Skysurfer

I think it was mentioned a whie ago but is yet to be seen. Planned afaik.

No, I do agree with you. There are areas and seemingly simple stuff that still weren't fixed since day one (untextured areas, cockpit typos and wrong instruments, texure glitches, missing bomb clamps), as well as the fact that they have missed pretty much every projected timeline by a substantial amount. As someone who manages projects in the engineering world this is pretty mind-boggling. Don't get me wrong, the Tomcat and the Viggen are my favorite modules and pretty much what got me into DCS to begin with but having to wait for something to be finished and polished up for 2+ years at this point is pretty tiresome as there is still so much to be fixed and added, which at this point I'm not even sure if we ever see all those things fixed like was the case with the Viggen. Partly the reason why I tend to fly the Hornet a bit more as of late since there is a steady stream of visible progress and fixes.

It's ok, he's just doing what everyone likes to do and cherry picks quotes and "data" to fit his narrative. Like I said above, you can listen to both sides and different accounts to get a much broader and more accurate picure. Not to mention that historically the 9.12 and limited 9.13's are the only 29 variants that were available up until the early 2000's - even 9.17 (SMT's) are fairly limited in numbers these days and most went to export. I am aware. Hence the confusion with someone who mostly flew that thing.

Well, go ask the Canadians and Americans who flew against them as well as the various HUD tapes. It wasn't seal clubbing by any means in the visual arena. nd of course we are going to compare the 9.12 - even the 9.13 wasn't much different apart from electronics upgrades and ECM.

Afaik he flew the SM, which might be a much newer version of the 15. Said behavior from the 29 is described in the S/SK manual so I don't know what you mean by this. In the thread you linked he further qualifies how it worked and that when locked up by an S-300 you get the usual steady lock tone + indications. The UB is essentially an S. What the SPO-15 (no matter what version) essentially does is put different signal types into a bucket that fits and spit out the relative signal strenght, rough direction and assigned subtype. It also works nothing like you are used to from DCS by the way. But we are getting pretty off topic at this point.

Honestly, if it's a made up variant that mixes in some features from the 52, I'm fine with it. Which then again begs the question why not make a 52 to begin with?

So it seems like they removed the President-S system in these latest renders? Guess legal issues with the russian DOD?

This also checks out with the test and evalutions from the German Airforce and their 29 ops. At BVR the 29 was pretty inferior to that era western platforms, both in pure performance and pilot-machine interface, once in WVR however it was pretty much an even fight often times with a slight edge in favor of the 29.

Wrong. This was actually confirmed by the 29 pilot on here in the russian section. The SPO-15 was next to useless in combat.

That's the logical conclusion, yes. Obviously nothing official. Given the experience with multicrew jets and the work on the Forrestal it would only makes sense next to the A-6E. From a sales perspective too.

I love how Hoggit is some reliable source of information.

Yeah, you can clearly see what's wrong after like 15 minutes of tests shots in a 1v1 online. It really seems to be the range witht he F and M as I described above.

I hope you speak russian. More details in this thread by a former 29 driver.

Anyone would. After the Tomcat it's probably one of the most iconic jets. And in my opinion HB are the only ones who'd do it justice.

As soon as the current stuff is finished to a satisfactory and reasonable degree, sure.

Honestly can't wait for this thing!

Yeah that is true. No idea if HB are on the full new API or know how to properly use it with the PN coefficients.

Except it's literally in the 29 and 27SK manual and was also confirmed by the Flanker and 29 pilots on this forum? The SPO15 won't show you anything useful when your ownship radar is turned on, let alone when you have a STT lock on someone. Yeah the overwhelming part is made up by some people on here. The SPO15 will detent the AWG9 in both RWS and TWS modes and have two different indications for long range and short range. This is described in the 29 (9.12) and 27SK pilots manuals (found online).

Honestly, given the lack of actual hard data on the specifics of the C all we can hope for is a noticeably improved CCM and potentially internal radar seeker performance from the C. Currently in DCS there is barely a difference between the C and A.

Sorta. The de-loft and active transition are still a bit wonky but that's just the DCS missile API I guess and not much HB can do about.

Yup. And it sure as hell wouldn't see an active Phoenix or Amraam, let alone give you any useful info when using your own radar.

I would have to specifically look for that next time but it hasn't caught my attention so far. I also run 4x MSAA and it runs just fine. No reason not to on a modern system.

Have you tried MSAA x4? MSAA shouldn't have too big of an impact on performance. Personally I don't see any shimering on my end - what is your texture setting?

Set AF to 16x - there is no reason not to.

The 29 in DCS is one of those modules where a good hotas (preferably mechanical with good tension) really can make the difference. If you get used to the way it flies after a couple flights I don't see how once can have issues with it. Had no issues with the T16000M HOTAS years ago and no issues with my new Verpil setup now.