has nice, 360 degree RWR, where 19's Sirena is very limited in capability, rear-aspect retrofit. Radar is also pretty much the same story - F-5's kit allows for more situational awareness, locking distance is also greater. MiG-19 doesn't have any countermeasures (signal flares doesn't count, as it is not their intended use), F-5 has both chaff, flares, and program release as well. Range of munitions, as well as quantity, is also greater, giving F-5 operational flexibility - up to buddy-lased GBU's. In terms of navigation, you have both ADF and TACAN, while 19 can tune in to NDB's only. There are also some quality of life improvements, like radio, that can use both preset channels and manual input, while 19 can use only the former. In terms of ease of operations, F-5 brings auto flaps/slats, nose-wheel steering, and far better cockpit layout. Now, in the merge, as you said, both planes are capable to tangle with each other. In terms of Fox-2, F-5 has same loadout, but missiles themselves are superior, even if you count rear-aspects only. IR seeker uncage option also helps. Lack of flares puts 19 into plain disadvantage here - of course you can evade Fox-2 here and there without them, but F-5 also can. Guns are coin flip - F-5's dual revolver pneumatics have nice rate of fire and more ammo, but 19 is packing dual 30 mm punch, albeit rounds are limited. In terms of visibility 19 is of course better with teardrop canopy. In terms of BFM both planes have advantages and weaknesses. After all, both were designed in the 50's, but F-5 evolved longer and its later versions, as we have in DCS, are superior. I guess F-5A would be closer match, but we don't have this one. Don't get me wrong, I like both planes. But F-5E we have is just one generation of equipement ahead. E version flew for the first time in 1972, same year as MiG-21bis. 19P entered production in 1955. That doesn't mean 19 is totally outclassed or something, if it will get into the merge, it is a dangerous opponent and not an easy kill. But in DCS context and versions we have, MiG-19 suffers in comparison of capability. I wouldn't mark it as clear downside though, it is still 2nd gen jet, capable of what it was intended to do - intercepting enemy bombers, and it goes a bit beyond with dogfighting capability.

I dig your solution. "Experimental Harkonnen Sting pilot fix" is a way to go.

Maybe devs could make official tickbox in special options tab: "Realistic Sting pilot fix".

That is why I am not overly concerned with bugs in this module - almost every changelog for open beta contains some fix or part of the upgrade. Yet, since they are working on the next thing, it will take some time. So... basically like a Sting in first Dune? Now we need mod that will replace 21's pilot model with jacked, oily Sting in armoured underwear and using suspensors. World will be a better place with this.

True. But 21 is getting rather consistent fixes and updates as a part of v.2 overhaul, so I wouldn't rule that one out. I guess it will take time, though.

Actually, I agree with "latest version" problem. I would also want to see earlier variants of airplanes: I would choose F-5A or C over E, as well as MiG-21 PFM over Bis. Sometimes latest variant isn't the one that was most impactful or representative. Problem with 19S is, in my opinion, two fold. First of all, 19P is not complete yet, and people are having this one right now. So I guess priority would be finishing that one. S was mentioned as an additional airframe in the module itself, so until we hear otherwise, we must assume it is still an intention. Second problem with 19, is that it falls in specific category - there isn't any real counterpart around. And yes, I am not maniac of pairing planes in military sim, there always will be imbalance. As it should! But 19 is lone 2nd gen jet fighter. Right now there is no F-100, Super Mystere or something like that. Closest real-life opponent is F-5, but there is 1 generation difference between them - and it shows. I don't mind enemy having the edge, but DCS doesn't always grant you options to compensate. I hope for more early jets and proper GCI in the future, though.

F-5, by design, was light, simple and solid fighter. Two close range IR missiles were enough for self-defence, intercepting enemy bombers or performing CAP. Radar, while not being that powerful, was enough to provide some situational awareness and to guide to target in the final interception phase, previous guidance being provided of course by GCI. While not great, it could help in bad visibility, clouds and alike. It could help also at night, but F-5 versions without ILS were not considered as viable all-weather planes. Now, just two weapons could seem not much, but potential opponents didn't had stellar payload either, in that regard. MiG-19 could also take 2 missiles, and it was later addition, not a day-one capability. MiG-21 also was upgraded during its service to take K-13 missiles (MiG 21F-13 variant, missile type is in the name here), also two weapons. I think MiG-21M was one of the first variants to carry 4 R-3S IR missiles, but I can be wrong here. And F-5 was intended to fight in proxy wars with export versions of Soviet aircraft, that usually were either older iterations or having their capability limited for export. When it comes to Soviet stuff, you had domestic, most advanced versions (like MiG-21S), that were not allowed to be sold at all, Warsaw Pact variants, somewhat simpler and non-WP - usually most dumbed down or just older. Realistically, F-5 would meet latter two export tiers, as well as mix of MiG-19's and 17's. SARH weapons were introduced for 21's, (and one version of 19) but they were short range, and mainly intended to employ against non-manouvering targets, such as bombers, so for F-5 they wasn't real threat.

Yes, and MB-339 is also being developed with both fogging and freezing effects. It would be nice, however, to see it as a standard feature across the board.

I like early Cold War jets, and MiG-19P is right up my alley. Of course having 19S would be fun. But changes and fixes to 19P seem to be at pretty slow rate at the moment - I guess there are more pressing matters. Since P is still in EA I am, at this moment, not sure if I would want to pay for S variant. After all, it would be very similar airframe, but with somewhat reduced capability comparing to P version. There are similar planes to choose if you are looking for an early jet gunfighter anyway, albeit subsonic. When 19P will leave its EA state, we can discuss, but I don't see how standalone S could be profitable.

I hope fogging/defogging and freezing will be added at some point to all modules, as it is pretty basic yet easily overlooked feature.

From my experience, night attacks are valid option, however you must take in account your limitations - you will have one pair of pylons with illumination rockets, one with your weapon of choice and a gun pod. You can get out of it one pass, maybe two if you will be really good with your illumination rockets. Or lucky, and they won't drift too much. Those rockets are tricky to use, but they are giving you a bit of a distance to your target, and you can stay out of AAA fire. This changes dramatically, if you can muster a two-ship, with one plane popping illumination rockets and one going in for the kill. Same goes for F-5 or L-39 for that matter, as both profit from illuminantion. When it comes to actually finding your target, sadly it is Eyeball Mk I sensor suite - you have to do good old Great War-style visual recon. In the night you are limited to stationary targets, that were previously discovered and marked during daytime. Scenario, where environment is suited for night operation of light attacks like C-101, L-39 or upcoming MB-339 would have to provide additional help to put payload on target. After all, airframes like that would benefit from cooperation with ground troops, radio vectoring and illumination provided by mortars or artillery. While they could help soften or suppress already engaged target, nobody would send them into the night hoping to find and kill stuff on the fly. But to be fair - finding and attacking unmarked targets of opportunity at night was feature widely used during Desert Storm, and was considered game-changing ability of modern planes. That level of operational flexibility is something far beyond capabilities of our little C-101, and there is no shame in that.

From what I remember, that was quite old feature, so maybe it is simply leftover, that isn't really working anymore, but wasn't cut out either?

Yeah, M-2000C is great introduction into 4th gens. And my personal darling, since I love deltas. I guess it is more to study than in F-5, but learning curve is nice and steady.

If you will build it, remember also to "borrow" Dune 2000's alert "WARNING, WORM SIGN" and give it to ATC.

Well, I think both approaches to beginner modules are valid - either starting with something complicated, that you really want to learn, or buying solid but easier stuff. If either of those will help you to dive into this level of simulation, it works, then it is good. Like Exorcet above stated, procedures or skills doesn't really have to translate well between modules, and that's something to take into account. Solid flying in C-101 doesn't really have to increase your F-5 or Hornet skills. But it is really all about what you seek in the sim, in my opinion. Trainers helped me a lot, I like them as a planes and as a modules. Since I am more of Great War period guy, it helped me to transition to jets, all that equipement, speeds and so on. But for me aviation is fun in general, so while I can use C-101 or L-39 only in some cases in MP, I consider it very good purchase. F-5 helped me a lot when it comes to supersonic planes, using burners, some BFM... I am still poor pilot, don't get me wrong. But! C-101 uses the same instruments and similar layout to F-5, and I guess it helped me with learning the cockpit, at least in that regard. It is also trim-heavy, so there is another thing. Starting procedure is also not that far off... However, I would not encourage to buy one module to get better in another one, as those similarities are not that numerous to be worth the price. It worked for me, and I am happy with that, it doesn't have to work for someone else. But if you like aviation in general, certain time period or a specific plane, there is value here - even if it is casual flying around. If you enjoy it, and you agree that your F-5 won't be as capable as some other planes out there, then it is simple, fun plane, that still demands some knowledge and reading. If you are new to study-level sims, I guess it helps more with study and learning part, and that can actually translate into other purchases you intend to make in the future. And last, but not least, F-5 fun factor. This is fun, nimble plane, that is joy to fly. After all, even if it study level sim, heavy on charts and numbers, it is supposed to be fun time for you. If you have a good time in F-5 (or any other module, even boring or limited from combat perspective), it is good, it is your game, you play it how you want it.

Well, F-18 is basically beefed up F-5... but F-5 is prettier. I really love how YF-17 looked like, though. Classy, classy thing.

F-5 fan: ED, we need more Tiger variants! F-5 crowd: YES. ED: *sigh* This again. How many this time? F-5 crowd: YES. + 1, by the way, C version had an AAR probe.

I would say it was totally worth for me! The first mission... Oh sweet, sweet first mission...

That's a good choice.

Thank you! Now, I have something else... https://pdfcoffee.com/northrop-f5-case-study-in-aircraft-design-pdf-free.html

Here, I think it might be interesting. http://pogoarchives.org/labyrinth/09/08.pdf