SgtPappy

As hummingbird and I discovered during some online matches, the Sabre seems to handle more easily, not dropping a wing as easily. In addition, the MiG-15's lack of G-suit also made it very difficult for the MiG-15 pilot to sustain anything over 6 G's for an extended period while the Sabre pilot could pull 7. Before 1.5, both pilots would not black out until they sustained 8 G's.

I was playing around MP last night with a few buddies and I tried to scare them off with FLOOD mode as a joke. They didn't react so when I asked them if they were getting a launch warning, they said no. The bow lights were on and my AIM-7 was selected. Anyone else have the same issue?

I haven't been able to find another thread specifically on tracks. I am running Windows 7 with an intel i7-2600K @ 3.4GHz(2 CPUs), 8 G of RAM, GTX 570. Every single track I have recorded yet does not show what actually happened in-game. I.e., if I do a simple in flight refueling mission, my plane doesn't refuel in the track. In fact, everytime, it will fly just above and behind the tanker. I posted two tracks. One of the refueling and another where I fight an AI Su-27. In the latter track, my AIM-7 is supposed to hit the Su-27 at the end with a boresight to STT lock. However because the plane flies differently than how I flew it, the boresight never sees the Su-27 so the missile is just launched and goes ballistic. refueling.trk Su-27 vs F-15 dodge test.trk

Yep, I've been in correspondence with the 159th for now. Hopefully they will add an 80's scenario to their MP mission rotation.

Make note that the F-15's curves in the scanned pages is not very accurate. Comparing it to the STR values in the -1 manual shows that the Russians slightly overestimated the Eagle's turning capabilities.

The thing is, it's hard to get IOC information for Russian aircraft. As soon as something is built, they put it "into service", but that doesn't mean anything if there are only 3 planes and 1 of them has no radar. I can never find true, official government or service-approved IOC dates. I think in fact, that the Su-27 first was delivered in 1984 but I think it is widely agreed that not enough planes or radar sets were available until 1986 meaning that the Su-27S didn't really reach true IOC til 86. That being said, there is no equivalent information on the SPS-171 ECM pods. The US on the other hand, has published IOC dates for pretty much everything which are much more difficult to argue with, making it easier for mission designers.

It will be up to the mission designers whether to include the A-10C and Su-25T. You're right though, if it's made really really accurate, it will bring a perfect atmosphere to the fight. MiG-21bis pilots would be much more likely to join as well. They become a tougher opponent when you have to face hordes of them with only AIM-7/9's.

Thanks, guys. Basher, did you mean to say that you have no info on the Sorbstya ECM pods? Hopefully someone's got an IOC. That's true.. but from a server standpoint, all I can hear is people yelling "where the heck is the A-10C?" and then leave. I think perhaps the best balance I can have is limiting weapons, but keep the A-10C and Su-25T. I'm not how many people will miss the Su-33 though.

I've been trying to compile a list of weapons for a 1980's Cold War scenario. I've been trying to find the Initial Operating Capability (IOC) of many of the weapons and equipment in FC3 aircraft and the A-10C (I know that the A-10C entered service in 2007 but the plane is close enough to the A-10A and would be a module people would want to fly so I would keep it in an 80's scenario). I don't know much about the Russian planes so I have no idea which Su-25T weapons would have been in service in the 1980's. The FC3 manual has IOC's of some weapons, but not for the entire exhaustive list of weapons the Frogfoot has. Also I can't find any IOC info on the SPS-171 Sorbstya ECM pods on the Su-27. It sounds like a very advanced system so I don't know if it entered service in the 80's or 90's. I also know little about the MiG-29's ECM dates. If anyone has knowledge on the Russian equipment, please post it here. Thanks!

I suppose the max. range figures are all moot until the missiles themselves are continuously improved in the game as per Wags' stream. Of course it will still be debatable, but hopefully far less so.

I've heard the APG-63(v)3 is better than even the F-22's APG-77. So then you've got a longer-ranged radar in the Su-35S than even the F-22! Although since the F-22 is stealth and has LPI capability, I suppose it doesn't matter as much.

Surprisingly, I've had about 3 kills on bandits while climbing straight from under their bellies. Like the F-15, I think they don't get any warning if you're right under them. So is SS like FLOOD but instead of sending out a warning, it locks what ever is in the circle? Like a giant boresight mode? I heard it looks at everything that can be seen on the VSD but I'm not sure the parameters it needs for lock. On that note, often I will use FLOOD mode to trick the enemy into thinking I've fired. They go defensive, lose energy and try to dupe a non-existent missile. It almost always works but sometimes I try not to use it when I feel like I'll lose their position once they defend. If I were more confident about my SA, I'd use it more. I often cannot fly with a wingman due to my schedule so it appears that I'll only ever win against enemies with less SA, which is one reason I fly with Sparrows - to improve SA and good strategy.

To join in on my extremely fun and masochistic 1980's hallucination party, of course :D

Wait what? Can you do this in DCS? If so, that would make close-range engagements and dogfights much easier for me. Pr1mal's problem is mine as well. It's hard to look outside and have to lock a target blipping from one side of the VSD to the other in a second.

If I hold a soft lock, will the enemy know I'm soft locking them? With the F-15's RWR, I'm pretty sure the answer is no, but I don't know much about the SPO-15.

Yea, I found if I locked someone too early, they'd be that much liklier to turn towards me and fire first. Preferably I like getting so close, they're at the bottom of the VSD before I fire. It's tempting to lock people because the information the scope gives you in STT or TWS soft lock helps with my crappy SA.

As these new planes come out, I think it only makes sense to have period-specific servers with corresponding loudouts. It will be overkill with the modern aircraft, so hopefully there will be 80's, 90's and then modern servers so balance can be applied through historical means.

I will experiment with staying high and being more careful. The other day I flew high and found a bandit who snuck up on me within 30nm, but while diving, I didn't pay attention to the closure rate. We merged, I lost him and was hit by an R-73. I should have extended to reset the fight. If I practise flying high and diving in the right direction and at the right time, hopefully I'll be killed less.

For the last month, I have been flying almost exclusively with AIM-7M's and AIM-9M's on servers like the 104th and 159th. I like flying around with a 1980's combat load, and since no one else does 1980's servers, I decided to just fly with the weapons I like. I also feel I'm more careful with Sparrows since I only have 4. So far, I have had fairly good success. I fly around primarily near the mountains or hills and use them as cover. On good days, I'll have a K/D of 1:1, but sometimes I'm lucky enough get 7:2 or unlucky enough to get killed a few times with no kills. Does anyone have any tips/advice on flying with this loadout? I find that my primary problem is running out of fuel because I'm forced to fly low. As a result, I'm very hesitant to get rid of drop tanks because I want to keep as much fuel as possible. I get killed often while trying to drop them. Also, I end up having to merge a LOT, and if I lose the enemy for a second, I will have to run behind a hill or I'm dead. and that happens sometimes.

Are you saying that the R-73 should be even better? If so, in what regard? Also, the discussion sounds like people want flares to be less effective. Aren't these 1980's missiles supposed to be relatively easy to spoof with flares? Not sure where to get hard evidence on actual flare-rejection characteristics of IR missiles.

It certainly is easier. It's very rare for a Sabre to kill a MiG in the game. But you try to fly without a G suit and see how well you do :P Plus, I'm still suspicious about the stall characteristics of our DCS MiG. It should stall very, VERY badly (superstall condition) according to virtually every test ever made out there on the MiG but none of that is modelled in the sim. Don't know if it ever will be, but DCS 1.5 or 2 will introduce the lack of G-suit.

The AI flies unrealistically, don't compare your performance in any plane to them. I haven't seen anything unrealistic in the Sabre's engine thrust. For its time, the F-86F was just a bit better than mediocre in acceleration with a nominal T/W ratio of about 0.397. That wasn't too high nor too low for the time period. If you're slipping or buffeting, this will negatively affect your acceleration. I find it accelerates quite well compared to the anecdotes provided in many texts. If you are at 0 rate of climb at, say, 10000' you will accelerate quite well so I'm not too sure what you're experiencing. I also find that the speed brakes work well, except maybe when you're landing. Make sure you aren't diving at the same time. If I'm level and my brakes are out, I'll need a lot of alpha to stay level under 300 knots. Trust me, watch your vertical speed indicator and keep it at 0. Your plane will slow.

Yes. 1980's all the way please! That way, everyone's got SARH missiles. Sure the AIM-7 will have the advantage but there will be more balance for those who hate AMRAAMs, my F-15 won't be able to run and kill you at the same time and I will be happy flying in a Cold War scenario :) I've been telling others that when the F-14 comes out, hopefully there will be way more 1980's missions to satisfy the Top Gun feel and to make a timeframe more logically associated with the F-14A/B.

That's what I figured. It seemed inconsistent with everything else I've read. I mean if the AIM-9B could lock on a signature almost instantly, then I don't see missiles having that much trouble locking a target especially WVR. Where do you think the guy got these figures from? Sounds like you know the guy, Tharos :P. And I also thought that. If BVR (or at least pre-merge) weapon employment was so useless, why would air forces invest so much time and money into building the weapons

After some practise, I finally got my first guns kill on the 104th! Both AIM-7's having missed and already out of AIM-120's, I press into the merge.