Dragon1-1

OK, what's the reason for them having the R-60M anyway? Are you trying to make the mission pointlessly frustrating? Because if so, you've succeeded. Between the Russian forces in the area (who have an Igla, just in case you blunder into them), the big SAMs disrupting the AI, and the Su-25s being way too good at air to air, this is yet another mission that plays really bad. It seems to be down to luck and DCS AI. Seriously, I suggest you go through the campaign with someone who hasn't played it before. Several of those missions are dice rolls with either DCS AI or with flares. It's beyond changes to DCS messing up the "balance", it needs serious QC, and from someone other than you, who didn't already fly all the missions a million times when making them.

That is for an "Alert 5" aircraft with pilot sitting in the cockpit, in case of a carrier, right on the cat. If the pilot has to run to the aircraft and start it up cold, it's longer.

Maybe, but you only notice when you're flying it. Even when taxiing next to it, the difference in quality is minor. I wonder if the pulldown could be done procedurally by the engine. "Extreme" textures will everything in full res, and "Very High" settings with non-diffuse maps downscaled. Won't help storage consumption, but should help VRAM.

You sure those Iraqi mods weren't indigenous additions? Because they did not, in fact, get any better gear from the Soviets than any other 3rd world country, MiG-29 included. They didn't even get the R-27T and R-73, which miffed them somewhat. They did figure out how to mod the MiGs that they did get, though. No, they might have demanded good gear, but they actually got the same monkey models the rest of the Middle East got. If they didn't, the Gulf War would not have been quite the cakewalk it was (assuming they knew how to use the fancier tech, their big problem was training).

The Viper doesn't like high altitudes very much, but it helps if you can keep your speed up when climbing. Generally, climbing to high altitudes with any kind of load, such as a pair of bags, is not always a good idea, and if you get slow up there, your only recourse is to drop the nose. The Viper has small wings and will never be particularly snappy in thin air.

Having DLC on is actually very important in the Tomcat. That's because it opens spoilers, those little things are not speedbrakes. Spoilers "spoil" the airflow, decreasing lift. With DLC in "neutral", the spoilers are partially extended, thus the lift is noticeably less than without them. What does this mean? More AoA for the same speed. Remember that in the Tomcat, you fly on speed AoA? Well, without DLC, your "on-speed" AoA really isn't, because what on-speed AoA does is put the jet at such an angle that the hook catches the wire just as the wheels slam down. If you mess with your lift, you mess with your hook-eye distance, which is critical for trapping. If you fly the way you normally do with DLC, but you forget to extend it, you're pretty much guaranteed to bolter. Either your pitch will be off, or your rate of decent will be. It's possible for a human pilot to compensate for this (say, if the DLC quits), but the computer is not that smart. Accordingly, ACL will only engage when it senses the jet is configured the way it knows how to land it.

Actually, the first Su-25 squadron was formed February 1981, and they've been in production for three years before that. They were also being produced in Georgia, so seeing them two years early wasn't too bad. The R-60M was a nasty surprise, though, especially since there was no warning in the briefing to expect Soviet attackers to suddenly have all-aspect heaters (would have made more sense on fighters, though in '79 it definitely would have warranted a briefing mention either way).

Just a little anachronism I noticed. The R-60M was introduced in 1982, which means it shouldn't exist at the campaign's timeframe, yet the Su-25s have it. It probably makes them a little too good at shooting down fighters. Also, the Phantoms seem to be SAM magnets in that mission. I think they either fly too high or are getting too far east.

It's well written, but the LGB mission in particular is badly designed, there's zero room for error and not enough time even for the conversation to play out.

There's the old Combat Ready Panel in the pic as well. So that's not even indicative of it coming back as a standalone product. It looks like just a render, anyway, it's not a pic of a real rig (though someone at Winwing probably flies with a rig like that).

It's just an Orion with an extended switch panel. Not a Super Taurus.

This mission plays far better with the fuel tank instead of rockets. No tricks, pop up, one pass, haul ass. If you line up right, you can shack both targets in sequence and pull off before overflying either. Ordering the wingmates to engage mission and rejoin helps, but is not necessary. One thing, for some reason the Hydras are the HEAT version, which makes no sense, against soft targets like that, they should be HE.

Well, I made it, by using a rather cheesy tactic of sending the wingmen way ahead of me to soak up AA-7s, while I waited a while and went after the bombers. Worth noting, I shot both of my Sidewinders, chased down the remaining bomber with guns (no easy matter due to the turret) and then, the MiGs caught me. Thankfully, they were out of AA-7s at this point, but I got launched at twice before a friendly MANPADS took them out. Wingmen all died relatively fast (except one, who couldn't occupy the whole pack by himself), scored no kills, but they distracted the escorts for (barely) long enough. One suggestion that probably had not come up: change the formation. I noticed that by default, they're in echelon right, which is just about the worst formation you can have them in, since it puts them all on the outside of every single enroute turn, and puts you closest to the MiGs. If you swap sides, they're better positioning for baiting Apexes mutual fire support. They should be set up in echelon left by default.

MiG-23s are definitely a bit smarter than they used to be. Shortly after the wingmen engage (on their own, at some point they'll just split by themselves), they just get cut up. Even if they dodge the radar guided AA-7, they usually eat an IR guided one. I have yet to see them down a even single one. Any other intercept geometry gets me shot at by a SAM. I can see the smoke trails, if I keep notching the MiGs, I'll fly into the SAM, and if I try to dodge the SAM, the MiGs get me. As it stands now, realistic tactics are not getting me anywhere. It doesn't really matter if I keep the flight together or not, they're picked off just the same. I might try sending them out ahead instead, and bouncing the bombers once they leave the furball behind.

Closure is not based on IAS. IAS tells you about aerodynamic forces, not about how fast either of you is physically moving through the airspace. Since that's the point of the closure readout, it should be using GS.

Use the mouse for everything that's not on the switch panel. For things that are, you can easily feel them out.

Iraqi were not WP, though, they were vastly inferior models for the 3rd world. The only difference between Soviet and WP version was the IFF.

If you try to turn with them up there, yeah. A brief visit to 30kft when going over the top won't hurt you. That said, at that altitude, the Phoenix is a real beast. You shouldn't ever need to turn with something that's so obliging as to fly in your optimum BVR envelope (at least as long as you brought Phoenixes).

OK, I'm trying this one now, and it's impossible. Four F-5s against four fully armed MiG-23s with unrealistic look-down capabilities, with a SAM interfering, predictably get butchered before they even get close. The wingmates get launched at by a SAM, defend against it, and are picked off by the MiGs. Also, why is the AWACS vectoring me around Krymsk in a big square? What's the point of it, when the bombers and their targets are the other way (it's obviously not a patrol this close to ground)? Also, telling me to fly at 2000ft in a place where you've got hills 2500ft high. The idea of coming in low would've been nice if the MiGs were realistically unable to pick the F-5s up on radar against the ground, but as it stands, the mission just doesn't play particularly well. One way of dealing with it would've been to strip AA-7s from the MiGs (they shouldn't be able to to use them anyway, if you follow the script).

As seen in the track, the MiG-23 is able to launch, and hit, targets almost directly below it. MiG-23 did not have this capability IRL. It probably wouldn't even be able to see the F-5s on its scope. Also seen, AI F-5s calling out targets long before they're possible to see on the scope. In fact, it's possible to hear them announce contacts beyond 40 miles, an impossibility for the F-5E because the range scale ends at 40. MiGShootDown.trk

Yeah, UE5 in particular looks pretty, but it has serious issues under the hood. I'd rather see them stick with EDGE.

Yeah, I am. The minigun pod could be useful for suppressing massed infantry if this was a thing in DCS. The bullets' trajectory is reasonably flat, so you can actually shoot something with them without hovering right over it. It's of limited utility, but with plenty of guns and ammo for them, IRL it does have some uses, and it could have in DCS in the future. The AGL pod? Well, I you could try sitting on it...

No, you should find a similar reference and fly it. Easy in the F-15 (just watch a YouTube video and see where the canopy bow is), in the F-16, you have to use the overall sight picture, because it has no canopy bow to reference. In each case, forget the PDL, it'll spare you a lot of frustration, and also spare you from complaining on the forum that they are, realistically, rather hard to see. Jester makes it easier because he warns you when you're approaching the limits, but in the end, it's all about finding your reference and not deviating from it too much. All Jester does is tell you whether you lined up at the edge of the envelope and are going to fall off the moment you slide aft a little, which makes the Phantom particularly good for learning the skill. Yes, I've been doing it for a while. A lot of that is simply muscle memory (being able to fly the jet precisely in first place), however, using the right visual reference helps a lot. PDL are friggin' useless, and fighter pilots IRL generally don't reference them. They've been originally designed for refueling B-52s, and it shows. Yeah, fixing that is a key part of configuring the stick. I don't know why they made it that way, it's been so since the Orion 1, but it's completely unnecessary. Both Orions are great hardware, but Winwing's software is meh at best.

Anyone noticed the Eurofighter in the Cold War Germany launch video? I think we might see some news sooner than we expected...

First of all, ignore the PDLs. Seriously, people get hung up on them way too much. Don't mess with your seat, either, it's a waste of time. Line up your canopy bow with the point on the tanker's fuselage where the wings start and hold it there. Pay attention to Jester once you're on the boom. Splitting throttles can be useful but is far from necessary. Trim, trim, trim until you only need to nudge the stick to get relative movement. Get in formation, then slowly get on the boom. Oh, and don't use a joystick with any kind of deadzone, it'll kill your sensitivity where you need it most. A decent throttle will help, too.