Sundowner.pl

Oh God, I just have a vision of a mob of little featherless birds! :lol:

hmm... who's next ? Buckshot ? Cobra? Flip ? :music_whistling:

Not in Iran :music_whistling: Anyway, the DCS, just like LockOn doesn't have a specific time frame, that we would know of.

Wow, that's an old one, 1984 if I remember correctly... but no, I don't have that one.

Well actually that helo, if done with all the bells and whistles that Bell-Textron is offering - It would own the DCS battlefield. I especially like the idea of dual-role cockpits, when on both seats you have the same controllers, and where pilot/gunner seats is purely of their choice... plus that TopOwl helmet looks really nice.

Yes I heard that too. Can't blame them actually, since the TOW2B F&F is dead in the water, that's a good move, Hellfire missiles exceed TOW in all aspects, except of the costs, but that's where those new laser guided Hydras are coming. I got the pocket guide on both AH-1Z and UH-1Y from Bell Textron, and both are looking very interesting, and when I look at that Z Cobra, I can't help but notice how much it took from LHX (Comanche) program. It's going to be exceptionally good attack helo. Yet the CRS placement looks a bit weird... :smilewink:

No, the Longbow is the radar, but not all AH-64Ds were bought with it (costs cutting) and second: that radar is not mounted when it's not needed (right now - most of the time ;) ), this cuts maintenance hours, and stretching that equipment service life.

Let's see, actually the USMCs AH-1s have more equipment, and actually everything a Cobra can use, the Apache can too, so: Rockets: Hydra-70 2,75" family launchers: LAU-68 7-tube rocket pod (USMC/Navy) LAU-69 19-tube rocket pod (USMC/Navy) M260 7-tube rocket pod (Army) M261 19-tube rocket pod (Army) Zuni 5" launchers: LAU-10 4-tube rocket pod (USMC/Navy) Missiles: AIM-9M/L Sidewinder (from LAU-7 launcher with ADU-299 adapter) AGM-122 Sidearm (from LAU-7 launcher with ADU-299 adapter) ATAS/ATAL AGM-114A/B/C/K/L Hellfire/Longbow BGM-71A/C/D/E TOW/TOW2 In case of Sidearm, the one that are still in stock are closing to their expiration date. As for the Zuni missiles, well I haven't seen them in a long time, probably they're still carried around on aircraft carriers, but I don't think those seen use in the last two conflicts. The LAU Hydra launchers are very similar to the Ms that Army use, but have special heat-resistant coating, that is essential for shipborne use. I won't go into Hydra/Zuni warheads, go to FAS.org for info about them.

I have that one on my hard drive, if anyone's interested, let me know via PM.

I think a good tactic for start would be getting a can of red, or neon orange spray paint, and writing over the wall, just above your monitor: "Don't fly alone!" :smilewink: This will never fail you, especially in the Ka-50. But when you have no other option: 1. Fly low - but not really hugging the ground, just low enough, to be shielded from the sides, by whatever the terrain gives - hils, trees, buildings etc. You have to be aware of your HV curve, because when something bad happen, you may have not have time to react before hitting the ground for the last time. 2. 'Plow thru' the route waypoints, its not that being cautious and therefore slow, will give you any advantage when you meet something surprising en rout to target, actually is the opposite, because when you fly fast, you can get of the danger zone quicker, and make faster turns jinking AAA and manpads. 3. Near target - pick a shielded place where you can pick your nose up to scout for targets. When dealing with human players in area, I avoid places, where after poking my nose high enough, I'll be visible with sky in the background - you're very juicy target then: hot, loud, and stationary. 4. When under fire, get the hell out of there fast! use the four Rs tactic: Run away, Regroup, Rethink strategy And when possible Reengage :smartass: Those are the rules I fight since 1991, and they work good for me :joystick:

Well, you know, kittens do scratch a lot :music_whistling: And that wasn't 150 kills, its actually closer to 70. According to ACIG.org Tomcats scored 50 confirmed kills and 10 claimed during during 1976-1981 period, than add those two Fitters and Floggers Americans shot down... and it's still not even near 150 (I supose, you're quoting the Tom Cooper book ? ).

It is actually realistic, yet still easier then the real life (no LTE phenomena and engine lag, that are simulated in DoDo's Bell 206 add-on).

As a member of Group Tomcatsky, I'm all for the F-14, but... F-14A, well ok, but as an 'enty' level - what do I mean ? The F-14A is not a 'true' Tomcat, the whole thing is downgraded by its engines that were there only temporary, but stuck for next 20 years. The first true Tomcat is the F-14A+ (later recalled as F-14B), that one in my opinion should be modeled first. Not to modern avionics, but good engines, and finely - precision strike capability. The F-14D is actually as good as we can get. New radar, new avionics etc. Making an F-14A would of course be good, we could fly it in Iranian markings, play some NSAWC scenarios, it would make for few good missions... But it wouldn't serve justice for that outstanding airplane, because all its life, the F-14A was less than was designed to be.

Nah, you got me wrong ;) Let's start from the beginning, shall we ? It's 1998, and the Falcon 4.0 draw a line, a point where you could go with avionics and campaign design. Than Lock On came... and not getting into talk if it was rushed, or who's blame was it - it didn't go as far as that older sim. But in graphics, online code, playability and 'feel' was ahead, and was still improving. The Falcon 4.0 stopped at 1.08 in somewhere 1999, anything more had to be done by the community, and was restricted to the original .exe - and its possibilities are running out. No one can tell that Open Falcan, or Red Viper for that matter, is as good as it gets, and we don't need another F-16 sim. We do. Actually we need it more than ever, because of the possibility to actually fly it against something living. We'll get Ka-50, than AH-64, after that A-10A, so next should be the SU-25T, just as counterweight... so what would be better for next two airplanes than F-16 and MiG-29/35 as multirole fighters ? Than Su-27/30 and F-15C/E as air superiority, Su-33 and F-14 for carrier ops, and MiG-29K and F/A-18 for the total mix ? We can't scratch aircrafts only because they already had their 5 minutes - decade ago. Yes, we should introduce new machines, but have to constantly improve, those who we know. Especially when many people who was raised on Falcon series, are now really flying them, this is the point, where you can get as much information as possible, missing that chance would be unforgiving.

If one want to fly helicopters - right now go for FSX, or... FS2004 with Dodo's Advanced Bell 206 (can't beat that, it's the ultimate helicopter flying experience available!) If you want to shoot something... well, Jane's Longbow 2, but it's old, troublesome to install, to run, to play... and it won't work at all on Vista. If you want to fly in packs with your friends, go for Enemy Engaged 1.9, but the avionics are almost nonexistent, and the flight model is... well... funny.

I'm really glad you cut your post there, because, just tell me... how many of those "new" things are there just to try keep pace with other sims... that are not really modern anyway, and I'm actually thinking about two of them - the Lock on, and MS Flight Simulator. Because, c'mon, it's 2007, you can't play a game where you hear "ghrghrgrgrrhrghrghgrr..." from your speakers ! That's not JFS! That's, my neighbor's lawn-mower ! The sound have to be on a level with modern games. The same goes with 'stable multiplayer' ... Who want's to play a game which online gaming means reconnecting every 30 seconds, and between - trying to guess where the opponent really is, because he's bunny hoping all over your screen ? Seriously, what they did? What were the milestones in Open Falcon, that you can say: "Yes, this is new quality. This is something I can play for the next 9 years ! " There aren't any!

Of course, its the only Falcon I fly (actually had flown, because right now I don't have so much time like I used to). Anyway, what do Open Falcon gives, that the old Falcon 4.0 didn't had ? Datalink and radios, are only things that came to my mind right now. Better graphics, 6DOF 3D cockpit etc. - that's just a CPR on that sim, just to make it still alive and playable 9 years after release. That sim won't ever get fully clickable cockpit, the HUD will always be a 2D, the AI won't get any better, the graphics can by updated only to a some degree (RV got it high... but screwed up the perspective), the Flight model, although mathematically correct it'll always be a bit of... robotic (check Condor Soaring Simulation, for the ultimate 'feel' of aircraft - unbeatable), damage model - still doing 1, 0 on airframe, you're ok, or you've just blown up. There is so much things you could do in games today, so many things for improvement it would be shame not to try. And the second thing... look at the falcon community, look how big it is... think what could happen if somebody do a F-16 sim, that had everything Falcon4.0 had... and more. Huge pile of money comes to my mind :thumbup: Actually the things you can do with todays computers and technology availble to the masses is mind bogling, the DCS won't get even close to what really could've been done. Lets sum few things from other games here: Just think of the weather and whole world from FSX, add Volumetric clouds/smoke/fire/fog just like it looks in Crysis, get speedtree, put avionics from Falcon mods, and thrown in some physics stuff Ageia gives with their free physics engine (mainly the cloth thing), structural rigidnes, like in Rigsofrods... etc etc.

Exactly, it would act as semi-smart missile, point in direction of enemy, and launch it, let it figure out on its own what to hit ;) BTW for HOJ you need an interface so say the missile to change the track mode, so it won't work on airplane that don't have electronics for that specific missile. It is very similar with the AIM-9 missile, in most helicopters you only hear its growling in the speaker, you know when it tracks something, and when its locked on, but you actually have no idea on what... well in the helicopters that were testbeds for that missile there was off course a switch to cage/uncage the missile seeker, so in lets say an SH-60 you would like to have it caged all the time and just point nose of your aircraft at the enemy, hear the whining sound, and launch it then. AH-1s and AH-64 of course have visualization of where the seeker is pointing at given moment.

Well i was writing this on the Lockon.ru forum earlier, but... The AIM-9 is a standard issue for the USMC AH-1s, but it can be carried by most of the US helicopters - actually from what I know, any helicopter, that has a standard weapons rack, and have wiring to fire a weapon, that includes the Ch-53s too. In NAS Fallon there is even an SH-60, that fly with a CATM Sidewinder to simulate Russian Mi-24 armed with Aphids (Picture of SH-60F with ADU-299/E adapter and LAU-7 launch rail). When there will be no air superiority over the battlefield, helicopters will fly with AAMs for self defense, The Apaches will haul Stingers, and when the crews would get their hands on those adapters (standard issue for the Navy and USMC, not the Army) then we would see Sidewinders too... actually, you could put an ALU-127 rail, and mount, and use an AMRAAM too, just trade it for something that those F-16 jockeys want right now ;) And I can bet, that those guys in Ka-50s, Mi-24s, and Mi-28s will find them selfs an Archer to hang under their wings in that kind of conflict we see here.

if those gas spring do not center the whole thing, then : a. It's ok b. It's weird because mounted like that, they should. For my rudder, right now, I have only a photo from WIP: those springs were meant to cancel the deadzone, but I got rid of those, because there was no such thing ;)

Chrono, if you wan't to scratch all the airplanes tat were already made... what will last ? MiG-31 ? F-16, F/A-18, F-15, F-14, F-4, F-22A, F-117, F-105, Kfir, MiG-17/21/23/25/29, Su-17/24/24/27s, A-10, Harrier, Mirages, Tornado, AH-64, Mi-24, Mi-28, B-52, F-5, B-2, Jas-39, Yak-38/141, F-35, A-6, A-4, A-7, Eurofighter, Jaguar, Rafale, Ka-50/52, AH-1, OH-58, B-1, Tu-95, J-7, Super Etnandant, Tu-160, Tu-26, Albatros ^ Those planes and helos were already in sims... so scratch them all, and tell me what's left ?

That rudder pedals are weird, what you don't want to have is centering in your pedals and cyclic when flying helicopters. If you fly a chopper, everything changes all the time, there is no center/neutral position for anything! I made myself a helicopter rudder pedals, based on Bell 206 family, working like a charm in FSX. Next will be the collective, I'm planing to do a mix of the AH-64, and AH-1W. The cyclic can wait ;)

Last F-16 - was the Falcon 4.0 in 1998! 9 years ago ! Yes, there are some mods, but they don't change much. Year later was the Jane's F/A-18, only other sims later was just another repacks of old Korea sim. The last Strike Eagle Sim was Jane's one... also in 1998. I say you just scratched out 3 airplanes that most people would love to fly (multirole baby!) and didn't have chance to be seen on our computers for nearly a decade ! What we really don't need are the planes from 60's, like F-4 (except the the F-4F ICE), F-104s, F-105s etc. yes they would be fun to fly, but I rather see a Jaguar, Tornado, Mirage 2000, F-14, Su-30, F-16-50/52/I and other more modern jets and attack helicopters.

From what we can read right now, it looks like it's Jane's Longbow type dynamic... so as far your missions goes - it's static. A real Dynamic campaign, like those in Falcon 4.0 and EECH will need the whole missions code to be rewritten... I don't think that's going to happen before BS hit the shelves.

Very comlex scenario. Lets assume that the duel was not intentional - both helicopters are not equipped for A2A. At long range the Apache has advantage - its Laser guided Hellfire missiles are guided automatically or by the gunner's hand (who's only responsibility is to keep the lock on the other chopper), plus the missile can be launched in LOAL mode, and the target painted only seconds before impact - that gives the opponent very little time to response. Ka-50 have to rely on its automatic tracking system. Everyone of us who tried the Su-25T know that you can't fly, watch for threats, and keep the targeting systems on target at the same time, plus the Vikhr missile have to be guided all the way, giving the Apache more time to cover itself, or outmaneuver the missile (which shouldn't be hard). In knife fight, the Apache have also an advantage of a cannon that can track its target quicker, than Ka-50 can turn, plus it may be slewed to pilot vision which is exceptionally good (there are no obstructions like in Ka-50 cockpit). Second - AH-64 Hydra missiles have programmable fuzzes, that may work similar as the A2A missiles, detonating near the enemy helo, raining tungsten shrapnels in its direction. And the third thing - the Ah-64 because of its sturdy rotor - can do maneuvers with lower G forces, and the pilot can allow himself to be less smooth on the controls, and just throw hiss helo into any attitude he desire. To sum it up, on equal terms, the AH-64A will own the sky. So the Ka-50 pilots will have to think and change every encounter to their advantage. Be sneaky, attack from behind, from cover, at close, leaving no place to run or hide. If spotted at long range, just run, find a place to hide, and ambush the other guy. When the Duel is intentional, the Ka-50 have the upper hand with its Archer missiles, that have more range than Sidewinders/Stingers.... yet the Sidewinder have enough powered flight time, because of the range that the enemy will be visible at - in that scenario, only thing that will matter is, who will see who first.