Ala13_ManOWar

No idea

I know people will use it like that day one, but it still was a ground pounder variant, remember. Indeed, if we finally get not only F8 variant but G8 variant, also said we would be getting, the nose guns would be removed and you'll be even lighter but with higher fuel capacity .

I know, I know, and I'm sure if not day one an English labelled cockpit will be available at some point. I just don't see those labels in the start up video to be so wildly strange or weird you couldn't understand or use the thing even as we are seeing it right now in that video. It's not like you're trying to fly a Klingon ship or something, it's still basic French, some English, not a lot of Spanish, but regular aviation slang we all know .

I meant the remove outer wing cannons option, or I guess not option but the aircraft should just be actually like that hence lighter in that regard though heavier in the armour one. Anyway, something about the C3 option in F8 was also talked about, I can't recall exactly what but I guess something about if it was correct for that model it will just be there, or the like.

Actually, no, it's not , but there're mixed labels, French, English, pseudo-Spanish, right. I guess it's what the cockpit was, so perfectly realistic .

You kidding, right? I guess the cockpit in the upwards video is labelled in mandarine Chinese or something .

But why you try to "fix" what Aerges already said they're going to do?? Besides, let's wait till we know what the price tag will be…

It's said we will have them eventually, maybe not in every airport, possibly the newer maps first, maybe newer maps only, but who knows how will they be or when we'll get it. In Marianas it's been said they won't be just the paint on the runway but usable in due time.

Yeah, we will have that option when F8 is available, actually .

Yeah, too many Vs to remember given my poor brain these days . Anyway, B-0 and so were pretty beautiful aircraft, the open canopy ones weren't for my taste. Probably not like we have to worry for the moment on what variant they make, but dreaming is free. Not like being Spanish is nothing special, you know, I just happen to be here . IIRC (hardly with my actual brain as said) there is a propeller, I believe an engine also, probably coming from some He-112 in the "Museo del Aire" (air museum) in Madrid, but not many more things that I remember. Yeah, it's a pity how so many unique prototypes and rare aircraft coming here during SCW and afterwards were just scrapped as junk at the end of their service lives, but sadly that's what it is in here, though I believe it wasn't different with so many captured aircraft at the end of WWII in many countries, so that's what we have left now. In the Museo del Aire there're weapons, engines, propellers, and some interesting things from relatively rare or not surviving at all aircraft, but whole aircraft not many aside from the famously preserved He-111E. A preserved He-112 would have been a really interesting bird to have, but sadly no.

I'm not sure we would ever see such an aircraft in DCS, too much information is needed and probably simply not available for those early models. Anyway, if it ever happens, hope it's not that V5 in the pic . What could be easily modelled is the bridge in the background, it's still there and I've crossed it like a zillion times either by car or by feet .

Yeah, gunpods were there, but I believe a read somewhere about the actual numbers and only a handful of kills were done with the gun, apparently the SUU-16/23 was so unstable while firing you hardly could hit a thing nor aim properly with it due to crazy dispersion. Most kills in the Phantom were done using AIM-9 of any kind IIRC, most meaning like 60% or something like that. I can't recall the percentage for guns, obviously SUU pods, but it was nearly ridiculous and that with USAF since Navy couldn't use them in catapults, of course. If that were correctly modelled in DCS I guess we will experience it, I hope so indeed, I'd like to know how it really was, though definitely not with the E model we get at first but hope we can with later releases. I mean, unreliable missiles, gunpods with which you couldn't hit a thing, that could be epic when we have them all .

I know mate, just for the sake of joke. Any Navy Phantom would be either suited and it's even funnier how that happened at the time .

What gun? Not the one in your F-4C/D . It's funny how those weapons were once the latest state of the art technology and pretty much useless at the same time. But I wonder, since they co-existed with Sidewinders of several versions, how they weren't ever updated with newer tracking devices?

One can dream!! We already have a lot of archaeological sites, maybe too many objects now, but…

But it's not an ED module and those choices can be up to every developer . For a modern aircraft I guess It's easier to get than kind of info, but in WWII it's not that simple, it's not only "knowing" it was used, or not, which can be hard enough, but once you get to know this or that equipment was or could be used in this or that aircraft you have to find the info relative to how it works internally and together with the plane and I believe that can be even more painful than just finding a picture of the thing being used . I'm in for the Wgr21 removal in Dora, yeah, it was never meant to be a bomber interceptor .

This is new. So, a problem already there since ever, back in times we didn't even have trackIr or panoramic vision in sims, just flat screens like changing cameras with a photo of the cockpit from that angle, at best. Most of the time you flew just looking forward and that was all. And now you discover this is a problem with DCS and anything else ever because you have no peripheral vision but in other arcades apparently your screen is bigger and you do . You people are so funny at times…

Historical facts aren't yours either , and this is not WT to ask for weird paperwaffe things .

By the way, I've come to know recently I actually "see" more than regular people for some reasons I wouldn't discuss in public (feel free any of you to MP if you like), but you're right some things shouldn't happen according to actual regulations. Anyhow, I was more into the "legal stuff says this, real life happens that…" thing, actual aeroplanes should be kept in perfect pristine conditions but actually you know in real operation many things which should be like whatever they are actually happens other different way… I remember mentioning the lights stuff to one of my instructors, "papers we're studying says this about lights but I can see all three lights from here which I shouldn't", his answer "well, you know, legal stuff says so many things but then again real life goes like that" .

I was just mentioning it because your sentence, "brief history of what ED has said about the Phantom", they said either about the Belsimtek development, but nothing is written in stone and plans may change which is what happened in the end. Only that. About your wishes of MiG-23 and F-15 switching positions despite F-15 being obviously a thousand miles ahead of 23 development state, well I would like to see the MiG-23 ASAP either but you aren't being realistic here. I don't think that would ever happen not to mention Razbam always say every project is managed by a different team so stopping one of them wouldn't change the other one current state over night. F-15E is probably close to an about end of 2022 release date, MiG-23 is close to another 3D render picture release.

You forgot the part in which Belsimtek was actually working on a Phantom and it was meant to be the next module after their last one which I'm not sure now which one it was (Mi-8? perhaps?).

Hehe, yeah, that happens IRL either. Narrow (or wide given the case) runways different than the one you usually operate from deceive you to think you're higher or lower than you think you actually are hence late (or non at all) roll out happens, then bounces and what not occur. Or the other way around, a wide runway tricks you to roll out too high so you stall the aircraft thinking you're just fine to discover you flared some 10 or 20 feet above the runway so your smooth gentle perfect flare results in a bad crash . There's no solution to that but to look outside the cockpit… IRL it's at the same time harder since you're just squeezed in the cockpit and you don't want to stop watching the instrument panel (ill habit) but easier since you kind of see by the corner of the eye so you learn to watch carefully to those hints. In the simulator, well, it's somewhat easier to look for the clues once you learn to find them and you're usually used to watch for screen clues since there's no feeling, but it's harder until you unlearn the old habit of not taking care of that kind of detail. You can watch outside the cockpit but you probably have to move your head either with trackIr, VR or the view system you use, and look for those clues you have to learn. Ground textures do help in recognising you are actually higher, or specially lower than you think you are at the roll out time so you don't flare late, or don't flare at all, as it's happening to you there. It's no extra difficult mission, but in the new maps of DCS, though Nevada was the first in which I noticed that kind of effect (as it happens IRL which amazes me of DCS ), specially in narrow runways it happens and you have to learn to watch for your clues in order to roll out in time. Nevada has several of those extra narrow though long runways, but there're more where it happens, the newer the map the more it happens since they have more realistic runway sizes and geometry.

Yeah, I guess I've seen ghosts on the aeroplanes I've flown. You sure you see well mates? Hope you don't lose your licenses due to poor sight

Ok, then you know IRL also the glow of the lights are visible even when not directly seen, which makes sense with these kind of high illumination lamps, and I noticed even while a student since papers tell you the diagrams you show, but RL was definitely not like that . That's what DCS game engine tries to replicate, and I believe it's not only not bad, but the latest (yes, it has changed more or less recently, I you noticed) changes are quite good indeed and most of them quite true to life within a game engine limitations. It isn't perfect, but what I see on a screen is a pretty good representation of that I too know from RL, even the ghostly glow happening sometimes while you shouldn't see. By the way, I hope you don't see the Christmas tree a Hornet is at night .

Yeah, but he starts at the very beginning (roughly) saying "it's wrong because I can see the lights at angles I shouldn't be able". I guess real life is also wrong cause I could see the lights of the Cessna at angles I shouldn't, not to mention all three of them at once . There're so many times real life is wrong according to chair pilot's standards…