Skysurfer

I mean, have you played DCS? This is a pretty bold claim to make as the T/ET and 73 are really easy to flare out and defeat based on aspect and burner use.

Can only confirm they are fairly dim during daylight. I feel like the max brightness setting simply needs to be increased allowing more control over it.

Known issues. I do wonder when this will get fixed...

Can report back that at least for the RU cockpit this is all fixed. Advisory and caution/warning lights are perfectly readable.

Can report back that this bug is finally fixed (tested with even the heaviest loads). Great job Leatherneck!

Well, I agree to a point with Max. The DCS Tomcat just seems to have way too much wheel friction to a point where it breaks immersion. You need substantial power to start taxiing and keep rolling and once you touch down and go idle the plane stops way shorter than it should (as if you used max wheel braking). No other plane in DCS exhibits that and most planes meet the landing ditance charts within a reasonable margin. It's not game braking per so but it does break the immersion at times. You should be able to start taxiing and keep the speed on idle power. By far not as big as FM issues or inaccuracies but still an area that needs to be addressed.

Depends on what radar they use.

I think so as some of the roadmap stuff is still missing or unfinished. Usually things take a lot longer than originally planned in DCS.

Still planned afaik - I think the Hornet will be out of EA in terms of features in 2-3 patch cycles.

dice please!!

I think what he is saying is the info bar actually shows CAS, which is the same for each airframe in DCS. It's the normalized reading so to speak. There's always gonna be some delta error by the way you fly or test it but that's to be expected. Even the EM charts in the NATOPS aren't all precisely tested values and usually extrapolated with some degree of error/varience in them.

Yup.

Yeah, given they haven't shown off too much of it and especially only renders of the FLOLS I wouldn't even expect it anytime soon at this point. Hoperully Saratoga will come shortly after as well for the true A&B experience.

Interesting. I have some sources saying smaller electronics, better computing and ecm resistence + slightly larger rocket motor on the C7 as well as D (same principle). But obviously there isn't even any known designation for the motor used so everything is a guess at this point.

Don't know. Done just fine around the boat with the way it is.

Agreed with the above. I have said from the start a naval F-4 (B,J,S) makes the most sense, especially given the new ships they are making and their experience with the Tomcat, multicrew and radar modeling. In many ways a Phantom would be a tad easier to do than the Tomcat even in the grand scheme of things. Now, the other jet could obviously be a F-111 to satisfy the AF peeps or yet another naval jet around the same era. It could also be literally anything. Still way too early to tell and speculate. I'll be pretty damn happy with a finished and feature complete Tomcat for many years to come.

Wow, that is very odd indeed. Hope ED can address this.

So much this ^ Shooting first doesn't mean a whole lot if you have to support the missile to impact, unless you have something like an R-33 or Phoenix. And unless you have two tightly grouped bandits supporting and shooting two missiles at the same time is pretty useless as well as degrades the quality of your tracks in some cases. Not to say that a Flanker doesn't stand any chance against western 4th gens, especially in more chaotic scenarios and if there is fog of war but technologically they are at a pretty notable disadvantage. Go talk to someone who flew Red Flag against the Indian dudes or participated in Clear Sky 2018 with the Ukrainians. Good article on the matter: http://news.e-dirgantara.com/internasional/the-russian-jet-that-fights-for-both-sides/

Source?

No such thing currently. Further 77 delopments, maybe, just not curent.

All valid points but even the 27SM or 30SM wouldn't be that more lethal in BVR since their main limiting factor are still the relatively old semi-active missiles. (77-1 or RVV-SD being more of a 120B equivalent with some high maneuverability as one of the design criteria). There's no way around that. Sure better radar and maybe better T/W (if even) can help to an extent but will never be on paar with 120C equipped 15's or most Link 16 jets in general. And then the Archer threat is mostly mitigated or matched by the 9X as well as counter hobs.

That's not how jammers work, buddy. And the DCS one works nothing like the real one and never will.

Yeah, that video is pure speculation and total bs. Heatblur have said "next gen aircraft" doesn't mean actual aircraft generstion or era but the next generation of Heatblur development and technology. I'd be very surprised if they in fact did anything as modern as a Gripen, given their experience with and passion for older, iconic aircraft as well as the creation of this 1970's to 80's US Navy ecosystem with the Forrestal class, Tomcat and A-6. Obviously this is still speculation but having the foundation for these types of aircraft already makes more sense to me. Still think one of the planes could be a late naval F-4. It's still too early to even wonder about it as these projects are fairly far away and the current ones still need a lot of work.

Gotcha! And agreed - hence the question. I'm sure the result will be outstanding once it's all done and dusted.

There is a tickbox in the special options for the F14.