King_Hrothgar

We have a 1970's MiG-21 so I'd prefer a 1970's F-5E. That means no BVR at all. AIM-7's and AIM-120's weren't introduced until much more recently and are typically associated with those upgraded to have glass cockpits and modern RWR's. They are F-5E's in name only. Oh, and the MiG-21Bis in DCS can carry 4x R-60 + 4x R-60M, but not 8 of one type for some reason (might have changed in 1.5, haven't tested).

The Gazelle maybe one of the ugliest helicopters ever made, but gimme gimme. :D

The Sabre and MiG-15 are a lot of fun to fly on occasion, but they don't really fit in with anything else in DCS. Just having the sabre slug it out with the MiG-15 in a 1v1, 4v4, 20v20 or whatever gets old pretty fast imho. However, the F-5E and MiG-21Bis are perfectly happy with many existing AI units. So there is a lot of potential for interesting missions. I think the F-5E will be a far more satisfactory experience overall. On a related note, the F-5 and MiG-21 go pretty well with the UH-1, Mi-8, Su-25A and A-10A. I'm hoping for a MP server restricted to just those (and maybe some of the COIN planes like the L-39ZA). It should make the choppers and mudmovers happy too, as it will be much easier for them to hide from an F-5 or MiG-21 than it is from a Su-27 or F-15.

I don't care either way if such things are added to our Mi-8, but I don't think your experience can be used for such a broad statement. The US Coast Guard fires sniper rifles from helicopters at the engines of moving boats to stop them if they don't cooperate. It's surprisingly effective. The use of helicopters and tranquilizer guns is also fairly common for tagging large predators. Both are bound to be a hell of a lot harder than lobbing a grenade in the general vicinity of a target. This is especially true when talking about vehicle mounted automatic grenade launchers instead of single shot handheld ones. I'm not saying any of this is easily done, I'm sure it's very difficult. But with proper training and a little natural talent, it is certainly doable. In any case, thanks BST for continuing work on the Mi-8. It's already a great module, but putting all these finishing touches on it is much appreciated.

In the Su-27 and F-15, you are moving your head forwards, in the Su-25T, you are zooming. They are different actions. You can change your TIR axis in game to whatever you want. I prefer having zoom on a rotary and my TIR be head movement only.

That's standard aircraft behavior. Though I'm sure someone at some point has designed a plane that doesn't roll with rudder input (probably on a bet or dare), I have never heard of it.

Me too, I want them all starting from the earliest AH-1's armed with TOW's up all the way up to the Ka-52, Z-10 and AH-64E.

Maybe, maybe not. Just because something is current doesn't mean it's a secret. And there isn't anything particularly special about the Tiger in terms of capabilities. It's very much on the mediocre side of things when compared to other current generation attack helicopters.

They've released 4 modules so far and with each one, they made the formal announcement only a few months before release. I don't think we'll get our hands on the F-5 in December, but January or February would be a pretty good bet.

AMD GPU doesn't actually mean anything as AMD is a brand. But given that it didn't give anything more than that, I bet you have integrated graphics. Integrated graphics cards are not capable of doing much gaming beyond something simple like solitaire. If you're looking at new PC's, I suggest the following if you want a good experience with DCS at 1920x1080 resolution: CPU: Intel I5 3GHz or higher (I7 is a waste of money, DCS won't use the extra cores it has) GPU: ATI 270X or better or nvidia GTX 770 or better RAM: 8GB or more (my system does fine with 8GB for now) Operating system: 64bit version of windows, doesn't matter if it's 7, 8, 8.1 or 10. Controllers: depends on your budget, just remember you get what you pay for.

At least they didn't go the Buchon route and stick totally wrong engines in it.:lol: In any case, I'm with you on the front line fighter part. Never understood the appeal of doing a simulation of a simulation of air combat. It seems a bit redundant to me. So I'm looking forwards to Iran/Iraq scenarios and other such missions instead. The F-5E has seen a lot of action over the years, so we have plenty of options for that.:thumbup:

Generally speaking, the higher you fly, the smoother the performance. Beyond that there isn't much of a performance difference between the modules. Regardless, your PC is far below the minimum specs for this game and most other modern PC games as well. DCS is an excellent chopper sim, but you don't appear to have the hardware to run it.

Thanks for the link and google did a pretty decent job translating. Some notable bits:

I hope we get a mix of old and new missiles for it. I'd like to be able to do 1970's and Iran/Iraq war scenarios, both of which require AIM-9J's. The J model would also be a bit more balanced with the MiG-21's missiles, which is always a bonus. It already has the AIM-9M on the AI model, so I assume the newer missiles won't be an issue.

The F-5E has more in common with the F-18A than it does with the F-20. Regardless, it will be a pure WVR fighter like the MiG-21Bis. It should be an interesting matchup too. The MiG will smoke it in terms of speed and climb rate while the F-5E should be more agile.

Thanks for answering all those questions, it was certainly a long list of them. Looks like I'll be passing on it for now though. Flight models are what make or break a flight sim to me and it looks like a proper flight model for the Mirage is a ways off. So I'll wait till it has that. On a side note, yes, flight models are the most complicated part. Lots of people can make pretty 3d models and textures. Many others can also do the basic programming and math required for systems modeling. But flight models require high level math, classical mechanics (the full version), fluid dynamics and thermodynamics. Those aren't things one learns in 2 weeks at the local community college.

He said current Airbus production, none of the Aloulettes come anywhere close to meeting that description. The most recent of them was discontinued 30 years ago, Airbus didn't even exist back then.

Yes, since it doesn't have a targeting pod or an internal laser designator. Also, a GBU-12 is GBU-12. It will go after any appropriate laser energy. It doesn't matter if it's dropped by an A-10C, F-18C or shoved out the side of a completely ordinary Cessna 172 (assuming you turn on the electronics and arm it of course).

It is off topic but one of the mods merged the MiG-25 thread into this one. So I'm not too sure where that leaves us. I know, let's make it on topic. I predict the MiG-25PD will be LNS's project after the F-14. I base this on absolutely nothing. :P

I prefer to come from an unexpected direction rather than try to hide in the mountains. It's a more reliable attack method I find. Greater speed would be helpful for that kind of tactic.

I've shot down plenty of human F-15's by sneaking up behind them for a guns/heater shot. The MiG-25PD would actually make this much easier than it is with the current aircraft in DCS. Now yes, if they noticed you, you'd have to break off. Flying into their amraams at mach 2 is not at all helpful. But at that speed, it's pretty easy to outrun one. And yes, there is more than just MP. I split my DCS time between MP and SP by about half and half. One of my favorite SP planes is the Su-25A, but you are unlikely to see me in it in MP. I'm not sure where the MiG-25 would fall, but I think it would be a favorite for me in both SP and MP. It's an interesting plane with unique capabilities, even against much more modern aircraft.

I too would prefer a model that supports early AGM-65's. I had been under the impression that maverick capability was a standard feature from day 1 on the F-5E. It appears that isn't the case but it was very common regardless. Given that BST has officially announced it though, it's probably in the final stages of development. So it is likely too late for any significant changes like that.

It wouldn't have to be BVR, you could run down an F-15C from behind, send an R-60 up his tailpipe and fly away in near complete safety regardless of if your missile hits or not. Think Me-262 vs P-51D or F4U vs A6M. Flown properly, the MiG-25PD should be borderline invincible compared to the F-15C and Su-27. The trade off is it's very difficult to get into a good firing position. I can't think of a more interesting fighter to fly in MP against other humans in DCS tbh. It would be totally unlike the FC3 fighters and MiG-21Bis.

I don't see how flying around an unarmed 2-seater F-5 with downgraded engines would be a new experience over the F-5E or the trainers already available. NASA does have a pretty paint job for it though, I'll give you that. In any case, the F-5E is a perfect match for the MiG-21Bis. I'm glad BST has extended their pairing of aircraft to include LNS's MiG-21. I would have preferred the Mi-24 and AH-1 as I mostly fly choppers in DCS, but as far as fixed wing goes, the F-5E is the best possible pick for DCS at this time.

The standard PD model uses R-40R, R-40T and R-60 (max 4, outer pylon pair). It is a one trick pony of course, but speed is a really good trick. For comparison, F-15C in DCS is also a one trick pony (spamraam and run away) and yet it's the most popular FC3 fighter by a wide margin in MP. In any case, my opinion on the matter is unchanged from nearly a year ago when I last posted in this thread. The MiG-25PD is still #1 on my fixed wing eastern block wishlist. #2 is a MiG-23MLA+MLD pair.