throAU

As an aside - I suspect people may be disappointed with PK in DCS vs. reality in general because (for example) the Phoenix and anything else typically does pretty well against targets that do not manoeuvre. The history of jet fighter missile combat is mostly USAF (or Israel using USAF spec or better aircraft - or in the case of f14, iran using USAF model) against export model or ancient models of Mig presumably with no or terrible RWR, no AWACS, minimal pilot training, minimal SA, etc. This would have made detection a lot harder for many of the missile kills that have actually happened - most of the kills against foreign fighters may well have been against pilots who didn’t even detect the launch and react.

yup, agreed and this is why i think simulating something like the VTAS helmet which likely had significant penalties in real world use is not “worth it” for the f4. Human comfort factors are often as or more important as machine factors in determining effectiveness but unfortunately there’s no an easy way to simulate some of them.

guessing 1970s helmet mounted tech was heavy. you’re talking pre carbon fibre, pre electronics miniaturisation, on top of helmets no doubt already made with heavier than modern materials. under G multiply the weight. that additional fatigue will be felt every time the pilot turns the jet, whether in a dogfight or not. probably made it much more painful to look over shoulder whilst under g load; likely more than negating the benefit of some small off bore sight capability as someone who regularly rides with a motorcycle helmet and has noticed improvements in tech being a real world comfort improvement over the past 20 years due to lower weight and better aerodynamics (without multiplying the weight difference due to g loading) i am not surprised it wasn’t liked. if it gets modelled in the sim, it should come with some form of pilot g tolerance penalty. how much? how to implement? who knows. probably a simulation issue…

The black smoke like that is incompletely burned fuel. So reheat will clean it up, as will engines that work more efficiently

Yup, and you can always do manual bombing in a 4th gen. Also, if you know how to put yourself in position properly the CCIP pipper just confirms what you’ve already lined up…

I’m practicing with iron bombs, etc. in the f5 already.

steam pre-order when?

i just want a Draken… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_35_Draken

sounds like a sensible load out to me. the radar won’t be great, by the time you’ve spent 2 aim7 you’re likely merged anyway. err looks like i quoted the wrong post. was referring to the 2x aim7 and 4 aim9 load out…

you also described an f15 or su27 the f4 is basically the 1960s tech f15

… and i’m spent

this is my bet. it’s too good an opportunity to pass up even if they’re holding it back for a week. for pre order at least.

Vietnam was limited by ROE severely. And I figured we were talking about airforce vs. airforce. Not the total war objective as that's entirely dependent on non-aircraft related things, which are outside the context of this as far as I'm concerned.

See the rest of my post. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Point being, the engine is not the only thing that influences performance - and as a result, comparing engine performance across airframes (especially fixed vs. variable geometry inlet) is apples to oranges. Look up the SR71 for example, a huge amount of thrust was generated by the intakes at speed. Again: the rest of the aircraft - especially inlet design - influences engine performance. The sr71 is an extreme example, but sometimes extreme examples are useful to illustrate that other things matter http://www.enginehistory.org/Convention/2014/SR-71Inlts/SR-71Inlts.shtml

Against the russians: based on the outcome of ukraine - 100% I’d wager that a whole heap of the supposed russian military capability is in actuality tied up in holiday homes in the south of france, private yachts, cryptocurrency speculation, etc. (due to corruption within the government). Against china? I think the usa has more/better supporting infrastructure and associated armed forces. Against anyone else - they’d do it in their sleep.