Ramius007

Except, that it's not middle way, it's just "realism on" or "realism of" setting. It's same middle way that man and his dog on avarage have 3 legs. Solution is not change realism, but to change enviroment. We will be in same spot with F-100, F-104, Mig-17, and then EF, F-35 and non announced Rafale. People will be asking to adjust them to fit pseudo Fox-1 servers, instead of making one that suit those planes. Like add fictional chaff/flares dispansers on first 3, and/or disable some features of most avanced jets.

Elegant solution!

I wonder if F-35 drop, we get thread like: "allow F-35 to be visible on radars" becouse stealth gives unfair adventage on servers, and is not balanced, just a little realism option, what's wrong with this?

I dont think that this "video game" designers, have to bow to small minority of arcade pvp servers participants, and balance modules around arcade style servers. For many people, only thing that DCS have going for them is realism, if you remove it, you can fly FC modules, free DCS mods or other game forever, there will be no diffrence with FF modules made in a way you like them to see. Issue is not realistic Fulcrum, but enviroment made by pvp server admins, that is balanced around assymetrical early XXI centaury conflicts, and made for majority of XXI centaury jets, and people who belive that Sparrow=CW. When they get actual CW technology they are shocked. This version of Fulcrum should compete vs F1, F-4, 530D less M2k, Tomcat without Aim-54, and all CW Fox-2 only fighters, and a lot of helos and attack planes, still plenty of platforms to choose from, and potential for great REAL CW server, where FF Fulcrum would be top of the food chain, yet difficult to master plane.

There is more of this I suppose, like Aim-7M on Phantom or "swedish" Maverick B on Viggen

Problem rather lies with how PvP servers are designed currently, than FF Mig itself. Single players can adjust mission/campaign and tune threats to what Fulcrum could realistically expect IRL, but servers, naturally geared towards modern modules are the issue, just a reminder that Contention CW have Ka-50, apache, A-10C and Su-25t as playable modules. We basically lack single one offering realistic early to mid 80's experiance, that removes planes with 90's and 2000's upgrades, supprise even FC F-15C is from 90's with APG-63 (V1) it wasnt really the case for original APG-63 to track low altidue threats, at least according to real Eagle drivers, and then we have F-16, F-18, Jeff, SE, even more important, such server should remove aid defence threats from late 80's or 90's, and some assets names may be misleading, our Avengers and sa-13 use all aspect 89 made missiles.

Be awere, that IR SAM's we have in DCS, are on avarage more advanced than system entry date suggest, and more advanced than ir a2a missiles on avarage. Sa-13 is using missile from 1989, Chapparel is mid 80's late upgrade, Avenger and M6 are using Stinger version from 1989 as well, even all manpads we have in game are not first generation either. There should be some flares rejection implemented.

Gazelle didnt get any update for a year or more, still is working perfectly fine, and is in better state than a lot of "maintained" modules. Even if there are no signs from PC, I would expect fixes, if something become broken in KW (or Gazelle)

I split my time betwean pve and pvp, SP pve is usually played on "hardcore" settings, but people who claim that AI planes can offer higher or even similar level of challange as human players are dellusional.It's possible against begginers of course, but even semi advanced player will be stronger than AI. Similar level of detachment from reality are claims about cheating being part of pvp, it's practically non existent. Dream come true would be server that offers realistic scenario based on realistic order of battle, with many MOVING AI ground units, but with human players in air as opponents.

I would reccomend DCS Retribution/Liberation to players who are waiting for dynamic campaign. It's IMO one of most infuential mod for DCS, and definitely worth trying, if You are into more immersive scenarios, but be advised, that enviroment with tens of AI planes, emphasizes all current issues with DCS that have to be fixed, before ED make their own DC. Some are mentioned taxi bugs, lack of sirious ATC, or AI killing themselves midair and bad fuel menagement, those to be alleviated first before DC. Also some AI modules have terrible AI, from bad BVR strategy, to crashing into the ground as wingman. You dont see those in scripted/paid campaigns or in small missions/training, but in anything resembling military operation, they are striking

I never said, that Fulcrum is better or even as good as Eagle, I m just saying, that even in DCS, while in SOME circumstances they are close, overall Eagle is much better. My point was, that combat scenarios involving those 2 were assymetrical, also be mindfull, about 3rd grade export variants, used by Iraq during Desert Storm, no helmet cuing system and R-73's, and in those fights where they faced Eagles, this IMO mattered. You can find raports from those fights online from US pilots perspective.

F-15C vs Fulcrum IRL were asymetric fights most of the time, with one side having all AWACS/ECM support and numerical advenatage, if you recreate those parameters in DCS and switch planes, Fulcrum will be performing similar to RL Eagle, you can notice this on PvP servers. Also remember about RL dffrence in flight hours betwean "West and "East" pilots.

Hunter, Sea Vixen and Lightning most likely have no market share, Buccaneer is closer, Jaguar could make some money as DCS module, and Tornado is in development. Brit Harrier have to be delivered by RB, they at least have FM for it, but again, GR would be just either too similar, or too limited to current AV-8B, while FRS no matter what particular era we pick, doesnt strike me as fun module, unless you are SA map enthusiast and like to recreate history in DCS. Old FRS is propably more fitting DCS, some niche for CW interceptor, butt with just aim-9L and unguided a2g it would have hard time making it competetive, both pve and pvp. IRL it was fighting against 2nd gen fighters...

I'm not even trying to make it another "Why no FF redfor?" I m just giving valid reasons, and those are legal, or unwillingness of ED employees to break local law, and this is understandable, I just made a reminder, that no lack of information or "secrecy" of those planes are reasons, this would be a thing, for not having most modern chinese jets, where we really struggle even with finding of cockpit photos, not even talking about performance charts or weapon capabilities. OTOH I firmly belive in future modern FF "redfor" but most likely it will be based on version used by some export customer, maybe Indian, or Maleysian, maybe Algierian, but I wouldnt expect actual workflow or specific detailed informations about avionics being modelled, as I dont expect from F-35 or even some planes we already have in game already. If ED was talking about aiming at 90% realistic Hornet, I think that 80% realistic Su-30 is possible, just not based on Russian version.

You dont have data on crew workflow during combat, but this kind of data is to some degree restricted even on current modern FF modules, technology itself is preety old, PESA radar was first used on 1985 Mig-31, a lot of weapons are late CW standard, capabilities are preety well known, also something being classified, doesnt mean that it's not known for aviation enthusiasts, You can proapbly find on internet that "classified" Su-27 manual, that prevent us from getting FF old Flanker, of coure becouse of legal status, cant be added to DCS, but does it mean it's secret or unknown?

Yeah, it was funny to me, when people were complaining about Codename Flanker Su-30 saying it's fantasy super secret plane, when Su-30MKI is actully older than Viper we have in DCS, of course devs added some weapons that are not even in service, or are on never Russian planes, but jet itself with weapons that are already in game is preety much our Viper/Hornet era. Btw, I reccomend this mod, even to people who are not planning to fly it, works very well as AI opponent in missions,we really miss something like this in core assets currently, and you can adjust weapons to scenario date. With r-77-1 finally it's F-teen peer in a2a, without having to lua hack FC-3 planes and grant them pl-12. Mod is not breaking IC

NS430 is not allowed on MP servers, It used to couse lag, not bringing GPS as integral part of module, selectable with mission editor is quite an issue. Fulcrum role IRL and landscape of DCS make it more focused on PVP IMO.

Link 16, helmet and aim-9x were not a thing before XXIc, GPS in aircrafts? certainly not 1991, during Desert Storm ground GPS tools were common, but ALL planes used during confict based on INS, drifting like hell, and pilots often turned back to radio navigation. Fun fact, that even things like NVG during 90's was not a std on F-15's. Our Hornet C lot 20 have upgraded engines and radar over 80's predecessor, it's still relatively close to CW one, if we remove DL, helmet and modern weapons,maybe for those reasons ED added Welleye II that was retired shortly after ODS, so there was practically no chance that lot 20 could even use it... Same can be said about DCS Viper. If you had to use early 80's Viper it would be a culture shock, especially old pulse doppler radar with range comperable to Fulcrum and similarly prone to notching and jamming. A Vipers were not HARM capable either, but older Vipers C were rather comperable to one we have in a2g, just diffrent weapon options with various foreign customers.

We dont have present time flyable modules in the first place, our lot 20 Hornet is already phased out from USN, and retiring from USMC, same with Harrier, F-15C retired this year, except Jeff we dont really have FF module that can play modern redfor, and even Jeff is old, no AESA pre blk.3 variant, A-10C kinda fit, but have fun against 2020's threats, same can be said about Apache facing manpads proliferation and UAV that can attack helicopters, any realistic scenario would be painfull with existing assets. What DCS really lack, are early 2000's threats, our early XXIc modules have to face boring early 80's Soviet SAMs, new CH assets will be filling this hole a bit, but it's a long way.

Are you holding consent to fire button? Goarge is more accurate after doing this, also some vehicles deploy smoke screen, this can mess with accuraacy too, as it should. AGM 114L is milimiter radar guided Hellfire, not sure there is backup SLH guidance, I doubt

I would way more preffer smtg like earlier lot Hornet C with L4, no DL, GPS, but with Nite Hawk and older Harms, if you think about Super Hornet in current DCS enviroment, it would be boring, slower with 2 extra hardpoints, need AESA radar to be made from nothing, ton of work, for propably OP and brain dead gaming experiance, like firing super long range a2a missiels onto 40y old red DCS assets, and even mods not cover this that well either, except maybe su-30 to some extent, 5th gen mods are broken in too many ways, also need new generations of a2g weapons for SH, for again obsolete in core DCS assets, like best being 40y old s-300. DCS currently have massive hole in playable modules, ED jumped from old 70's F-5 and Mig-21, FC3, and RB m2k that cover mostly early 80's single role, right into 2000's 4th gens like Hornet, Viper and later JF-17 and F-15SE, entire 80's and 90's multirole is a blank space in DCS, it's bad both for pve and pvp, when someone aim realistic scenarios, things like standard arm and older than HARM C SEAD would be welcome. It's easier to do with Hornet than current Viper.

CEP of HARM, when radar stop emmiting is also wrong, preety good chance to hit other target inside baterry, instead of village few miles away... It's not some super secret weapon, plenty of RL data about HARM performance in such circumstences.

I m preety sure that info about how small targets and from what distances Apache FCR radar can track are classified, but indeed Shahed 135 is smaller than usual "suspect", yet I imply that it has little to do with how mod is done, you will not be able to detect other objects in DCS core, that are about same size munition, or maybe even aerial targets, but only small enaugh plane/helicopter that you can test is newly added chinese gyrocopter. I played with a lot of CH mods recently, and they couse no issues, as long as you not mix large mod packs.

Most likely issue is that Shahed is a missile, not a plane or helicopter, while FCR radar is coded to only see air targets, not missiles, I dont think, that mod is a problem here. It's easy to check, if Shahed can be added as air object in mission editor

Older HARM's in DCS would be great addition, they have similar guidance, but worse kinetic performance make them more fitting into Cold War scenarios, both as player modules, but also for AI planes. Range diffrence to current 90's HARM C is substantial