TobiasA

As for the fun, then it's alright. I can understand that approach. Or for training- that's fine. I'd never step into a fight where I'm outnumbered, because I know for sure that I'm out of fuel before I can get a gunshot on each one. It is more likely that they just smash me, because they easily can, assuming they have a brain and use it. The 9X is almost a certain kill inside the right parameters. You only trash the shot if you guess the closure rate wrong or fire too close right from the start. There are three kinds of players in military sims: - The dogfight crowd that fights dogfights for fun - the tactical flyer group - and the "Imma just blow things up and go back if I don't die"- group. The third one doesn't care about E/M charts, tactical formations, maneuvers, energy management, fuel management, planning or stuff. They go full burner, pop slammers and go back. They have fun. The first group cares all about the stuff that the third group certainly ignores all the way along, has in-depth knowledge of how to fly BFM's, has all the experience in dogfights and kicks other groups asses in dogfights, but probably can not do precision strikes, SEAD or sink ships. They have fun. The second group cares about tactical formations, flight planning, fuel management and stuff, has a broad knowledge of weapons, likes checklists and ramp starts. Most of them don't know that much about E/M charts and their dogfights are short and dirty, rarely end with gun kills and they are mostly mediocre in dogfights. They have fun. All three groups have fun in DCS, but they occasionally get into discussions of what is right and what is wrong. The truth is: Most of the time, it is just a different point of view. And some people (not refering to anyone specific here) tend to look down to members of the other two groups and think their way is best. My personal approach to messing with 4 MiG-19P AI's: As you see, I belong to the second group (the tactical flyers). The moment I decide to go into that fight means exactly I'm returning home afterwards because even if I have missiles left, my fuel will be gone. So, end of the shift for today. Usually, I'd throw four slammers into that group, finish the rest off with winders and go home. If those were MiG-29's or something, I'd not even engage. I could have gone for a gun shot in one or two cases but that would mean I'd fuzz around with time (==fuel) or risk a certain kill that I have with the 9X (or even 9M). So, the missile goes off the rail and if it fails, I can still go for a gunshot. I only go for guns if I'm too close for or out of missiles. For the sake of the demonstration, I did not fire winders until I was merged. The one thing that is to complain is the ridiculous AI flight model for those types. I can understand that the first group is annoyed by the AI flight model, because let's be honest it is out of this world. Also, it is very annoying if you would fight these in anything pre- 70's when decent AAM's appeared. So, we have a different look on that situation: - First group: That sucks - Second group: Wtf... Anyway, eat my heater - Third group: Sees the bogey and fires a slammer into that furball over there None of them is wrong in their point of view.

The AI flight model is some BS. Serious BS. They can follow you in steep climbs, outclimb you, outturn you. But... They have no comparable missiles. So why should anyone fight a MiG-15 with guns only?

Better late than buggy. Looking forward for it.

I have the exact same thing (without the left roll) in a different F-16 sim tho. Roll builds up slow. Similar with pitch. The real thing has a force sensor with very little movement. I think that the "dead zone" is there for a reason. But for me, it is still linear, precise and reproducable in both sims. The muscle memory of the other sim matches DCS. It is just the throttle on different blocks and engines that sometimes drives me nuts on the tanker. I can reproduce parts of it, but I can't see anything wrong. My guess is that the longer your stick is, the more it bothers since the FLCS is made for the extremely short side stick of the viper. I sometimes fly with just two fingers on the stick, resting on the sticks base...

While the X52 isn't the best stick around, mine is from 2008 and I am not having these issues. It must be something with the setup. Or the autopilot is enabled by mistake. I am not using any custom curves on the stick. One can probably tell by displaying the stick input. If that shows no dead zone or sudden jumps, the problem is somewhere else. Handle the viper like your girlfriend. Smooth rides, gentle inputs.

Are you guys flying with middle or side stick? Right side X52 here.

Yeah, it is not. More to come in the future.

Never ever, except for roll trim on asymmetric loadouts. A good practice is placing your gun cross on the end of the boom and keep it there before pushing forward. Throttle is most important. It takes tons of practice, especially on the throttle on which you need to think ahead of time due to the engine spoolup time. It is quite easy to get into pilot induced oscillations. If that happens, it will is easy to solve in the viper: push a little into a safe direction and let go of the stick. FLCS will sort it out. Then go back, stabilize the gun cross on the boom and gently push forward again.

I've been flying the F-16 in various sims for more than 20 years now and I never bothered tbh. It is a matter of getting used to the FBW style and once you do, you start missing it in other planes. My old Saitek X52 has literally no dead zone, so that's cool. I also don't have any stick curves changed. You need to get rid of the idea of flying the viper like the hornet. You fly it differently, you land in a way being worlds apart from the hornet. You also have very noticeable landing gains when the gear is down. You flare and aerobrake. You point your gun cross to the 10° line or slightly below and maintain AOA with the bracket. Maybe I should make a "Vipers conversion tutorial" on my YouTube channel... There are a lot of questions when being used to fly other models.

No... Way too expensive, way too inefficient in terms of today's basic workload which mainly includes fighting rebels in the bushes. You need a few of these as a spearhead in a big conflict, but they should not be your only leg to stand on. Stealth is important in some cases, but you also need reliable workhorses that do the same job for a fourth of the price. People praise fast jets, but what I really wait for is the meteor which has a variable thrust, can reach wide and still has power in the endgame. It will never come in DCS or will get banned on many servers... I am a fan of Gripen and Typhoon. You also can't say which is the better aircraft, you can only say which is the best platform for a specific job.

The F-16 trims for 1G. That's it. It doesn't trim roll or yaw when carrying asymmetric loadouts.

Anything that kills fast without hurting myself is legit. AMRAAMs aren't so bad in dogfights, you need to create a two circle fight though if you can (not advisable against AA-11). Lag pursuit is your friend, give your enemy the idea of an upper hand do he separates, then pull tight and pickle. It is like bringing a longsword to a knife fight in a phone booth, but still... If you create room, it is deadly. If he decides to not give you the space, you can still use your gun. The thing is: He needs to make a tight fight. He can't play on energy because your heaters are better. So he will be slow. Many of the old IR missiles don't even have the range to get you if you separate out of a superior energy state and if you separate into the sun, many of them are useless. So you can leave the fight, turn and kill him with the sun in your back with little that he can do about it. However the 21 can really make life hard if you let it come close. It is fast and agile, a somewhat worthy enemy in a pure gun fight.

What I meant is that the MiG-15 can turn tighter because it can operate on smaller speeds than the F-16. So you shouldn't get yourself dragged into that kind of fight. It is not wise to get into a turning fight with a MiG-15 if you are sitting in an F-16. - In a 1 vs 1, you can easily disengage, zoom out and come back with a heater or gun run - In a 2 vs 2, you can switch targets and clear each others six with a heater - In a 1 vs many you can just blow through the fight, leave at the other end and be never seen again - You have missiles, the MiG-15 has nothing that is comparable to the AIM-9M or even X The advantages the F-16 has are power, sensors and guided weapons. The older MiG is a better gunfighter at subsonic speeds, and is most probably more agile below 300kts. Stripping away every advantage the F-16 by removing the missiles and making the radar useless is simply putting the F-16 back into the 50-60's with a better T/W ratio and a better gunfight. It's cool for the thrill of a gunfight, but you'd usually avoid any fight once you are winchester. The gun is something that gets you out of trouble below Rmin of the heaters. It depends on what you expect from such a fight- the thrill of a gun fight because you love gunfights or getting an engagement done in the most efficient way. I'm more into the second way- only go in a fight if you have the upper hand, and if you do, leave the enemy no chance to react. However, if you are into gunfights because you enjoy BFM's, you might seek a different approach. If you do, I can't participate to the discussion because I am a dirty dogfighter, always going for a heater shot rather than a gun solution, using AMRAAMs in dogfights, sometimes leaving fights if I have not the upper hand or even zooming straight through without even banking. And avoiding dogfights because they cost situational awareness and fuel. I'm cool with both, I admire you BFM guys, discussing E/M charts, maneuvers and stuff. Most of my fights don't even have two full circles.

That is right- if you let yourself drag into a slow fight, you will lose it with the F-16. If you get your speed up and create an energy fight, he can't follow. You can drag him to where he has no chance. The only advantage he has is being lighter, and more agile on low speeds. Go fast, around the 420-550kts mark and pull a 9X on his tail. There is nothing he can do about it. A gun fight is a bit different since he'll always be able to point his nose in your general direction. But then- if you wanted a gun fight, you wouldn't have brought a 4th gen fighter with HMCS. Separate, pop a heater.

Hey everyone, is there a specific reason why you can't have your radar in A-A mode scanning for bogeys while you are in A-G master mode? I'd love to have my radar scanning in A-A mode when using HARM's to avoid nasty surprises... Is there any specific reason this is locked?

Yes, I know some people who do have the F-14... And most of them seem to miss a good RIO. So yes, I am thinking about multiplayer.

I actually think about getting the F-14 and improving my "market value" by becoming a RIO. Basically... learn flying, get the aircraft under control so I can handle it as a pilot (just to be able to handle the plane safely and with some level of confidence like other modules)- and then becoming a good RIO. Sounds fun tbh. Should I do it? Anyone doing exactly that approach?

Thanks!

Hey everyone, just wondering: Is there any maximum guidance time for the AIM-120? Like the seeker running out of battery power?

As far as I know, you can't and the wisest choice is carrying a targeting pod and use this to lock your mavs. Because the TGP will stay right were it is, and you can handoff your mavs then one after another.

If it too harsh in the center area, you can go to axis controls -> select rudder axis -> axis tune -> Curvature: 10 which will give a slightly less responsive rudder axis for fine adjustments, yet still allow larger "kicks" and leave those almost untouched. This. The brakes are so weak you can grind them to death while taxiing.

Viper is cool, but still lacking basic features and development is slow. The Tomcat is more challenging to fly, but far more complete and modelled in depth. Plus, you have carrier ops and the Phoenix. That being sad, the Viper is fast, easy to fly and a multirole aircraft. If you have the time to wait, this is your choice. As for the plane, go for the viper- but only if you can live with its bugs, flaws and slow development it currently has. If you want an awesome, pretty much finished plane and manage to get friends with jester and you are more into A-A, the tomcat might be a better choice. It also depends on your "entry level". The Viper is easy to learn since many of it is not implemented yet. A-A mainly works, LGB's on fixed targets are alright. Interdiction with CBU's or Mav's is fine as long as you don't rely on A-G radar which we don't have yet. HARM's work, but the HARM targeting system doesn't- only HAS and prebriefed do. It still is a valid Wild Weasel, being fast, nimble and agile with good avionics. It's fly by wire system protects you against yourself, it is nearly impossible to depart if you don't seriously mess up and leave the controllable area in three axes at the same time. I have not experienced compressor stalls yet. The only difficult thing is landing it the right way, but that comes quite easy once you get it. The basic rule is "flare or die" which is quite different to the navy guys. Put it on the runway like a hornet, and you go and search your wheels in the grass somewhere near the touchdown point. Still way easier than putting a plane down on a boat. The Tomcat is just a pure beast, made for BVR fights yet still very capable of dogfighting. You get carrier ops, you get an incredible beauty with a lot of A-A stuff hanging under its wings and it can even do basic A-G missions. It has the longest BVR reach ever, and the two-seater is really well made. The pilot really flies the plane, and therefore, his workload is more flying the plane instead of fuzzing with the radar so much. I have the Viper and tried the Tomcat in the free trial. The one reason why I do not own it yet is that I want to be able to fly my viggen with the same confidence and knowledge that I do have on the Viper before starting another plane. Heatblur did set a benchmark with both, even if both have some work remaining. That hornet argument however is also valid- it is a jack of all trades with mostly the Viper benefits + navy ops. And it is far more feature complete than the viper since this one is actually being worked on. The reason I do not have it is that I want to learn the Viggen first (same as the tomcat) and I won't buy it until the Viper gets some love. It feels like the money I did spend on the viper (and some maps) actually goes to the hornet and the supercarrier. So... Why not going for the hornet? Another option that you should consider: What do the people that you fly with usually fly? The hornet is flown quite often. I think that the order is as followed: - F/A-18 - A-10C (no choice for you, but very detailled and common) - F-14 / F-16 / Viggen / JF-17 For swedish squadrons, insert Viggen on place 2, not having one is treason. The hornet has quite a large player base since it is far more feature complete than the F-16, it is pretty easy to handle since it is fly-by-wire, has navy ops, is quite capable of BVR and is multirole. In your case (and probably I should have done the same) I think you should really look for the hornet, unless you either come from a specific other sim featuring the F-16 or have no interest in carrier ops. The supercarrier module goes very nice with it, and the tomcat will benefit from this as well. So if navy aviation is a thing for you, the hornet is probably the wiser choice. It is also easier to hook up with anyone flying hornets. I know tons of guys having the viper, but not flying it, or not buying it because it is so far away from being complete. As for single player, there are very little single player missions or campaigns to enjoy on the viper. You can still use the hornet in a pure A-A role, and in dogfights, it is currently one of the most, if not the most capable aircraft in DCS.

That explains a lot.

As far as I know, it doesn't because it just locks you, but doesn't paint you at all. Wikipedia says the same https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Track-via-missile http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Grumble-Gargoyle.html It is probably classified tho for a reason.

It would be so easy to fix, and bring so much more... Hope it finds its way in one of the next updates.