303_Kermit

F-104 isn't capable of performing one. Either drop tanks or bombs. See... I mentioned "With A2G payload" and diagram surely is charted for A2A payload. Having next to no wing - with supersonic airfoil, that produces marginal Lift coefficient, F-104 needs a lot of speed and a lot of AoA to produce some similar Lift to F-105. F-105 poses subsonic airfoil and swept wings, that actually produce some lift. The more bombs - the bigger advantage F-105 has. Again - I with A2G payload A-6 and A-4 are faster. F-104 can of course use AB , but can't fly supersonic with bombs. Carrying bombs, and keeping some descent altitude without occasional use of AB won't be an easy task. Forget about Hi-Lo-Hi mission profile. F-104 is faster in clean configuration - sure, but taking into account all limitations of A2G payload? He can't compete against A-6. The latter one will be faster and more economical. What conflict of 1960 did you meant? I missed that nuclear one. How many Nukes were dropped from F-104? Can you provide some stats? But I see your point. F-104 will be unstoppable on every nuclear campaign / mission played in DCS... If it becomes a nuke of course. Fantasy. Mirage F1 is 1970 gen III fighter, one may say even fighter bomber. Swept wing, modern aerodynamics, Viggen is also Gen III Fighter bomber with Double delta wings. They both produce more lift than F-104 may dream of. Range of Mirage is beyond competition even for much better F-4 Phantom. Last Reforger mission I was able to perform 1:50 min flight that included interception of MiG-25 with only one drop tank , and without any airborne refueling. After I land there was still enough fuel for another 30 minutes of flight. I can reach every destination on every DCS CW public server with any bombload and without single droptank. Neither MiG-21 nor F-104 can compare. If we consider bombload, range, speed and agility with full payload - not the avionics. MRF1 looks comparable even against F-16 and F/A-18. Dramatic difference is visible especially whem one fly next to F-5E. MRF1 carrying 2x as many bombs is 2x fast over target, without use of AB. Don't expect that from F-104. These plane won't fly without AB. Viggen is other case. I won't say much since I'm Mirage F-1 pilot, but he posess some serious set up of missiles. I doubt if F-104 can carry some comparable setup of those. As for bombload - everyone know that Viggen isn't very impressive here, but it's also not his task. His capable in anti shipping strikes, and on that field F-104 can't compare. I expect rather something similar to MiG-21 in terms of A2G, but MiG-21 is much easier to fly on high AoA, while F-104 is really not built for that. We shall have plane with just as little range with bombs, struggling to climb with bombs in any other way than on full AB - just like MiG-21, easy to stall in 10 possible way during A2G strike by every speed , when pulled up rapidly. You may expect widow maker. PS. The beauty of CW 50-60-70 planes is, that good pilot will perform even in "Widow Maker". In CW duel, pilot is more important than plane, and it's visible in F-104 career, if somebody care to learn about it. Amazing story.

I truly don't care if you like what I like or not. I check what I see, I check sources and post what I found. -If you check my facts, see them correct / or not correct, and provide some sources for your statements - It makes me ( and probably not only me) smarter. Logical discussion based on facts leads to greater knowledge. but... -If you're limited to like / dislike what I wrote - you're presenting not a point of view but a believe. Such discussion is pointless. For me the case is interesting. Statement, that F-104 is in any way useful in A2G means, that somehow plane with lack of maneuverability on high AoA, difficulty in control by low airspeed, without any significant advantage by A2G over A-6, A-4, F-105, F-4, or F-9F is somehow better than them in A2G. Either It's just bollocks and F-104 is useless in A2G compared to any plane from 1960, or I am not aware of something important in air to ground attack, so I may learn something. Let's put it more clearly. I just wonder... if F-104 with A2G payload isn't more agile than F-105, isn't faster than A-6 or A7, has no better range, carry less payload, isn't more accurate ... where's the advantage? -it can't provide precise bombing, can't provide CAS, can't perform deep strike - so he's not better as a bomber. -during attack run over target isn't faster, isn't more robust, isn't more agile - so in any way provides better survival chance. I see all your argument. I see a lot of emotions in them, there are even some facts - however all completely irrelevant to the discussion topic: What capabilities should we expect from the F-104? I say - I expect him to be interesting Fighter, with interesting advantages, like speed, acceleration, climb, probably very capable Interceptor in good hands. And I expect him to be totally rubbish in A2G compared to anything in DCS. I will love him anyway. And you all somehow are offended by that. I find it funny

I swear the god. Flat Earth society. 1962 W. T. Competition: 1. Planes that took part: F-104C, F-101, F-106, F-100 2. The competition tested various aspects of aerial combat proficiency, including: Air-to-Air Missile Engagements: Pilots engaged unmanned target drones to demonstrate missile accuracy. Gunnery Exercises: Involved shooting at towed banner targets to assess gun accuracy. Team Coordination: Evaluated the effectiveness of crew coordination during intercept missions. 3. Air to Ground Attacks were also tested - but they play a marginal role and scoring system was created so, that it was interceptor competitions. A2G points weren't crucial (otherwise F-104C would lost since he scored 0 points in one of A2G competitions). 4. Only USAF Pilots took part. no USMC, no US navy. Only TAC, and ADF. 5. In first air to ground competition - iron bomb drop F-104C scored best, but in another - napalm strike pilot completely missed the target, (10:43) lost orientation over shooting range, and scored 0 points. Mainly because F-104 lack of maneuverability, and too big approach speed for such task. Pilot saw the target for very short time period. 6. However it was USAF Interceptor competition There are no source to confirm, that F-104C truly won. Films were made in time , when US tried to massively sell F-104 overboard, and there's strong suspicion, that it's just a marketing statement. What's more It's worth to mention that F-104 was piloted by TAC pilots, when F-106 and F-100 was piloted by ADF pilots - and that makes also the difference. @Bremspropeller Your posts are kind of nasty manipulation and somehow remind me old soviet joke: Radio Erevan: -"Is it true, that Ivan Vladimirovitsch won a car Volga on a lottery in Moscow" Party spokesman: -"yes, it's true. However.... Not Ivan Vladimirovitsch, but Vladimir Ivanovitsch... Also... not in Moscow, but in Petresburg...and not on lotery, but on the "Red Square"... and not a Volga, but a bicycle...and not won, but was stolen..." You're wasting my time sir.

If you're truly interested in my explanation, and subject is for you interesting, I suggest don't mess the thread. Please write me in private. I'll respond starting from"errors in the thought process" like: "false lead", "false universality", "confirmation bias" and few others

Thank god I'm not alone who thinks that! My point in every discussion when someone asks: "Why don't you fly F-16" ? No period in history of aerial warfare when pilot was more important than 50-60-70. MiG-17 could kill F-4 and that was the beauty of it. The pilot was more important than plane

I am going to check how far F-104G will bring me... Or rather my squadron. We had no problem hunting Tomcats with MiG-21bis, we have no problem hunting Phantoms in Mirage F1CE. And I'm going to check what can we hunt down in F-104 How about some challenge between gentleman? Who's going to hunt down bigger prey in F-104 on PvP public server? I would suggest maybe a separate thread for it. Sometimes I forget, that "having right" in discussion is not that important. Maybe I'm bit old for internet. Thank god I'm not to old to fly :-) Have a nice day gent's. Can't wait to take Starfighter in the air... Not that I'm bored with F1. God forbid

I both posts above there's not a single sensible, logical, based on some fact and data argument. A lot of words but lack of content and facts, or numbers. It's like discussion with some flat earth society members. They also talk a lot, avoiding any sense as hard as they can. Keep things simple, use Occam's razor. I'd like to see how any of you will perform in any PvP server in F-104 proving your point.

I would appreciate if you don't call me a "bro". That's first. if there were only 70 F-104 that is probably a reason for it. If plane is capable - he's ordered in numbers, and deployed in numbers. If it's not working as expected - it makes little sense. That's second. as for F-100... young man. Please check before you type something. Otherwise you bring confusion to the topic. We may disagree, but we all try to stick to the facts: yes over north Vietnam it wasn't used in biggest mission numbers - if we take into account whole war, but at the beginning of war F-100 conducted 5 000 missions over North Vietnam. It was used massively in most important task this war. Bombing Ho-Chi -Minh trail. There- where finding a target under dense jungle cover was very important. And if it's not a deep strike mission than check your definitions. I'd like also to remember you, that famous Wild Weasels started from these very plane. Famous "first in last out" came from it. Sure - it was than replaced by better planes, but he wasn't replaced by F-104. They both were replaced by F-105, F-4, A-6 etc. F-100 marks a beginning of Vietnam War. And being in service in the same time as F-104 he was always first choice over F-104 to air strike role. F-100 Remained long time active in combat duty over North Vietnam unlike F-104. F-100 was used in abut 360 000 combat missions over Ch-Chi Minh trail and South Vietnam (I count together Tiger Hound, Steel Tiger, "Praire Fire" and CAS over South Vietnam and Laos). For Tiger Hound and Steel Tiger US used AFAIK such planes: F-100 Super Sabre (CAS and Misty FAC). A-1 Skyraider (low-altitude precision strikes). B-52 Stratofortress (strategic bombing under Operation Arc Light). F-4 Phantom II (air superiority and strike missions). OV-10 Bronco, Cessna (Super)Skymaster, and other FAC aircraft. That's third. null Thank you. PS. I don't mention F-104 contribution to A2G missions, but it's very easy to check. Wasn't good in deep strike, wasn't good in precise strike, and wasn't good in CAS missions. After modifying F-104 to be capable of A2G he was moved back to air superiority missions and other operation areas / theaters.

It's really worth to compare. Payload and range with that payload. -F-104 Plane with tiny wings, taking tiny payload , able to deliver it very inaccurately, really hard to take off with any A2G payload, unable to dodge any SAM with full payload, maneuverable like a train, and fragile for any hit. There is probably a reason why even F-100 conducted more A2G missions over north and south Vietnam. The question is not how much better in A2G than F-104 are those mentioned aircrafts, but if there's actually any aircraft worse in that role? I doubt. F-104 proved being capable fighter in 1958 during Taiwan Strait Crisis, but never performed well as Ground Attack. In fact, during Vietnam War even F-105/F-100 were considered too fast, and too inaccurate for that role. It was later learned especially by Luftwaffe in very hard way, that it's a very bad idea...

Any plane armed with bombs is a sitting duck. Best example here is F-4 Phantom, and it's Vietnam battle experiences. USAF invested huge money in development of F-4E with wide A2G capabilities. Very soon they discovered: 1. A2G armed Phantom needs escort anyway (in fact USAF doctrine theoretic's never expected that fighter bomber will be able to defend by himself. Air domination is must have either way.) 2. Survival ability of A-10, A-4, A-7, A-6 on battlefield is many times higher than F-104, F-4, F-100 and others. 3. Suicide drones don't exist in '50-'60-'70 - don't mix modern warfare and F-104G Building Fighter - Bomber was economically questionable from the very beginning. In a peace time - It's cheaper solution. In war time, it's surely more expensive. Ground attack plane don't need radar, expensive A2A weapon systems. Can be stripped from everything what is not absolutely necessary. F-105, A-4, A-7 were the examples of such solutions. They - not the F-104 took the role of delivering heavy punch.

Personally I couldn't care less about any gen 4 fighter. It's nice that thread about MiG-23 isn't dead.

Don't get me wrong. I am a huge fan of that plane, and I truly think , that it's great supersonic fighter of '50-'60. Definitely I'll put my hart into mastering that plane, but I'm also standing firm on earth. A2G on cold war jets was difficult. F-105, MiG-21 - first practice and results were disaster. Whole squadrons on practice flight managed to miss targets terribly. It's hard. -in F-104 you have to make it all even faster, -in spite of it, you have to work even gentler with the stick, -if you won't - it's not a forgiving plane. Unlike for example MiG-21. Having a choice in A2G I would choose F9F or A-1... Even F-86F. Older, better, more agile. Wouldn't you?

If someone can confirm or deny it would be nice: 1. Is it true , that Spanish Air Forces were the only one, where there was not accidents involving F-104 2. Is it true , that Spanish AF never used Starfighter in ground attack role? (mainly because it's hard to find a plane less suited for that role) If both are true that would rather imply interceptor. In ground attack F-104(G) is helplessly useless anyway.

Halo Dear Aerges. I have another bug to report, please do not hate me. IFF in Mirage F1CE with "IFF mode 4 enabled for BE, CE, EE" in specials tab, becomes not clickable - however (that one is tricky) only in MP. In SP somehow it's a O.K. Tomorrow I'll check the other versions of F1 if it's the same for them. my best regards Love your work guys. Thank you!

See guys? @MiG21bisFishbedL @Art-J @Rudel_chw A drops drill the rocks... Somebody did notices the problem and... in strange way Agreed with me

First step to solve a problem is to realize that there is one. Saying "It's alright" - never caused any changes. Start seeing a problem. That's the beginning.

These way you may explain every incompetence, negligence, and underdevelopment. We're talking about worst quality module in dcs. Most neglected one. With bugs that exist since the very beginning, and were never corrected. "there's not THAT much wrong with the Fishbed" - basically apart from moving switches in cockpit - the plane has nothing what is modelled and finished -systems? non existent. I posted couple times what is wrong. -flight model? serious flaws (if you dare to fly high and fast you'll easily guess what is wrong - for arcade players WT style it's irrelevant, so I'm guessing mr Fishbed is arcade player, or hopes that the rest of us are.) -damage model? well... tell me about all those MiG-21 flying fighting and landing without one wing. -3D model? - that's funny also. If you brake wing, the damage is visible for you from the cockpit, but from outside - for your colleague on your wing you're a allright! Another case is, that cockpit dimensions and proportions are wrong, and it's obvious for everyone who at least once sat inside MiG-21. A-10 was refreshed, rebuilt, remade couple times times K-50 was refreshed, rebuilt, remade couple times times F-5E-3 was refreshed, rebuilt, remade couple times times Even F-15C from FC3 became new cockpit MiG-29 from FC3 became new FM (and it's great!) MiG-21 @by Magnitude is a joke. It's revolting that it's being still sold. It's not even good enough to be a part of WT right now. Name one module in DCS which is in similar condition as MiG-21. All of them are light years forward in every single simulation aspect.

Thank you very much!! You're great

And I started to think, that it's meant to be played like World of Tanks. - Want to see enemy - exp up your "visibility skill" or buy a golden something... or VIP / premium account ...

Heatblur Cold War server. Today. Map Syria We fly with GCI - our own. -12-o clock 10 nm Viggen -no joy -6 nm directly in front of you I zoom in zoom out -3 nm! Then I see him. 9 O'clock shadow in 300 yards range. It's pure desperation. Tomorrow I shut down all extra terrain features. maybe it will help? It's not that dot is too small or too big. Problem is that the dot is not there at all. Can we please have DCS 2.5 again? I tried literally all possible settings. Result is always the same. Empty server 1 vs 1 , 2 vs 2 - contacts are perfectly fine. About 16nm Range. Big server , many objects - nothing is visible.

Hallo. I experienced repeated problem with AiM-9B on high altitude (38 000ft) while trying to shoot at B-52H, on MP server. I can't launch the missile. Master arm on, trigger unlocked, "croissant equation" on, (green lamp is on). Is there anything I'm missing? Or it's some bug. can anyone repeat my problem?

Flying on populated servers with GCI is very frustrated. I fly and enjoy the view, Heat blur CW when: - how many contacts around me in 10 nm range? -8 -I don't see any. -don't worry they can't see you either.

I never heard about ED being involved in removing bugs from 3'rd party module. TBH I also never heard about Magnitude / Leatherneck removing any bugs either. It's tradition and honour of those 3'rd party dev. - to collect oldest bugs in DCS. If you want to see even more impressive collection of bugs buy MiG-21 "Unfinischedbed" by Magnitude.

nullLatest activities: -Live combat trainings on Heatblur Cold War Server live PvP training in Hostile environment null-Night Bombing mission also Heatblur Cold War Server. -BFM Training with Instructor and Aggressors. Polish language is welcomed, but any guest is appreciated. We speak English and German. Ostatnie aktywnosci: -Treningi walki mysliwskiej na maszynie 2 miejscowej (Mirage F-1BE) z instruktorem na serwerze HBCW w srodowisku PvP. -Nocne Bombardowania z JTAC i dlugimi litaniami 9-Line, polaczone z nawigacja w nocy. -Treningi BFM pod okiem instruktora z wykorzystaniem maszyn 2 miejscowych (Mirage F-1BE). null Język Polski mile widziany

You mean Unfinishedbed?