Temetre

R-60 isnt all aspect; with an uncooled seeker Id imagine it should probably pretty rough. The R-60M is an upgrade from the 80s with a cooled seeker head, that supposedly has limited all aspect. The stuff people say about the Sparrow being so bad seems more and more like a myth though. Sure, the missile had a rough time in Vietnam, with poor training, bad maintenance and quirks to be ironed out. But doing a double check, it got apparently a similar kill number as the Aim-9s. So if the missile is so bad, then why did it get so many kills? Desert Storm is 22 Aim7 kill and 6 Sidewinder kills, and thats despite the rules of engagement limiting BVR usage. Seems pretty efficient?

Everything from Aim9D onwards is a cooled seeker. Feels like the R-60 is way overmodelled if its similar in performance? Tbf the PK stuff is very complicated. IIRC the Aim-7s, in the end, got the most kills even in Vietnam. So clearly there must be conditions under which it works very effectively.

Hm, I looked it up on wiki. Aim-9 should also have a 9kg warhead, compared to the R-60s 3kg. Btw were talking R-60M I assume? Apparently base R-60 didnt have cooled seeker, should be rather unrealiable in anything but tail aspect? Yeh, talked about that on the discord as well (im reymt there). Theres a fuse to disable the lock tho Winders+Ters is gonna be there, weve seen it a lot in the trailers and its in the manual.

Oh, can you lock without the range measurement? Tbh its been a really long time ive used the system, I just remember it being kinda whack. edit: Ive just given the SU27 a test flight. The EO doesnt even seem to show any targets if it doesnt know range? As soon as they appear, they are shown by range.

I close my eyes because it flickers so hard in VR QQ OpenXR flickers too, if maybe in a different way. But the entire game runs stuttery if you use OpenXR, and image stability is generally a bit worse (steamVr issue?), so thats not useful.

Oh, I do agree with it being unrealistic and an RP thing. But thats also why its silly to say its cheating, because thats saying people are wrong for not following your RP rules. That they arent living your personal fantasy. Im not saying its not useful, im saying its not required to dogfight well. You dont need it to make use of your nose-authority after you bleed some speed; and I dont think even STR/rate speed relies on pulling more than 7.5g?

Its kinda funny when people use realism standards to justify not using the paddle, but then talk about "cheating" (which is a gamey thing) when people do. Its like people take offense but dont know why or how to express it. But yeah, the paddle really isnt that relevant to F-18 dogfighting.

Maybe it would help to have links/references to the manual, assuming the changed feature is already explained there? (tbf i imagine manuals lag behind a lot of the time)

Is that 32km? Thats an insane range for EOS, even with how broken and magical it is in DCS. IIRC the Mig-29G in reality had an EOS locking range of 6-8 miles or so, with way more limitations. During evaluation by the US they considered the IRST capability basically useless. So I would hope that its just way too far away for an IRST lock, and not a bug.^^

Yeah, a unified baseline radar API would be really nice. If it does all the basics well, is nicely implemented and configurable for specific features, that could help other modules a lot imo. Radars are just so complicated, even getting the basic right seems to be a big challenge for the developers. Honestly, I wish Heatblur or Razbam would license their Radar APIs to other devs or DCS in general, those two seem to have the best radar models. I know at least HB is developing general radar-framework with the F-4E, which is gonna be transfered to F-14 and Viggen in the long run.

There we have it!

Fair, guess it depends where OP stands and what he wants

I think its better to learn the basics first lol.

Problem is also their AI can be very buggy and nonsensical, so its hard for training. The Mig-21 is more sensible than the Mig-15 I feel. The AI MIg-29 is fairly well done, but it can be a bit difficult. I actually found fighting the AI SU-27 pretty nice, because its big and easy to see, and the AI isnt too intelligent. F-14 might be similar to Flanker, but with more engine power; not sure if the AI struggles to fly that thing like a human does tho.

Thats fair, tho I didnt find those missiles arent overly reliable in head on engagements.

Thx, tho my confusion came from that I thought you said the Aim-7E was tail aspect, which of course makes no sense^^ Gonna be fun to do head on attacks on Mig-21

I mean Aim-7s against enemies like Mig-21s are pretty great. Enemy has almost no ability to attack you head one

Yeah im joking now about, but it wouldnt be the most crazy thing. But gotta make sure not to get your hopes up to high^^

Last part was more of a joke^^

Theres a bunch of techniques, laser scanning, 360 photos, photogrammetry, etc. I think HB might already do a few of those things.

If that disappears, then hopefully by making it harder in general to shoot down munitions, especially maneuvering glide bombs! Sounds more like he made a minor mistake this time? Probably was overly cautious after the last time he got grilled for his vid.

The 2000-5 would absolutely bring a lot, mostly MICA-integration. Those are really interesting french active missiles, with R and IR version. And probably even more importantly, we'd go from 2+2 missile to 6+2. Only being able to use 2x S530D's is just a big limit in what you can do with the plane, even offline or in 80/90s servers. In more modern battles you get wrecked by active missiles, or at least forced to give up the lock for the S530. Which is kind of a shame, because this is an amazing little plane, and the module is so well done.

It seems clearly incomplete, I can accept that with an EA module. But its so strange this stuff isnt even on the roadmap. Still flying the F-14 currently, which seems to have a much more granular damage model, its a massive difference.

Afaik the cockpit language of those planes is all english. But im not 100% on that^^

I mean the release schedule is very obvious if you think about it. 1. We expected plane last year, didnt come that year. 2. We now expected plane this year, so it wont come this year. 3. The plane will always come next year, roughly on pace with fusion power. It might release before the F-15E, however.