Dragon1-1
-
Posts
3940 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Dragon1-1
-
-
Last time I've flown them, they worked. They had been updated when the biggest changes were made.
-
1
-
-
First of all, look up Fox 1 tactics. Flying high and fast does work, although you don't want to go higher than your opponent, so first of all, just go fast. Which is exactly what Phantom does really well (although hard wing ones are best at it). The F-pole maneuver is quite effective, but be prepared to merge with the opponent, because in Fox 1 era, getting a kill in BVR was far from assured, and the fight would naturally close quite quickly. Also, keep in mind you get just four Sparrows (and that's two more than most opponents), meaning there's not much room for multiple passes. MAR is still a thing, and so is banzai/skate decision point, but banzai is going to happen more often, giving you a neutral merge into BFM (either that, or one of you decides to blow through and RTB).
-
2
-
2
-
-
A flying I-pad with a lot of electronics and very little guns. Nah, I'll pass, give me an F-4E any day.
The F-35B is interesting because VTOL, but otherwise not really all that great. There'd be no comparable assets for it.
I think the early F-18E/F is the furthest forward in time that DCS should attempt to go (and that's only because of Top Gun 2 and that ancient Superbug sim that I'm rather fond of). Anything beyond that is too much of a flying computer IMO. The real fun is in Cold War era heater+gun dogfights, anyway.
-
4
-
-
This is realistic, both the switching to WPN page and locking onto random crap on the ground. While the contrast lock mechanism could perhaps be improved, in general it's rather easy to lock onto anything except your intended target. It was bad enough with EO seekers so that the term "tactical bush" came about to describe the missile deciding that a nearby bush looks more like a tank than the actual tank does. IR Mavs weren't completely free from that, either, but at least they'd track what you locked onto, for most part.
-
4 hours ago, razo+r said:
Brown-ish smoke, likely oil
White smoke should be fuel
Blue-ish smoke is water/coolant I believe
Actually, it's the other way around. White smoke is water (actually steam escaping and then condensing), while fuel is a blue-ish spray. Black is either an oil leak or a fire. If it's thin it's oil, if it's thick, it's probably a fire (in most cases you'll see the flames, at least in DCS).
-
1
-
-
I don't think it would double, after all, the end goal is the same: launch an aircraft from the boat. Russian procedures would require additional code, but not coding a whole different system from scratch. In fact, I don't think it functions much differently from SC, although I'm pretty sure it looks different. The biggest change would be the comms for landing.
There are other priorities, but if they can get permission to make a Su-33, then this should be put on agenda IMO.
-
1
-
-
Vulkan shouldn't actually appear different, or at least not initially. They just used a bit different postprocessing and perhaps a few FX that didn't make it into an update yet. Vulkan is all behind the scenes.
-
That's why you get SC-quality visuals on the Stennis. Pity about the Kuznetsov, but I guess it was kind of a side project and we don't have an FF aircraft for it, anyway. If we ever get a Su-33, perhaps it could become part of that package, especially as it has no SC functionality.
-
2
-
-
That doesn't help him, though. As far as I understand, it's not a one-off thing, but rather that he's interested in a small part of what Supercarrier offers. Free trials don't really help with that. They also don't apply on Steam.
-
1
-
-
Depends, if Aerges made it, we'd have a chance for multiple versions. The oldies might also be easier to find data and license for, Dassault is said to be notoriously difficult to work with regarding anything that could be regarded as modern.
-
That and the Super Etendard, another major player in the war, and in Falklands, too. I hope someone takes that one up (and not the 90s upgrade, please).
-
First of all, the MiG-21bis module is ancient. As it happens, MiG-21 did, in fact, carry Grom missiles. Just not the version we have. Magnitude 3 probably assumed that since the older variant could carry it, so could the bis. It turned out it couldn't, but it's too late to change that, because several missions use it, including official ones. Sea Eagle, likewise, isn't completely fantastic for C-101CC (they were tested for Chile, but never actually ordered), and it's also a module that predates the latest ones by quite a bit.
Standards have changed since then, and HB has never been ones for compromises. Not to mention that integration of those other weapons with the jet was known, which is not the case for the Iranian ones.
-
1
-
-
I think that an NS-430 unit should be doable. It's not the exact one they had, but in spirit of those modifications, particularly early Polish ones.
-
54 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:
Only visually as far as I understand.
That was the question, though. If all you want is a decent looking carrier, Stennis works.
-
2
-
-
The free version of Stennis got updated to SC standard, I think.
-
2
-
-
You sure you didn't bump the recce switch on your stick? It blanks the HMD hands on.
-
2
-
-
You all have it good, anyway, you preordered everything and are just waiting now. I'm on Steam, so I have to wait for them to actually announce the date to even submit a preorder.
And no, I'm not switching, despite problems I do get good deals in my own currency out of it.
-
3
-
-
We do need a rework for boom physics, along with upcoming hose and drogue physics. I don't know far along that is, though, nor whether improvements to the boom are included.
-
2
-
-
Shame, it's an amazing piece of kit. I have one, but I bought it used.
-
On 2/13/2024 at 2:50 AM, Dentedend10 said:
Adding to this discussion. I do have a motion platform, and I notice that the ride feels better in the civil sim.
Do note, I've heard opinions that the planes in the civil sim feel too lightweight, as if they had no inertia at all. It does have a vastly superior air current system, including modeling of thermals, but for that to work in DCS, a lot of optimization would have to be done on the turbulence system. We already have a vector field simulation of wake turbulence, and that's pretty good, but it's underutilized, presumably because something like, say, a WWII bomber formation bogs down the sim immensely with it turned on. Before a more complex turbulence system is added, those performance issues would have to be addressed.
It would be a great thing if we had it, not just for aircraft, but also for things like bombs. We'd get more realistic accuracy with unguided ordnance, particularly high altitude level bombing. It'd be important for low level helo ops, too, as you'd have to react to updrafts and downdrafts acting on your helo. Good old flying in bad weather, or air support in mountains, would become more exciting, too.
-
2
-
-
Besides field mods, Ukrainian MiG-29s flying today aren't too different from the ones from the 80s, which is causing some problems on the battlefield (not unlike what DCS players always complain about, Russians have Fox 3s and they have only Fox 1s). At most, they have a commercial GPS unit stuck on top of the HUD repeater.
-
3
-
-
We don't know, but given the Phantom is coming and fuze customization is already in, we'll probably get it someday.
-
3
-
-
Some of us like to make do with imperfect or obsolete kit. Particularly things like the Hawk, which, if we could ever find docs for it, would likely be rather interesting to employ. The R-73 would actually be superior to Sidewinder variants carried on the Phantom (it was the missile that spurred the AIM-9X development, after all), although depending on how well Iranians had integrated it, it could have some interesting limitations, too.
I'm mostly interested in Hawk on the F-14 because of its role in Iran-Iraq war, which is an underappreciated conflict in the West. Especially in a dynamic campaign based on the conflict, Western weapons would not be infinite (although that particular one is too early for Iran to have R-73s).
-
I think ED is slowly refreshing some of the models, but there's so much actual military hardware still in that level of quality that it's probably going to be a while before they get to civilian assets. I hope that the "new product" that high poly AI models will be a part of helps speed that up, though.
5 hours ago, cfrag said:Yes, the new model comes with an FM antenna and internal audio cassette player pre-installed.
Heh, I remember those. My father still has a pile of tapes with old sea shanties somewhere in the house. Other classics like Dire Straits, Dzhingis Khan and Goombay Dance Band, as well.
I remember times when there was always a bunch of those in the glove compartment. Probably all demagnetized by now. Grandma even had a spiffy revolving rack for cassettes, it's probably still stashed somewhere as well.
And yeah, the Cybertruck almost have been designed in that era. To think that not so long ago there were exited ads about how the new generation of cars was so smooth and aerodynamic...
F-4 BVR Tactics
in DCS: F-4 Phantom
Posted
Not really. DCS tactics will approximate what the F-4 was supposed to use IRL. Remember that it was originally designed to fight a Soviet invasion of Europe. As such, IFF would not have been an issue and Sparrows would have been maintained in temperate conditions with normal checkups after shipping. The Phantoms would be facing Soviet fighters equipped with their own Fox 1s, meaning that closing in for VID would be suicidal. As such, these tactics is what they practiced in exercises, and would have been used in a Cold War gone hot scenario.
Now, Vietnam saw the F-4 used in ways that it was never intended for. For one, the Fox 1 threat didn't exist at all. Also, the skies were saturated with friendly aircraft, and due to how air operations were planned, with carrier fighters coming from the east and USAF from the west, point of origin criteria were not particularly helpful (in Europe, anything taking off from the east was likely Russian). For that reason, VID requirements were established, and Sparrow ran into envelope concerns. Not helping was Vietnam's harsh jungle environment, which did a number on the missiles in a way that Europe didn't.
Most of our maps are not in the jungle, nor are they set up in a way that invalidates point of origin criteria for IFF purposes. They are, however, equipped with Fox 1 capable redfor fighters. This means the first set of tactics is going to be in use.