NytHawk

You mean the VSD with the RCS orb on it? My understanding is that the centre of the circle is the aircrafts mirrored relative signature when viewed from directly in front. And then the edges of the circle show the signature when viewed from 90 degrees up/down and left/right. This (to me) makes sense knowing you can vaguely see the expected increased signatures when the target can directly see into your radome, and your side profile. It also lines up with the target positioning on the HSD.

I just interpreted that myself as "We're developing Sniper and then we'll consider potentially making LANTIRN"

Я не вижу сайт. Он еще в разработке?

There are quite a few slideshows and simulator demonstrations out there showing the VSD page in action and interacting with ownship and target positioning. This is the clearest screenshot I have found of it so far. Note the bug splat when BLOB is enabled on the HSD.

You can't just turn any DCS radar into an AESA in DCS from a .lua file. Simply speeding up the scan rate will just result in less dwell time over targets. You also won't be able to add any of the intelligent beamforming that the F35 has. Even if we do get a block 2B/3I, it will still be by far the most capable BVR aircraft in DCS. The AESA will allow much higher tracking quality and faster acquisition times than any MSA, the DAS can act as both a 360 degree IRST system and MAWS. This is also ignoring all the advanced datalink and sensor fusion functionality that the F35 gets. I don't see where this not being "capable of penetration" concept comes from. Even the much earlier F117 with basically zero defensive systems had absolutely zero issues penetrating some of the densest IADS in the world. Regardless, many people would find it more enjoyable engaging at much shorter ranges. Also, the F35 release is ages away, and its incredibly likely ED's plan and general scope of the project will change considerably. The original FAQ even mentioned a lot of SDD munitions such JSOWs and SDBs before it was edited.

Realistic in terms of capabilities...? sure? Realistic in terms of how its integrated and employed? Incredibly unlikely.

I can assure you that future HARM/AARGM integration on the F35 will be completely different to what we have seen on the F16 and F18 There are limits to this, we shouldn't add weapons and major features in which we have absolutely zero understanding of.

How is ED meant to implement a capability which doesn't exist yet, and has no practically information about it? Shoving a HARM onto any aircraft on DCS is the easy part, actually finding a way to accurately incorporate it into the PVI is the hard part. The public simply do not have enough resources to make this happen. ED developing a module (especially as controversial as the F35) will always be stuck in a catch-22 situation. Damned if they implement some unfeasible and unrealistic feature, damned if they don't.

I have limited experience on the A10C, however MADL used on the F35 does basically everything you can do in the F16, plus more. Friendly aircraft will have their own PPLI symbology. Cyan for aircraft in your flight, Green for friendly aircraft outside of your flight. Ownship symbol is the cyan hollow F35 icon. Friendly F35s (likely other aircraft as well) will show a dashed line between them and their next-to-shoot target. Once a missile is launched, a missile symbol will appear and travel towards the target. The missile flight path is shown by another dashed line, and TTI is shown under the missile symbology. F35s can send images and assignments for ground targets from its own A2G sensors (like the FCR) to specific F35s in its flights. Target assignments will appear as inverted cyan triangles in all of their portals (TSD, TFLIR etc). White triangles represent ground tracks, moving ground targets will have a white vector on the top showing its direction of movement. Half filled triangles indicate ground tracks which have been correlated between both on-board and off-board sensors to my understanding. Information from both MADL and Link16 combined with onboard sensors can also affect the Fusion ID and confidence on the expanded data window. F35s over MADL can collaborate with each other by sharing all sorts of information from all their sensors individually (FCR/DAS/EOTS/ESM etc). This allows for some additional ways of acquiring and tracking targets including TDOA and passive target triangulation. There are obviously a lot of other MADL features on the F35 which i haven't covered. or understand yet. Such as this Imagery request system above. All images above sourced from various youtube videos and several slideshows from LM with unlimited distribution statements.

Sadly scorpion isn't chronologically accurate for our F16. Scorpions are only just starting to be adopted by the ANG. We also haven't got much information showing how its integrated onto the F16 (symbology etc.) to my understanding.

Block 3F entered OT&E in late 2018

The Block 3F was the first F35 with full operational capability. Everything before it was a glorified test aircraft. Block 2B/3I jets could only carry two AMRAAMs internally with no sidewinders and very limited A2G payload.

I don't get how this is related to the F35.

Did you exit the hangar you were in (if applicable) and ensure you have enabled GPS time in the DLINK page? This should be done before MIDS is powered on ideally.

Developing such a complex airframe without any weapons systems, datalink, limited to m0.9, 5g and 18α respectively seems like a very wise use of development resources.

May i ask what exact version are you running?

Ideally you should have it disabled when using a non force-sensing stick.

I'm not that familiar with how the MB-339 flies, so I can't really comment on its exact behavior. The MB-339 is a much lighter airframe which is probably a bit more responsive to control inputs in DCS than its real world counterpart (assuming you're not using a FFB stick)

Its mostly inertia, but there are some other forces in play. When turning, your nose is rotating around your pitch axis. Levelling out with only roll input doesn't counteract the inertia, hence why the nose can rise after levelling out. Edit: The increased vertical lift component will also contribute to the nose pitching above the horizon when levelling out.

By default, the F-16 will automatically trim itself to maintain 1g flight. You'll notice that the pitch will stop creeping up once the G-indicator on the HUD reaches 1g. As @Lace said, you will need to reduce backstick pressure (or even put in some forward pressure) in order to maintain 1g and control pitch creep after levelling out.

I feel like it would be nice if we can get this cool and wacky soviet agricultural aircraft as either a static asset on farms, or as a thing you'll occasionally see flying around and maybe cropdusting.

AARGMs (or any ARM) have yet to be implemented on the F-35 yet, so i find it highly unlikely.

C6 Was actually developing an E-7 AI asset for DCS, but sadly they ceased development recently.

Leading Edge Flaps should be elevated 2 degrees when weight is on both main landing gear, among a few other circumstances. Leading Edge Flap position is automated in flight dependent on mach, altitude and AOA. So under certain positions, the LEF can be elevated in an upwards position. (Referencing Page 1-118 of T.O. GR1F-16CJ-1)

To my knowledge, entering STBY mode when in OPER has not been implemented yet in DCS.