Skysurfer

Are you even listening? You would have the same choices as right now, namely the 54A Mk47, 54A Mk60 and 54C Mk74, with the A's simply having white base textures and respective 54A stencils. As far as I know there are no grey A's and white C's unless someone can prove otherwise. Example: https://www.artstation.com/artwork/4bza5Y

It's actually really straight forward, you have two options. 1) The easiest option is to simply include the early 54A texture with the early A's and IRIAF A's. (Each livery that is). This is how 3rd party livery creators do it. But then again, once you actually fire the missile it will transform into the generic, grey C model. 2) The best solution is to simply split the munitions up properly and make each have their own proper textures. I don't think this is really too much too ask for.

Currently the 21 still has a thick black smoke trail when using afterburner. I think this should be addressed asap.

Yes, someone with less or no SA will always lose, regardless of airframe. I don't know the specifics of whether the AJS actually could go that fast as all the published perf. charts end at the stated limit speeds but I do know for a fact that it is 1) way better than the Mig-21 both in top speed and climb performance (worse in turning obviously) and 2) working in the industry and having studied aircraft design and performance I know for a fact that thermal heating and designing a non-variable intake would be an issue and/or next to impossible to sustain. Especially in the 70's. I guess this isn't so much of an issue of Heatblur simulating the thing compeltely wrong or being off on thrust and drag values but either a bug or the simple fact that most of these modules don't have an extensive damage model. These limits are there for a reason and ignoring them should have at least very simple consequences. They have gone to great lenghts with this in the Tomcat (comp. stalls, G limits and aiframe + component fatigue) but even on the Tomcat after almost 2 years the flight model is still being tuned and new bugs get introcudes every now and then (as of the current OB build). In my opinion, after the Tomcat is done or out of EA they really need to revisit the Viggen, address the main issues, take a new look at the FM and perf. figures and polish it up. It was supposed to be out of EA last year but that didn't happen either.

How is this exactly a problem? The 54A Mk47, Mk60 and C should all be seperate munitions with their own textures. Same way we have different Mavs and rockets. This really shouldn't be too hard. Should have been done properly on day one so it doesnt drag on for almost two years, especially now that we'll probably have the early A and IRIAF cat carrying grey 54C's...

You mean you don't listen to community feedback and stick to your internal "roadmap"? Got you.

No it is not. The AJS-37 manual specifically states Vne as 1350kph - operational limit. How would you know anything about its engine? It is literally an airliner engine (JT8D) with an afterburner slapped onto it. The thermal heating at 1.45 at SL would be pretty insane - comparable to Mach 2.5+ at high altitudes. Let alone the effect of such speeds on the engine. The Viggen is mostly made out of steel and yes it can go really fast, just not that fast. This may be physically possible given the thrust and drag values etc. but the consequences of entering this speed regime and maintaining it, ignoring published ops limits are simply not modelled in most DCS modules. The F-16 can do it, the 29 can mostly do it too. At least on the Mig-21 your engine will literally shut off when reaching the limit speeds.

Afaik they plan to rework the vapes and add sonic shock cones once ED adds those to DCS.

I do hope you are right. Would only make sense, honestly.

I have been bugging them since release about this and every response so far was that it's either not planned or very low prio. There's 3rd party liveries that already have replacement hi-viz textures for the A's so I dont know why this is so hard.

Bruh.

Agreed. There's also the untextured TCS internals and that misaligned bumpmap on the engine necelle where the strut reinforcement attaches. Just sticks out pretty obviously. I'm also mostly fine with having these "mixed features since the F-14 like you said way pretty diverse in variants and rebuilt versions. It just has to look authentic and not have obvious glitches or even missing textures.

Can only second that. Probably why the userbase puts it under so much scrutiny and wants all the details to be right. The module has a huge potential and I am certain we'll get there in the end.

I've said it numerous times and I'll say it one last time, this isn't CSGO or a competitive FPS game in plane form, there is no place for balance or gameplay-adjustments for the sake of some inferiority complex. Each plane should be faithfully modeled and represented within the realms and possibilities of DCS. Missiles as a whole have been broken for a year now anyway and you can't say that before the Tomcat the AMRAAM wasn't outranging and doing exactly what you describe the Phoenix does. Let alone the fact that most airframes to this day are unjammable. A Mirage or Mig-21 wont get "adjusted" for balance so it can all of a sudden compete with a F-15 or Hornet at BVR. There is also a *lot* more to BVR combat and missile employment than whoever gets the longest range stick and biggest radar dish. You know nothing and none of your claims ever turn out to be true. Sometimes it's better to just say nothing and listen. And to top it all off, you don't even own the F-14 so how do you know how "easy" it is to eploy in a PvP environment? Go get it, try it out yourself with some actual experience and statistical data and go tell everyone how absurdly easy it is to use, how it has all the advantages imaginable online and how the Phoenix is a "I win" button in DCS. It will 100% be an eye-opening experience.

Regarding the new clouds, I wonder how older or existing missions will be affected by this change of weather system and the fact that you'll only have "presets" for the initial release? Really hope this doent break all the missions or campaigns.

Second this. I also think Heatblur would be the prime developer to take on this task given their success and experience with the F14. We'd already have the fitting Forrestal class carrier and assets. While the E could be used for a lot more countries, I do think the J and S models are much cooler.

I love how you never provide any sort of evidence in the forms of tracks, videos, constructive discription or tacviews for any of your claims. Let it go dude. Like I said previously, uninstall the game and go do something else and not waste everyone's time with this. I know exactly who you are now.

In an ideal scenario yes. There's also an advantage in not emmiting anything and sneaking up to say an unsuspecting Tomcat with GCI guidence. Literally how iraqi Mirages and Mig-23's got kills on Tomcats. Point is, no matter your airframe, no one has "global SA".

You don't use it as a dogfighter. The AJS37 with 4x AIM-9L's is an excellent interceptor and boom and zoom aicraft. Does it better than anything in the game since the operational limit of 1350kph doesn't seem to apply in DCS.

I did not say it outturned anything I said it turned fairly well all things considered if you kept the speed up. And it for a fact will outclimb a Mig-29, F-16 etc. People need to stop looking at EM charts and start looking into employing the jet properly. And as a matter of fact I have used the Viggen online in the past against 4th gens with pretty decent success.

Nah dude, it's only "competitive" in your head. You are on your own with this one, buddy.

The fact you can go M1.45 at sea level until your fuel runs out should raise somequestions. Despite what some people say the thing can turn and outclimb anything in the game.

I can appreciate the work you are doing dude but you are really wasting your time here. ED is not going to use any of your data, nor did you have an accurate 3D model for each missile (ET will be different from ER) to have real accurate values. There are unclass. and published flyout and EM graphs for these missiles. Given the fact ED are still tinkering with the AMRAAM and Sparrow and breaking it ever other update I wouldn't have too high hopes they'll re-visit the russian missiles again. Let alone the whole thing with the russian DOD, even though the missiles in talk aren't actually of russian design and production. We'd all love to see all mainline missiles in DCS abide by the same physics and be on the same API but this is sadly not going to happen anytime soon, and just like with the amraams, 3rd party cfd work will not be taken into account. Again, great work from a pure research standpoint but I don't see what the goal is with all of this?

Hopefully it has something to do with Metasim or maybe even a FF A-6E or F-4. But above all I really hope to see the Tomcat and Viggen out of EA by say Q2-3 of 2021.

Yes because comments like these from someone with "CSGO" in his name clearly show that the person treats these games equally - like some sort of team deathmatch where the K/D ratio matters. This isn't what DCS is all about and if you are this emotionally involved and mad at people doing certain stuff online you probably should step away for a bit. Just my opinion. This isn't ED's or the developer's fault in any way.