Tank50us

I'm gonna side with the Gamepad owner here, because there's people that play with Keyboard and Mouse. So, anything that could be integrated into the game that can *help* the player with most of the hard things by giving them visual indications of what they need to do. Not take control of the aircraft obviously, but give some visual indicators.

The best way for it to be handled would be a display that pops up to give the pilot direction on how to get into the correct position for refueling. This could be something that's optional, and could be turned off if a player wants, but otherwise it's an aid, and not something automatic of 'easy'.

And let's not forget the various mortar carriers NATO forces have developed over the years. Heck, the M113 would fit in just about any army that isn't allied with the Reds given how many 113s were built. Then there's some of the freaking awesome ones like the PzH2000 which can put five shots in the same spot at the same time (Multiple Round, Simultaneous Impact, or MRSI). Then there's the various other NATO Rocket launchers and Tube Artillery that had been developed over the decades.

Uhm.... a ChangeDotOrg petition isn't going to affect Eagle Dynamics, especially since they're a Russian Company, and Change is a US based thing.

Yeah, right now we have what? two mortars in the entire game? One is that little stand-alone thing, and the other is the Nona. Then again, when it comes to long-range fire support in general, DCS is quite lacking.

The 'in a pinch' just refers to the unlikely scenario that those aircraft either aren't around, or otherwise not available, but the F-16s (somehow) are in a particular location. Or, if such a massive fleet (like the one the Chinese have been building, or that the Soviets had at their height), were to attack that you'd need every possible aircraft in the air that can fling harpoons as you can get. Obviously, in a situation where the enemy ships are in port or clustered together in a single location (and not moving), the F-16 could get by with HARMs and MK84s, but if an enemy fleet is on the move, and sufficiently sized, you might need more planes with the capability to attack it from a safe distance, and the Harpoon would most certainly give you (the pilot) that.

Oh goodie, another thing to turn to scrap

You don't think that people willing to drop $80(US) on a module wouldn't be above spending an extra ten bucks to have some cockpit greblies in their pits?

My unit is in need of a livery for the Hind, and until the paint kit is released, i certainly can't do it. However, I've seen several people manage to make one, and I'd like to know if anyone would be up for making the base livery for the 145th PMC Groups Hinds. Concept: If anyone is up for the challenge, I'll supply all the roundels and insignias.

@BIGNEWYfrom the research you guys have done on the Falcon, would such a thing be a software update in the aircraft to install irl? Or would it require more modification to the aircraft in order to accept the missiles?

I don't really see a reason why they couldn't. If it's a software issue, then it really wouldn't matter as that is something that would be loaded into the planes computer system. I can certainly understand it if it's a hardware issue though, as in, the computer simply can't be programmed and those features installed to the aircraft. Update, the version we have is the Block 50, and according to F-16.net, two, maybe three customers use the Harpoon on their Block 50s: https://www.f-16.net/f-16_armament_article12.html And it seems the USAF did tests with the Harpoon on the F-16, as the photos there show. So even though it's not a normal load, it does seem to be an available one for some customers, and a "In a pinch" load for the USAF.

bobble-heads aside, having some official cockpit items that we can place would be nice to have, even if it was something that we had to pay a little extra for.

Maybe we should get the F2A Viper Zero then, and it's custom anti-ship toys

Will the F-16 get the Harpoon (max of 2) and Penguin (max of 4) Anti-ship missiles? I know that the USAF may not have used it much (after all they have platforms that can carry many more missiles than a Falcon can), but other nations do have that capability, being island nations and all. If this is on the roadmap, then please disregard, but if not.... why? Anyway, feel free to discuss everyone.

Neither! Tomcats for the win!

actually, we don't need Jester-like menus for that, we already have the radio coms menu. I think it would make more sense that when I give the 'remove wheel chocks' command in the radio menu, the pilot model looks out to the right, or left, and does the animation (visible in external view). Same would apply to the ground power, ground air, as well as acknowledgements (thumbs up, thumbs down).

The problem with the UH60 series is that it would become the helicopter equivalent of both the F/A-18C and FC3 combined. The reason I say that is due to the sheer number of versions of the H-60 series of helicopters, each one with their unique characteristics and roles. It would be a nice thing to have, but it is something that ED would likely be forced to spend years on bringing all the variants to the table since the moment they announce it, people are going to demand every possible variant of the blasted thing.

I have to ask the big question though... why haven't you upgraded to Windows 10? It was available as a free upgrade a few years ago, and just about everyone I know went forward with that upgrade. Having said that, since that free-upgrade period has long since ended, you could still get it fairly cheap. Look up 'Windows 10 key reseller', and you can get legal keys for significantly less than a retail key. How this works is that a lot of these gaming rig companies have thousands of keys they can't use (by contract), so they just sell'em off to people who turn around and sell them for 10-15 bucks. It's all legal, and dirt cheap if you want to upgrade.

ah ok. Yeah, I've seen a few bits on that, and it certainly looks pretty neat, especially with TacView built into it. Too bad it can't link into DCS and give us viable terrain and city data to make maps with.

what is C-MANO? you've mentioned it before.

I think that he's just referring to the invisible FARP that we just got. Not exactly something I have an issue with obviously as you've seen me talk about before in another topic related to this subject.

It would. Pilots in the real world are briefed on the locations of things like no-fly zones and will mark it on their maps.

As an addition to this, I'd like to see an option to have weapons grouped by 'class', IE, grouping weapons of similar type into one 'super' type that when you rearm with one, it subtracts from the total within the class. For example, the R73 'Archer' and the AIM-9X Sidewinder are both off-boresight Fox-2s, and should be classed together so that if you have 20 (under the current system it would be a 10/10 split) of them in the stocks, and an Hornet takes two, then there's 18 in the stocks. At which point an allied Flanker or Fulcrum can come by and now has 18 of the type available rather than just 10. This way we can have a system wherein we can have 0 logistics (unlimited everything), 'easy' Logistics (the system I mentioned), and 'hard' logistics (where every different type is counted separately)

I wonder who else wants that announcer to kick things off? "Ladies and Gentleman, welcome to the main event! LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEEEETTTTS GET READY TO BUUUUUUUURBLELLLLLLLLLLLLE!!!!!!!!"

It's almost as if they've had to drill for that very scenario