irisono

I don't think you've even come close to understanding the problem. Have you tried doing ACM with AI Migs with their current FM? It's like fighting UFOs, completely unrealistic. So, ACM and improved AI-FM behavior by using GFM do have something to do with each other, don't they? I won't no longer comment on your posts here until I've seen that you've understood the problem.

It's not just a big nuisance for the F-4 jockeys, but for everyone who likes to play SP campaigns and Cold War era missions. Commercial campaigns, pre-80s modules like the F-5E, F-1C/E, F-86, all Migs -15, -19, -21, and even modern modules are thereby massively devalued since playing against AI opponents with such a crappy FM spoils the whole fun. In my opinion, it's a disgrace that ED is fobbing off its largest and most important customer group (SP users) with such poor quality AI FM and AI wingman behavior. It's very frustrating to see that the promise ED made years ago to remedy the situation with GFM has not been kept. I cannot accept such statements. Especially since ED has made it clear that it will promote trends such as Cold War era simulation with the corresponding maps and modules. But Cold War air battles mean ACM/BFM with early Fox-1, rear aspect IR missiles and cannons. These weapons, but above all the behavior of the AI planes and the AI flight models, must be reasonably realistic; otherwise none of this makes sense. The prerequisites for such scenarios must be created before the maps and modules are introduced. Today we are a long way from having reasonably plausible ACM/BFM. In the meantime, ED sells us the modules which actually have little value to us due to the missing prerequisites. They keep us waiting for years with promises to improve the AI situation e.g. with GFM.

May I ask you, why are you and your buddies here if realistic air combat simulation is not important to you? If I interpret your statements correctly, you could also use the famous arcade game as a training tool for your exercises. I think you should also respect the opinions of DCS users who want the simulation to be as realistic as possible.

Please note in all your discussions that the AI Mig-21Bis in DCS does not behave in terms of performance like the corresponding aircraft did. It does not represent a Mig-21Bis but more a kind of a Mig-21UFO. All these debates are therefore purly hypothetical.

The AI opponents, especially the Mig-21: Quote … You win only if AI make mistakes, and AI do make many mistakes and mess up with geometry if you give it the chance. or Quote … what they do have is perfect SA and the ability to fly very precisely… What now: The great experts in air combat fundamentally contradict each other. The fact is that the AI flight models are in such poor condition that DCS has been forced to launch an extensive GFM (General Flight Model) program to correct this problem. The self-proclaimed air combat experts should finally realize this. As long as you fire Fox-3 volleys or 4th Gen IR-seekers, you won't notice this mess. But when you get to a real dogfight with cannons and rear aspect IR-seekers, the broken AI flight dynamics have a catastrophic effect in the sim immersion.

I'm sorry, but I didn't find any wisdom in this thread, other than some uninteresting video clips with labels on and general phrases like...You should constantly predict where your enemy will be in the future and maneuver your plane accordingly… Without taking into account that the opponent is using unrealistic flight dynamics and is uncatchable.

There is no advice for combating UFO planes with the F-4E. The AI flight models of some DCS modules are unsophisticated and completely unrealistic. Measured by their real technical parameters (power- and wing loading, G limits, etc.), these DCS modules can rise into the sky like rockets, and they hardly lose any energy during high G-maneuvers. They can fly abrupt turns without being damaged. In reality they would lose their wings. The UFO behavior of modules such as the Mig-21Bis, Mig-19, F-5E must be corrected as soon as possible. The best solution to address this problem is the early introduction of the General Flight Model Program (GFM) announced by DCS. This announcement was made a long time ago. Little has happened so far apart from a few corrections in the WWII section. This problem remains unsolved for all other modules. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/newsletters/a134f231fe8269e1c78dd6d0dd8c3c9d/

That's good news. Your "what-if mission" is exactly the encounters that I would like to simulate as realistically as possible. Thank you very much for your help.

The J-7 itself was used in many conflict areas around the world but it could also stand in for a Mig-21F-13. In the wake of the emerging Cold War era in DCS, a J-7I or J-7A would be a great asset for those who prefer air combat maneuvering (ACM) to BVR encounters. The upcoming modules F-4E, F-104, F-100, F-8 Crusader and A-7 need a worthy opponent over Vietnam, Sinai and the South China Sea. I really hope that Deka Ironwork makes this wish of the Redforce community come true.

I really hope we can soon admire the Su-22 over the cliffs of the Kola peninsula. A fine and wonderful job, thank you for your efforts.

Thank you very much for this great mod. All your efforts were worth it. It does and will enrich the emerging Cold War era in DCS immensely. How about a Su-11 with the same quality.

It doesn't just take Europeans on board. The F-16A would open up far-reaching and fascinating possibilities for Cold War scenarios. Just think of ACM fights between the Viper and the Mig families from -21 to -29A. Or at QRAs against Bears and Badgers in the far north. Or the air duels over the Bekaa Valley in the Syria map. Just getting away from the Fox-3 orgies and the boring MFD finger typing.

A map with potential, especially in areas of vegetation (missing conifers), in the transitions between land and water, waves, revitalization of towns and airfields. Nevertheless, it is a real improvement over the sand maps and the already rather outdated Caucasus map. All in all, the Kola Map is a great enrichment to DCS and worth the money. I'm already looking forward to the Cold War campaigns. Until then, I enjoy every flight over this magnificent scenery.

I'm actually only interested in Cold War flight simulation. The new Kola Map release opens up wonderful opportunities to replay this era. Unfortunately, the protagonists are missing, among others, the F-16A. I see the idea of replicating an F-16A with the existing F-16C as an improvisation, but an acceptable one. I am considering buying this DCS module, but would like to know first whether the functions mentioned such as JHMCS, night vision, data link etc. can be deactivated in a simple way, e.g. via the user interface not via init.files or lua. Is there a HUD declutter function on the F-16C?

It's really all three Mig-23MLD, Mig-27K and especially the Su-17M4 that urgently need a rework. The new graphical overhaul of B-52H, S-3B etc. at the beginning of this year should serve as a model. These modules look really good now.

Because you've made a few more posts than IMGX, do you think you own the truth? Ridiculous. Back to the topic. The quality of the Kola Map looks excellent on the screen shots I've seen.

Both Kola and FC2024 announcements are great news. Will FC3's AI planes, e.g. Mig-23MLD, Mig-25PD, Mig-27K, Su-17M4, Tu-95MS and Tu-142, receive a new graphical overhaul for FC2024 like the B-52H and S-3B received at the beginning of this year? The graphic quality of the former types is very poor.

DCS is taking giant steps towards Cold War era flight simulation. I also think that the F-16C doesn't quite fit into this picture. An F-16A would be much better suited to represent Blueforce in the 1980s. The DCS community will receive the Mig-23MLA and Mig-29A, which will cover the needs of the Redforce during this period. The decision for an F-16A would actually be the logical consequence. When can we expect the F-16A?

With the upcoming modules F-104, Mig-23MLA, Mig-17F, the existing types Mig-19P, Mig-21, Tu-95, AJS37 and mods such as SU-15 Flagon (by Marco1985) and P-3C, the Draken would fit extremely well in Cold War scenarios based on the Kola Map. A Forrestal-type carrier with A-4E, F-4, C-2A, S-3B etc. would also be within the realm of possibility. All protagonists Norway, Sweden, Finland, USA and the USSR would be represented with good equipment. That would be a good prospect for all users who love historically based flight simulations.

Also for me, the F1 series from Aerges is one of the best modules in DCS. Controls, operation of the systems and especially the flight model provide the virtual pilot with a feeling of flight that is hard to beat. The Tomcat ranks in the same category. In my opinion, the fun is many times greater than with all the other FBW aircraft from DCS. The latter makes you feel like you're driving a locomotive on rails. I'm incredibly excited about the upcoming F104. For me that will be an instant order when presale is announced.

I've been a DCS user since the early days and own many of its FF-modules. But from a flying point of view, the F-104 mod gives me the most fun. Unlike the FBW-planes in this simulator, the Starfighter requires good flying skills and clever combat tactics otherwise it is difficult to be successful. VSN has created a mod that behaves as its pilots have described it in the specialist literature. It is super fast, climbs like a rocket and doesn't like to fly slowly at all. If you master these challenges, its contemporary opponents hardly stand a chance in an encounter. In my opinion a really successful module. Now to my question: In comparing flights between the G and S models, I can hardly see any differences in the flight performance, even though the S variant had the much more powerful J79-GE-19 engine (dry thrust 5385 kp instead of the 4492 kp of the G). Am I mistaken or have any of you had the same experience?

Although it is and remains a workaround for "de-UFOing", your justification sounds convincing. Sometimes it's better to have a workaround than none at all. Thank you.

Allow me to ask three questions, please. Are we talking about the same simulator here? If so, how can you claim that DCS' aircratf AI is pretty decent and challenging when our forum is full of aircraft AI complaints and ED feels forced to start a major GFM program? Or, are you working for the ED defense department? Then I would understand.

I understand some of the points made but your reasoning is very specific and beneficial for high-end mission creators. The UFO behavior of some ED modules affects the entire SP community, i.e. the majority of DCS users.

Captain sir, I have been in this sim for many years and have seen quite a few announcements like this. I hope there will be a breakthrough this time. Or will it be another one of those daring promises? In the evolving Cold War era in DCS, there will be predominantly close combat encounters. If the aircraft AI is not significantly improved, the frustration among users will increase immensely and the whole thing will just blow up in DCS's face. I would like to be wrong.