Gunfreak

Same way you would defeat a MiG23 or other BVR capable aircraft in DCS with an F16 armed with a Sidewinder.

I didn't say irrelevant. I said the main Soviet fighter until the mid 80(85-87) would be the MiG23. Which it was. None of the links given over support his claim. None say that 600 was made by 85. That 800 29s had been made by the 1990 gived zero support for the 29 being the main soviet fighter in 85-87. I've found no source that list all soviet aviation regiments and what they used during the 80s. I've found a few random regiment. Some had MiG29s by 86 or 88. Some didn't get them until 90. I do find many that still use the 23. I also find that Poland and East Germany didn't get their own 29s until 88 and 89. And then less than 30 each. I also find that some 500 were in operation with the soviet airforce in 1990. Which again is fine. But 1990 isn't mid 80s. And the Soviet airforce still had 1500 23s in service at this point.(granted many of those in fighter bomber configuration) The whole point is. If you are doing a scenario set in 83-85. The MiG29 would not be the main soviet fighter(they were still converting older 23s to MLD specs in 85) and Poland and East Germany didn't have any until the late 80s. Saying well it entered service in this and this date. Therefore there would be 500 operational ones within a year or two. Don't sound realistic. Churning stuff out of a factory is the easy part. Training pilots and crew, adding logistics can take far longer. The 29 suffering from a lot of technical faults. With something like 65% readiness in the mid 80s but up tp 90% by the end of the 80s.

And yet the MiG23 was the main soviet fighter untill the mid 80. In 1990 the soviet union had 1500 Mg23s in service. The first units to get operational MiG29s was the guard units who got them around 85. While Warsaw Pack countries like East Germany and Poland only got them in 87-89 period and then only in small numbers (less than 30 each) So no the MiG29 would not be extremely common for most of the 80s. One thing is making the thing itself. The other is making the logistics needed for them. Training pilots and ground crew. Same would go for the R73 too. Having a million on them in storage isn't as them being combat ready. Old stocks wouldn't just be thrown away. In the west AIM-9M and even Ls would be used long into the 9s and beyond. Sure if the soviet planned a major ww3 thing. They would try and get their best missiles to the front line. But the 1980s wasn't exactly the high point of soviet military might.

But how prevalent would it be? By the end of the cold war. There was plenty of R73s. But given how stuff usually work for military stuff. It can take a while before they actually reach units. And then you'd often get stuff like half a squadron having the new stuff. Or aircraft flying 1 new missiles and the rest holder stuff. Given it was in use from 84. How many Warsaw Pact MiG29 units would have the R73s in 85, 87 or 88. Even MIG29 itself wasn't that common untill the middle of the 80s. With the 23 still being the main front line fighter untill mid 80s. None of that matter you just fly the 29 in some generic 80s Cold War server. But if you are doing a realistic ealy 80s scenario. There shouldn't be any R73 at all. And not that many 29s either. And even in 85/86 I would think the R60M would be more common on the 29. And then it's advantage in dogfighting vs the F16 wouldn't be there at all. And not vs M2000 either. And far from a certain victory vs the F15A either. Now in a 88-90 Scenario the 29 would be a bit of a beast in the merge.

I've been harping on that all warbird engines in all modern fight sims seems to be way too sensitive to surive real life and death between young men. And doesn't seem to match any first hand accounts I've read. And I've read quite a few. But I'm not gonna go on yet another long rant. I still don't understand how an engine can overrev when I pull the RPM back. If I pull the RPM back to 2000rpm. In a dive abd the needle never goes over 2000. How can i overrev it? Yet it the only excuse I can find for my engine dying within 30 seconds after diving after a 190.

I'm honestly now sure how a constant speed prop cam over rev at all. Especially in an engine known to be indestructible. Yet the P47 engine is the most delicate engine on any warbird in DCS. I haven't tested much in a whiile but some 7-8 months ago. I would break the engine in 10 second dives from 30k feet diving after a 190. It happened if I ran at max WEP with water on. And happened if I throttled back. A few seconds in a dive and the engine broke. I even had it happen at low altitude shallow dives from bombing. Dividing 20-30 degrees from 12 000 feet to 3000 feet. Would break it some 6-8 months back(this I didn't experience last time I flew the P47 a month or so back.)

Steam does pre-order all the time. Sometimes with 1-2 years advance before the release. It's ED/DCS that somehow can't get it to work on steam. They could before. But now they can't.

Can't you do something so simple as 100% is what it is now. But let you move the thing past 100% to 125% or what the full load would be. The default when placing a p47 would be 100% and then you can choose to put it over 100%

Apparently not.

GCI will be very interesting if it can be added to other modules.

It would be very helpful if conventional artillery could fire illumination flares. And let us order the artillery to fire automatically after however many minutes the flare lasts.

Oh you say the Hellcat is out? Oh wait it isn't We aren't just talking full fidelity here, lack of AI aircraft to make proper 1944 missions and environment. The Mossie didn't sell well enough, so they haven't done anything with it for 3 years except using it as a test bed for some new gear physics(probably because it didn't sell well enough, so if it broke only a few would get effected.) Nothing major has happened for WW2 DCS for 3 years, imagine if nothing had happened to DCS jets for 3 years. What 3rd parties are you talking about? The Corsair that is at 8 years and counting development time, or the I-16 that doesn't fit into anything we have, or the IL-7 that also won't fit into anything we have? Again, it's a lack of interest from ED that is stopping development nothing else. They choose to prioritize their jet stuff, because that's were the money is. But as long as they do that, they'll never make a proper WW2 sim for those that want that. We'll see when the PTO comes out, if it will get proper support, or if it will get a few thigs, then nothing for 3+ years. And the full fidelity isn't an issue, if you ask someone who flies that other WW2 sim, why they don't fly WW2 DCS. You'll always get the same answers. 1 Too expensive, having to buy an aircraft, a map and a asset pack(ED is again forcing a paid asset pack for PTO) 2. Not a real WW2 sim, as there is next to no aircraft to fly. Lacking any proper WW2 environment and a mismatch of aircraft and maps. Both those answers is something ED could do something about if they wanted to. They simply don't want to, because they don't believe it will make them enough money. Which is perfectly legit reason for a company that has to make money, but don't make up other reasons for why nothing major is happening with WW2 DCS

That's the point. They could make 2 ww2 full fidelity modules a year But they choose not to. Probably because they don't expect it's worth the money. And that's the problem. DCS WW2 doesn't make them enough money for them to prioritise it. And since they don't prioritise it. WW2 dcs doesn't attract enough players to for them to make enough money on it for then to prioritise it. And on and on this cycle goes. ED could make the best WW2 sim ever made. But that would require time and money ED isn't willing to use on ww2. So ww2 DCS continues to be the unwanted stepchild.

This would be pretty standard for artillery during ww2 and throughout the cold war. But I'm unsure if any artillery in DCS. Can fire that or if it always has to be done with triggers or aircraft dropping flares.

12 Ship Luftwaffe F-4 strike to take out 3 Soviet reinforcement columns, some 150 tanks, APCs, trucks, fuel, SHORADs and AAA.

Let's actually flesh out what we have, namely 44/45. At the rate ww2 dcs is worked on. Asking for 3 aircraft is a 8 year development job. In an ideal world. DCS would get 1-2 ww2 aircraft a year. Expanded channel map. 5 new AI aircraft. But that's not happening and probably never will happen. We can all wish and dream, but asking for a totally new ww2 project. Is like asking for 2 random 1942 aircraft made over 4 years and never anything else will happen.

Mabye this is already a thing. But would be great if we could force radar and especially rwr off in AI aircraft. Say you want your MiG21 AI to be closer early models like that used in Vietnam. As far as i know. The MiG21 modeles used in Vietnam didn't have RWR even at the end in 73. As it is now if you want to sneak up on a MiG21 you have to turn off your radar. But in real life an F4 could fly towards a MIG21 fire off a Sparrow and the 21 would never know the F4 was even there until the missile hit. Unless it had GCI that could warn it. Having an option in ME to force rwr off would help make the AI less omniscient when they shouldn't. Same with say F4s, and F100 and F104 when they come. They shouldn't have RWR if you are simulation 1965

Egypt also had Sparrow F16(Isreal apparently demanded that Egypt couldn't get Amraams for their F16s)

There are now quite a lot of air bases. They are mostly adding infrastructure around these places. Which means that between these strategically important places there still isn't that many towns and villages. Some ports are added though. The second biggest city on the map Tromsø is still missing. But given it's quite large and have some unique architecture. It's probably a bit of work to get done.

ED is working on new infantry models. With much better animations. Including new insurgency infantry. I don't think we'll see any new infantry models until that job is done After that hopefully official and unofficial infantry models can use the new animations.

If Evenes airbase is on your Kola, then you have the newest version of the map.

The map is so RAM hungry. That I could not run a dedicated server and play the mission on the same computer. If i run a dedicated server. And join it on my PC all 64 gigs of ram would be used. And DCS would crash when i selected a side in the MP server. When playing on singleplayer if i tired to save the mission. The game would crash. I bought more ram. And with 128gig ram I can save the mission state and end the mission without cashing (though the game is unstable and do crash randomly) and when I do hit Save game. The game freezes for like 2 minutes before it saves(vs instant crash with 64 gig ram) This is a bit mission. Dozens upon dozens of aircraft. SAMs, hundreds of tanks and vehicles shooting at each other.

The the mission is supposed to begin with an artillery barrage. That barrage could have been set and made ready before the mission starts. "Simply" add the option of "pre planned barrage " in the fire at point to remove the delay.

It was released a few days after the Easter update.

Can't add track. It's too big. No mods.