TobiasA

Weird. Guess I need more tests. Thanks!

You assume that the Viper uses terrain. I never do that unless flying AG missions and most of the time, I don't even have mountains. A map is nice, but not of much use in flat terrain like a desert. Speed is life, altitude is energy that you can convert into speed. Our radar isn't great in look down either, so once you lose SA, break off and let your teammate have a shot. WVR should only happen if you lose SA (you get jumped) or you totally dictate the fight. But yes, the movable map is really nice. And yes, AIM-120 can be trashed even on WVR range. By a MiG-19. At the open sea. I am surprised how weak they are in DCS, a kinematic defense works almost always. I don't do a lot of PvP because it is like... Firing a ton of missiles, neither side will score hits and you fly home. On a typical mission, you got 12k lbs fuel and need 6k for the trip when you want to have 1.2k at touchdown. That leaves you with 3 to 6k for the loiter and engagement. Which is sufficient, but it ain't much, so I try to not spend it on the deck in a dogfight. You always need to be able to break off and make it to the tanker. So I scan low for intruders and see if I can pick up someone on my racetrack. At least my RWR is on the top of the cockpit and not hidden in a page somewhere which means that you can fly with both HSD and radar open while having the RWR right where I need it. I guess it comes down to what fits your playstyle. On GS, the Hornet dominates the fights with ambush CAPs and dogfights, on buddy spike the Viper is really nice. My playstyle sucks on GS though, because I usually serve mostly as a link16 contributor. Whenever I pick up someone from altitude, some ambush CAP will snack it while the enemy is focusing on me. Quite efficient, but SEAD or the buddy spike server are more fun for me.

Yeah, maybe it is related to my stick... I exchanged the warthog springs, the bottom 4 are harder now so I get less resistance in the immediate center, allowing for finer movements. However, other people I fly with noticed the same. I almost never fly a clean Viper though. I can pull 9G just fine, didn't notice any difference here. Ok, it got marked as "no change" now so I blame it on the springs.

There seem to have been some changes to the FLCS because air refueling feels easier, and I am not the only one feeling it. Might be placebo, might be not.

Partially means that some parts work while others do not. We have warm wheels and tracks but no hot exhausts. And cows are dead, they show no heat at all. They are probably zombies.

I got two tracks, but it's too large too attach. I will try to do it in two posts. Did some more tests against an SA-11 which does have less range and more emitters. The first track shows the tracks not being updated, but the pod is already equipped when the player enters the slot and the jet is already running. I am not sure about that, really, because in the second track, the pod behaves a bit different, the SAM site behaves a bit different... But anyhow, I don't see a single update and the first SA-11 pops up as PGM1 right from the start. The second track is a cold start. The HTS is equipped when the jet is entered, I do a quick and ugly cold start, power up the HTS and use it. The first throw is pretty rough, it also is not PGM1 right from the start and the emitters are somewhat more distributed, not only in the distance axis but also in the azimuth axis. After messing with the site a bit, the emitters chance their position slightly, and after my first HARM launch they get updated and show a pretty accurate picture. They also go green if the emitter is not received. I think it is related to the cold start versus starting with the HTS when the jet is already powered on (or probably also rearming and fitting the HTS, didn't try that). I can't prove it 100% but it looks like that. That would also explain why I have never noticed that on any of the multiplayer missions in our group, but can easily reproduce it in a training mission. F-16_HTS_nok.trk Track No 2- zipped size is 4.7Mb F-16_HTS_ok_later.zip

Would be super cool to display the current drag index in the loading screen, so one can have an indication of how draggy a loadout is and which cruise altitude is suitable.

Did you start in the air? And did you fly low level? It seems to be very noticeable in these two conditions, especially low altitude. I think they never get updated but the first throw is more precise from high altitude.

Outstanding, thanks! The BRU-57 is so draggy that I never use it. It is like having your speedbrakes half opened. But sadly there is no public data about its drag index.

I think that might be the case because wing tanks do have a large effect, probably larger than their DI would be. Noticed that yesterday as well. Good catch, thanks!

Once you know the Viper, every other plane feels difficult. The SPI concept, the view outside (it is so easy to hold a formation with that bubble canopy), the whole HOTAS is simply a blast.

It'll be my first aircraft to really hook me after the Viper, I think. And the one helicopter that I will fly most.

Google HAF F-16 supplemental manual. It is not allowed to be shared here, but unclassified afaik.

But at which altitude? Is it mentioned somewhere? I could only see 5000ft at the end of the video.

Optimum speed is the one with the slowest total drag in that case. A high drag index shifts the optimum speed to the slower. It might be possible with Mach 0.8 though. Just not with 0.95 or 0.5. Need to dig up the charts. I can calculate it some time at the weekend, just now I am flying Ah wait I don't have a drag index for the HTS and ALQ-131... Might add a drag index display to the wishlist

It looks pretty much like what one would assume looking at the chart.

But it was worse before, we can at least use auto gain control now.

It's better than before. BHOT and WHOT are swapped. We are slowly getting there though, and I appreciate the update even if there is still room for further improvement.

Just tested it, the limit with 2 HARM, 2 bags 3 AIM-120, 1 9X plus ECM plus TGP plus HTS is 30k on Mach 0,7. In MIL.

That is actually amazing.

Yes, but you were way above Vne? I am just curious if this is something that happens within normal flight envelope or outside of the limits. Outside is difficult to say, may be right, may be wrong.

Which altitude do you have? Vne is Mach 1.2 at sea level, going up to Mach 2 at 30k. You would need to be at 22k to fly Mach 1.7and that doesn't look that way according to publicly available charts. At 10k it is Mach 1.5. Can't check though, I am on the phone in my lunch break. But the limit for speedbrakes is Mach 1.4 otherwise oscillating might occur so this looks not weird to me. It looks like you are way above Vne.

Support the turn rates, speeds, fuel flows and sustainable MIL power speeds which depends directly on AOA and lift. If there are numbers proving otherwise, I would be interested as well. I cruise with that loadout quite regularly, even with a TGP and HTS. You need to maintain a speed of about Mach 0.7 to Mach 0.8 to minimize the sum of induced drag and parasite drag. This is also the most fuel efficient area at altitude. If you get slower, the induced drag of the high AOA will be a large factor, slowing you down until you fall out of the sky.

Please supply unclassified data proving otherwise. There is a manual out there, but it supports the current flight model.

They usually have the english manual up to date, and update the regional versions when the translation is ready.