104th_Cobra

"A Swedish road". Nice detail on natural camouflage, at min 2:00.

Yep, there's no need for the mk3. Just having the improved range of the rbs15 mk1 or mk2, comparing with rb04, will be very good. And this thread as derailed :) BK90, guys. :)

I know that rb04 and rbs15 are antiship missiles. I just put on bold theirs singularity at present DCS weapons availability. Good times with gameplay, ahead :) . Cheers. Sent from my Aquaris M5 using Tapatalk

Yeah, siding with Rb-04 and RBS-15, this weapon will be VERY interesting in a SEAD or OCA mission context. I tested some low level, flat terrain, ingress runs with the M2000, on runways defended by TORs and Tunguskas, and the air defenses are outrageous. This weapon can give some standoff.

Good job, guys. I've been waiting for this.

You were right, after comparing with open_alpha file structure and deleting /Users/user/Saved Games/DCS.openbeta/Config/View directory it was solved. Thank you guys.

Yeahh, I was suspecting that at some point I edited some *.lua file at /Users/user/Saved Games/DCS.openbeta/Config/View If I delete the existing files, does it return to default files on repair/update?

Upgraded to openbeta 1.5.4.54596.121. There's an arch on the plexiglas. Not using any mods. Any idea for what is causing it? Thanks.

Nah... I would buy first two A-7, and perhaps an F-15E, modules... :D

Take your time with RADAR and INS. No hurries with a good implementation. We want all the bells and switches :D

I had fun with Sonalysts's SubCommand. It would be a blast to stalk and sunk a Carrier. Why not? :)

There is another related thread. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=156824 I was also to write about the need to review the "nails"-"spikes" logic and display. Without good info from RWR it is tough to have situational awareness; I'm always almost zooming to full screen to get the situation from the RWR. In combat this have almost as importance as the lack of IFF. I hope we will get NCTR, if that was available in the modelled version.

Yeah. I saw some video of someone firing the Magic at almost 6 miles... Even the Sidewinder wil be employed inside 2 miles. Yesterday I had good kills with the Magic against the Mig-21 on ACG Jets server, merging, getting separation and firing from 1-2 miles. I had a frontal aspect kill, in the weeds, from 2-3 miles. But, if that chart is feasable, the kinematics apparently are with some bottleneck. Let's wait for the radar lock Magic cage and, if needed, for the correction of the uncaged HUD boresight point.

The M2000-5 it's a totally different beast, it will require a lot of work just to implement the avionics. If you guys "are in position" to do that, go ahead don't think twice. Just finish before the projects already in development.

Think the opposite. The performance isn't unrealistic, the AI logic is a simplified logic model. :) If you have better sensors and higher thrust, do you still enter a turning fight with an more agile opponent?

True. That's why I use the words lag pursuit. All the rest it's patience. You can run but can't hide.

I should had explained the simple killing machine the 109 K4 is. You don't need to be very cautious as flying the Mustang: just choose the moment to enter the fight and keep the energy, as also should be the main objective of the P-51 driver, all the rest will come smoothly IF the 109 keep a lag pursuit and enter the opponent turn at an ideal moment. Track the target for half a second with all blazing and its done. And for the P-51s, never enter a rolling scissors with a 109. The words again are control of the torque and lag pursuit.

The 109s slaughtering the Mustangs it's the normal evolution. The Bf-109K-4, right now, it's a BFM monster. I had no problem out-turn and out-climb an P-51, even with an external fuel tank, in Multiplayer.

I already asked the implementation for this, multiple times. Without the possibility to classify an runway or taxiway as unusable for a period of time, dependent on damage and repair capabilities onsite, ofensive counter air operations are dismissed. Ingressing, low level - high speed, at a full defended air base... :)

I know that, thank you. I'll wait for purchase phase... if it's immediately after Open Beta release. If not, I'll pre-purchase it in a time lapse. I want to put my hands on this bird ASAP.

One question, if I buy the M2000-C module with my bonus amount does the money go directly to the developers or is there any relevant share with ED? I respect ED business model but I want to pay for this guys effort. Flying and fighting in the Mirage 2000 will be amazing and, above all, they are bringing the A-7 :pirate:

My work OS is Ubuntu, from "office-e-mail" to various database management and process modelling. Window$ will never get that far in usability capability of the opensource software development model. DCS is a commercial software and framework, mainly for profit of the involved actors, from ED to third parties developing add-ons. Besides that, I doubt the number of Linux users within the DCS community will be that big. Let's wait to see the improvement in DCS v2.0 with DX11 use.

If there would be an option to superimpose terrains in a geodetic coordinate system, suppressing the differences between them, why not to have the option of a "generic"/low resolution and textures terrain beneath a higher resolution terrain populated with ground objects? The contrary does not apply, it's pointless to have an higher resolution terrain outside some area of interest.

High resolution (0,5 - 2m) orthoimagery in DCS is bad idea. It's pointless to have operation's theaters / terrains without ground objects. And to have the ground objects locations coherent with the imagery / ground textures, it will be needed a lot (and I mean a lot!) of work, not to talk about the size in drive. Even for ground operations it will bring no improvement, only entropy. Remember, DCS is a combat sim, not only a flight sim.

Competence in air navigation is what you need. In the absence of visual references, the words "dead reckoning" where the ones to know in a time where gyroscopes wheren't yet accurate enough and satellite navigation where SciFi. Download this documents: https://archive.org/details/wwIIarchive?and[]=subject%3A%22Navigation+%28Aeronautics%29%22 Also, read this manual: https://www.dropbox.com/s/l6s7133z9w43laz/Air%20Navigation%20Manual.pdf?dl=0 If you want to go all the way, buy an analog flight computer. Cheers.