Jump to content

Zpigman

Members
  • Posts

    81
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Zpigman

  1. I think in the video what we are seeing is him pulling back on the stick. I believe he was going too fast and the nose coming off the ground was from him pulling back. The initial touchdown had no real bounce, but the rollout after did.
  2. Zpigman

    Wo hoo!

    If the Cuban data could be found legally I am sure that there would be some intrest with the devs in creating what is needed for them to utilize them, maybe a slight change that only is implemented when you have missiles attached. I don't know how good that would be though. The 17 we seem to be getting also appears to be heavily suited to air to ground combat than the mig 15.
  3. Zpigman

    Wo hoo!

    The problem I believe is that the devs don't have access to accurate documentation as to how the k-13 and other missiles were implemented into the aircraft. Examples would be: How was the weapon selected, How long do you have to hold the release button before launch (think mig 19 vs 21), Is there changes to the armament panel or any other panel, etc. Until they can find that documentation I don't think they could add it into DCS even if they wanted to.
  4. Zpigman

    Wo hoo!

    Unless someone gets data from the Cubans on their as models, I don't think there is much we can do about it. And it isn't R-3s missiles it is K-13. Wish it was posible but I think they only had access to a lim-5. Would love to know what the as cost and changes affiliated with the missiles was.
  5. Correct, but the overall flight performance will be a much larger help in terms of learning manuvering and aircraft handling. The jump to the slats should feel more like jumping from the 14A to the 14B in terms of understanding. The radar will also be different, and I don't think it has an AI back seater so that won't be as polished. I think in terms of learning habits that will kill you, you could do worse. Like I said though I need to actually fly it to see, earlier renditions had lots of problems.
  6. VSN just updated their Phantom II B/C mod to include a cockpit, if your looking for building points of references during fights, haven't flown it out yet but am eager to try it later today.
  7. She is talking about blades that are technically under the air intake. This was done, because the air intake wasn't attached to the skin of the aircraft to correct bounded (I believe that is the term) air from entering the engine. The problem is when taking a barricade, the thin straps would go between the two parts of the aircraft ripping the intake off and 100% destroying the aircraft. The solution is the blades that you find meant to cut the barricade and maintain the structure of the aircraft.
  8. Correct, Like I said it was there for a special event in 2010. Not sure where it went after that, I may be able to ask some extended family who live in the area. and you are correct, it is the Happy Hooligans 119th ANG regiment. Sadly they no longer fly fighters, but times change. I need to do more research into where the current plane is, I was too young to know what an airframe number was at the time.
  9. Can't remember/don't know where it is currently but last I saw it was at Fargo's air museum (special event ergo why I don't know where it currently is), it was a William Tell competition aircraft. As of 2010 it was still flyable, once again not sure if it still is, I live 800ish miles away. Bellow is not the actual aircraft but an example of how it is painted.
  10. I want an F-4D simply because my family has a history with that aircraft including one with their name on it in a museum.
  11. Personally want to see an air-start/power cart hooked up and disconnected with the appropriate commands. I want to see the scramble bomb started engines. Icing and fogging would be cool to see what with new modules developing that, engine modeling is the biggest one for me. We will most likely see the later version first and would love to see their beat-up texturing job that heatblur is known for in these old aircraft. The RIO/WISO/GIB is big too and how the radar system is modeled from a user's perspective. I also want to see the rwr be of the classic phantom type that would have been you hearing the prf frequencies surrounding you. IFF would be cool, but I also love the British phantom way of sticking a big tank scope out the side of the aircraft to visually id targets. I think what is going to make or break the module is the community itself and how it adopts the module.
  12. Exactly, I think that it is not a bad idea and certainly better than not getting anything from a buyer's perspective. I know a lot of people want certain versions of planes that their homes use, and this may be a way to get the ones they want. Nothing would be set in stone, but it could very well be cheap vs expensive for if they have to mess with the flight model at all for a version or if it is a new cockpit with slightly different controls.
  13. It depends on what you do with it. I tend to be the person using outdated aircraft and having fun running around trying to kill modern aircraft. Even in the group of people I play with they all perfer newer aircraft, that I can't gamble on a notch and recommit to beat. Having the ability to cary a modern missile is nice so I can at least close a gap. The feel of the old jets flight characteristics is what I like. I don't know what other people think about these now. This was just to get people thinking of it and am glad that people are even responding to the topic.
  14. Correct, the variant pricing you and I are talking about is basically there to offset the costs of additional development. Granted my example wasn't the best. I posted this to at least get some thoughts on it out there. I would totally buy both the old and modernized versions of aircrft for use.
  15. Correct, it also depends on how much code can be re-used from other projects. An example was if ed made the f-4f they can reuse the code for the f-18 radar that the latter model F received. It is a game of balances, but it may open the way to streamline module coding so that if you don't want x version you can just have the versions you want, hopefully taking up less disk space. I can definitely understand the risk of diminishing returns, so you would have to be careful of what versions you want to do.
  16. The lancer was just used as an example of what could be done. The f-4f and other 120 slinging sub variants would also be examples. The idea is the framework itself where a separate sub data pack could be sold that allows for the main development staff to focus on the main branch aircraft then the smaller aircraft they can have smaller teams work on if needed or sub out work to other people. Think a-10c and a-10c tank killer.
  17. I was looking at the Heatblur f-4 forum and found an idea I really like in terms of potential function. In talking about the ability for the Phantom to carry aim-120s there was discussion over what was more important to 3rd party developers, and what they need to focus on more. It was during this that the f-16 Sufa mod was brought up an an idea took root. What if there is an ability to have 3rd party developers create add on dlc that can be bought independently of a full module (price to be determined by how much needs changed/added). An example perfect for this would be the MiG-21 bis already in game where people have been wanting a Lancer versions for years. What this would do is add a data pack containing the additional or rewritten code allowing for a separate purchase of an upgraded Lancer if you already have the bis. I am not sure how the coding would have to be done for this level of modularity, but it lets companies create highly requested sub variants without having to massively change the entire module that the aircraft are based on. One of these packs (again for the Lancer as example) might have different weapon data allowing it to use more modern missiles, a new 3d cockpit to match what is modern, and finally some new skins specific to the new version. The idea is to make it have a cost to the end user so that they can get specific to what they want and the developers can do the main important aircraft that bring them the big money. Please let me know your thoughts on this idea below.
  18. This Idea is actually really cool and a good way to open up the game to more aircraft types. having a cheaper dlc that adds some specialized or slightly different version of an aircraft to the sim. I honestly wouldn't mind if this becomes a thing where you could down the line buy an f-4f or terminator for 20-25 USD and run those in game. I can agree though that Heatblur has other more pressing things on their plate than making these micro changes dlc.
  19. Didn't they manage to down one aircraft with the modified HAWK missiles though? Pretty sure it was a French aircraft (can't remember which one), had to use multiple missiles because at least one was a dud and never tracked anything.
  20. Sadly, I don't have any tacviews of that as I don't use tacview. The shot at around 25 had me pitching up quite a bit and at time of launch about (started launch sequence at 60nm) 55nm. The target was an Ace level Mig-29, that upon pit-bull of missile went into a hard (his left) righthand notch and ended up outlasting the missiles battery just barely. The 2nd missile I fired at 45-50nm (don't remember which) was able to reach out and hit him, hovering around mach 1. Keep in mind this is all single player A.I testing with the Aim-54 mk47.
  21. I have done some simple shooting in the 14, and have noticed that the 54As are doing much better in guidance. I was firing at ranges of 55-60nm at angels 25-30, shooting at targets above and below. What I have seen is that I am able to reach out to the targets no problem, even at lower altitude, and that I haven't been having any of the guidance issues I have had in the past. Is this from new from the latest update or something else?
  22. Man I can wish, used to do only f14 RIO for a long time; nowadays I am being pushed into pilot, but I want that center console and armaments button box so bad. That frame you have is also awesome and something I need to look into making too. And now with the f-4 coming out I want to build an f-4 based simpit because I will probably never fly anything but that and an f16 again.
  23. Don't have the software, but I may be able to get some measurements of the parts and then use a British site for the f4j's panels and size them correctly.
×
×
  • Create New...