Temetre

The HB guys seem quite confident to release the F-4 this year. But yes, its not impossible that itll get delayed for longer. Maybe even just because they want to make it bigger+better.

I think people are way underrating the F-4E and overrating the Mig-23. Its kinda weird, because nobody is expecting miracles from the F-4E in A2A, but the 23 is treated like its flawless perfection. In reality, the 23s radar doesnt make its missiles fly further, they are very limited in range. You might shoot in BVR, but youre gonna be WVR when - if - the missile hits. Especially if you shoot low. The lockdown is gonna be very limited, and lets not forget that the F-4E has more missile to waste. Maybe the -23 will have a bit of an edge, but its not an Aim-120 duel where radar and speed are everything. Im also a bit dubious about missile performance. The R-24 will go up against the Aim-7M, and the latter can keep up with R-27R/ER. With WVR i cant agree at all; if size was everything, then the Mig-21 would be an amazing dogfighter. And the Mig-23 is likely worse, itll have big trouble getting its nose on anything for a kill, especially with its low speed AoA limiter. While im not sure how itll translate, the IRL track record of the Mig-23 is pretty terrible, even the few ML(D) uses. Otoh the F-4E Phantom is pretty stellar, as soon as the US developed new strategies to counter soviet interceptions. Phantom served a long time, while the 23 couldnt even fully replace the 21.

Or maybe they should start selling when they can deliver something

Why do you need a lifesign after a month? Not like anything happened. Also devs are reguarly on Discord, they just say theyre working on it. No big showstopper or anything, just more work. From yesterday: edit: Posting of screenshots like that from HB discord is allowed I hope?

Yeh those shouldnt be a problem in itself. Would try different USB slots tho.

The way people also use the PK is also just nonsensical. Its like giving a rifle to a bad shot, have him miss 100% of his shots, and then concluding that the rifle is inaccurate from that. Or have the LMG-guy do suppression fire, and conclude the gun is inaccurate because most shots hit nothing.

Tbf I dont want to downplay what you are saying, or the work you did at this stuff. Mainly its to note that there is a ton of open questions. Frankly, I got more questions than I got answers looking at what you wrote and this stuff. But thats sometimes just how it goes

Tbf are you sure that this was the shadows and not just general CPU/GPU load? Ive seen stutter issues correlate with framerate (+business), but not tried disabling shadows yet.

Have you checked your USB ports/hubs? Especially if your headset is connected via USB, then it might be an issue with the USB ports or connected devices. Do you use a Logitech X52/56 per chance? Those are pretty troublesome for a lot of people.

Hm, how to put it... Sure, you might know more than me about the math behind this stuff, but if you put bad numbers into a math equation, then its garbage in, garbage out. If I had to take a guess, the problem is that you try to focus on what you know, rather than ask more about what you dont: So, okay, the numbers in the Aim-54 document dont make sense to you. But from what you posted, they are extremely incomplete in the first place. Its not clear of what circumstances the impulse and thrust describe. Is it theoretical fuel performance under specific circumstances? Is it the maximum performance of the rocket engine at one point? Or is it just generic ballpark numbers? Maybe because the exact numbers are limited to another classified document? Even obfuscation could be an element, after all. Or its just inaccurate, but that doesnt matter much because this isnt an indepths technical document. So we dont know what the document is actually describing, its not necessarily wrong. And if you dont know what the numbers mean, theres no point putting them into a math equation. Then you use the Smerch/Aim-9D as an approximation, but why? Because to you, they seem more believable. And there is reasons why you might believe so, but its still taking a big guess. This is a different A2A missile and a soviet MLRM. Considering you know the Aim-54 documentation doesnt make sense to you, how do you know the documentation of those missiles isnt inaccurate/incomplete as well? Maybe you just dont see the inconsistencies in there because they are less obvious to you. And physics in east and west work the same, but that doesnt mean the documents, estimations and ways of measuring work the same. For all the reasons I wrote, and the idea that documents might be inaccurate, which is literally what you originally wrote about. Thats what Im saying, I dont think you sufficiently put the documents into context. Seeing something that doesnt make sense to you in one document shouldnt just make you go "why is this document wrong", but rather "am i misunderstanding the document" and if so, "am i misunderstanding other documents too?". That stuff is what makes military documents so opaque and hard to understand, you cant just go the easy way and ignore uncomfortable elements and expect a good result. The RD-33 thing is my bias, my sense of skepticism is always skyrocketing when its generalized assumptions like that, and especially when they include western weapons being really bad and russian/soviet weapons being so much better. Usually that skepticism is quite warranted, somehow theres a real pattern in military sim games and soviet weapons being overestimated (and people shocked when it shows they are indeed not super weapons). This is also part of the overly generalized math. Even liquid fuel rockets are not really that simple, but especially solid rocket boosters do not have static thrust, pressure or efficiency. So clearly any single number describing those factors is insufficient information to estimate a rocket engines performance.

From what Ive read, the Aim-54 Flexadyne propellant can have up to a specific impulse of 260, though obviously lower in practice. Seens speculation that the reduced smoke propellant they used in the later american rocket motors might be a tiny bit less efficient. Either way, it seems kinda arbitrary to disregard a document because you think it doesnt make sense, and then just assume the Aim-54 has similar efficiency to Aim-9D or some random russian rocket. You can do as much math as you want, but its not that useful if everything is based on assumptions. And if I understand you right, then on the other hand you chose to believe that the R-33 does have some insane ISP for a limited time? Seems a bit biased frankly.

Yeah this kinda stutter pattern is the biggest performance issue im seeing in DCS, and especially VR.

I see, I wasnt aware the Mirages were doing most of the A2A work, that probably explains why the Israelis didnt see much need to get the Sparrow right anyway. Probably wanted to preserve the limited stock of F-4s for strike missions as well, considering supply was limited. edit: So that would be the Mirage 3? Tbh I wouldve imagined Sparrows would do better than R530s or so^^

As has been talked about before, even in Vietnam, the Sparrow is what won the air war, despite all of its issues. Got as many or more more kills than Sidewinders, despite its early problems and the tendency towards close combat. And Desert Storm was just sparrows downing Iraqi aircraft with high reliability. Tbf maybe the environment in and around Israel was just too different and american equipment wasnt adapted for that? IIRC they eg declined early M16s and FALs as well, because they werent really optimized for sandy environments.

^ Thx. The response was definitely not normal.

I mean if its actually logged then im happy. All I wanted. Well see I guess.

Read what you wrote; you told me im splitting hairs and how its unrealistic to spawn the jet midair and whatever, which is just nonsense. It reads just contrarian, trying to fight the relevance of the bug report for some reason. When nobody said that this is a high priority issue anyway. Tbf maybe I shouldnt blame ED for people in the forum being toxic about simple reports. Then again, its weird they call this "not a bug", as if they intentionally set bad settings? I think the damage model of the F-14 is about a million years ahead of F-16/18. And more concerning, the roadmap for those two planes isnt even listing any damage model improvements. Frankly, it sounds like we both want the Viper the best it can be. So why even argue about this? This was supposed to a be a small bug report just to have the issue logged, nothing more.

Well, that mentality is probably why this game is so buggy and unpolished. Something is obviously wrong, sticks out like a sore thumb, and they go "clearly not a bug". Not gonna bother with rebug reports in the future, looks like a waste of time. Ill stick to 3rd party devs who care about polish. But nah, you saying I shouldnt report this issue because you think theres bigger problems was still an really dumb thing to say.

Tbf the F-14 is also naturally a more responsive plane, from what I understand. Cant compare quality of those two tho, dont got the SE.

Also isnt the whole thing with the F-16 that its STR is generally getting worse because of the same wing surface but increase in weight? So idk if being consistent with the F-16A is really making that more believable. T/W didnt make up the loss for the F-16C either. I wouldnt downplay the BMS guys, they do great work. But is that idea of dynamic thrust really just on some simulations those two guys ran? Like, that feels like a ton of datapoints that are half assumptions, half generalizations, but none actually proof those questionable numbers.

Nice! Imo these kinda details really add towards making planes in a game/sim feel likes it as real thing. F-14 is already really good when it comes to 'feel', and thatll add even more.

Frankly, while the developer can always improve, and HB isnt perfect, its 100% your fault that you exaggerated the issue to this level. Communication cant be that bad, considering I know whats going on, and so do many others. There is no radio silence, considering devs talk here or on the discord reguarly. So first of all, lets set the facts straight: 1. A release date can have a lower or higher level of confidence. There is rarely an "exact date", especially when the developer (like HB currently) has the ability to delay the release for a while to maximize quality. Rather than release an unfinished game, like AAA-devs do again and again. 2. So if the developer gives you an internal date, then thats an estimate the dev believes to be workable. The dev doesnt got a hard release date, so he either cant give his honest estimate, or he can say nothing. Its not like the developer lies, its the current target. Its not a promise. 3. Main reason HB is not making a major hype out of it, is because they dont want to start the hype till they are really close to release. Which I think is a really good way to handle things. And frankly, I like developers to be honest and not be afraid to talk about their development, and give out estimates. So I do kinda take offense if you want absolute radio silence till release, just because you feel bad because reasons. Like... im not trying to insult you, but these are purely your feelings that make you feel bad. You cant deal with the excitement, but you surely know that release dates arent set in stone? And despite expecting it, you still take it as a promise and feels like its a betrayal if they are delayed. If you feel bad about something and your solution is "someone else has to change", then youre giving up any personal responsibility. And it wont get better, because you cant change how devs work, nor does everyone agree with your about how they should communicate. The solution is that you learn to deal with your feelings better. I dont wanna make this some dumb overaching social commentary, but its a real tendency that people are less willing to take agency over their feelings, and ask the world around them to change instead. Thats a horrible approach, since you cant control others.

Btw, things that people seem to forget constantly: 1. Both Viper and Hornet damage model are highly incomplete. The current level of G-damage isnt necessarily representative of anything. 2. Our Hornet has an improved engine. Its not the one used in the USN, so all IRL experience cant be directly applied. Idk if anyone even knows whats the difference in performance. 3. F-15C is a simplified module, and therefor cant be used as an "exact" comparision. Its flight model is 'good enough' for what it is. The damage model on FC3 planes is pretty weird (and sometimes buggy) too. ^If theres some issue, it seem like that would be it.

Clearly, Ciaphas Cain, hero of the Imperium is a quite serious and grounded charachter. I was more thinking of parodies, like Kaldor Draigo.

Apparently that it doesnt dim with the switches, that is a real issue. But I think the gauges should have a red color night mode?