Weta43

It’s a great module, and you’ll get the cockpit/model/lighting fixes free regardless of whether you buy BS3 or not. The 3rd edition has some systems added the real aircraft never had so that people can use it as it was never intended to be used... If you’re happy with having only systems actually fitted, and flying it within the circumstances it would actually have been used in, no reason not to get it now. Also - it’s fine with a twist stick - the only tricky thing is the AP, so depress the trimmer, change attitude, let the aircraft stabilise THEN release the trimmer. Edit, why you’d like it more than the Huey is that it’s easier to fly, easier to land, easier to hover, faster, tougher, has better weapons, has a targeting pod and has stand-off capabilities... And GPS and a real auto pilot :-)

So crazy they won't do a full version of this... It's all steam guages and 60's technology - there can't be anything classified left in the version we have that's not already modelled as its capabilities would be, and even with the FC3 version there isn't that much functionality you'd be adding: What's missing is the system modelling and the clickable interface, not sensor or weapons functionality, or the fact that when you try to move the laser designator after it's stabilised the gyro lets go till you drop it again.

:) Of course - What am I thinking ? Why would the US need help with anything technological ? Slightly off topic, but did you ever read the story of the Bell X1 ? (The first manned airplane to exceed the speed of sound in level flight) The US Govt was backing Bell on a project to develop a supersonic aircraft, but Bell couldn't solve the problem of the loss of tail plane authority as the aircraft approached M1. The British were also working on a M1 aircraft, and had come up with the idea of the all moving tail plane, which solved the problem. The US Govt knew the British were working on the problem and so approached the UK Govt and requested that there be an exchange of information - the British would brief the US on their progress, supply their plans, and the US would provide access to their work & the rocket motor that they intended to use to power it (on the subject of US rocket technology - ever heard of 'Operation paperclip' ? The foundation of the team that got the US to the moon ?). The UK gave the briefing, handed over the research on all moving tail planes, the US said thankyou, and reneged on the deal. So you could say the US' superior technological knowhow allowed them to develop the first manned supersonic aircraft. Or, if you were feeling less generous, you might say that the US stole the technology to allow supersonic flight from the Brits, that Germans scientists built the motor to power it to supersonic speed, & Bell assembled the parts & the US took the credit... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_X-1

Which is what I was referring to above, and why the aircrafts' layouts are so similar. L.M. appear to have entered into what was initially a hush-hush partnership with Yak to gain access to the Russian company's work on this technology, then ported that work to the F-35.

Track ?

They got rid of the harriers to curry favour with the US by buying F-35.

if You think about why the hook eye distance is bigger for the F-14, and what you already know the physical factors that are modelled, you probably have your answer ...

You think ? Because to me, if you account for a bit of tarting up to account for reduced radar signature, they look like they came off the same drawing board 15 years apart.

There are similarities because : Yakovlev did the heavy lifting, LM built the F-35...

Different maker.

There will always be planes for any map in DCS. I won't complain about not getting EXACTLY THE PLANE SET I WANT !!! Is that what you mean ?

The vagaries of the English Language. When he said "I thought", he meant in the past, but not now, because he believes you, and the "Thanks" were for giving him the new information. :)

there couldn't just be two versions running at the same time ? One for light helicopters and another for Mi-8 ?

That's what I thought.

So if it is where it should never, and IRL would never, be ?

Hegelian answer: Things that are not nice.

Hot gasses - lots of hot gas - stored in a form that increases their stability and density.

If you search it's all been done already

I don't remember anybody mentioning re-doing flight models... Another 'say it and hope it happens' ?

They track, but apparently don't navigate to that track while the lock is outside their FOV ? Look for an Ironhand post.

^^ If they'd finished off the systems that aren't modelled (higher fidelity radio systems for a start), , implemented the laser using the same API as for the other modules (So other modules' weapons can see it or its weapons can see other aircraft's lasers), added the new damage modelling, given it a better cockpit and external model, put rain / snow / ice on the windscreen & functioning wipers / demisters - I'd have said that was enough for an upgrade fee... Fantasy weapons and systems just makes me less likely to buy it, and taints the whole perception of the module. Particularly if there's no way to remove them from the external model (hint from a customer)

Presumably nothing. If you don't buy the SC you'll still have access to the current carrier - & there's no reason to believe that won't be "carriers

He said “all the same structures”. They’re not the same structures, they’ve all been updated. Yes, the shelters are in the same place — so are the runways. - because they were placed to copy actual places. You want them to move them so it feels fresh ???

If your DCS airbases look like this, you need to turn your graphics up

Although you have repeated this many times to justify your wish for fantasy elements, it’s simply not true... (And “near-imaginary” is an imaginary concept. )