upyr1
-
Posts
4446 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by upyr1
-
I was thinking about this in the Thud thread Hypothetically if an unknown third-party developer other than Heatblur is working on the Thud, and we had enough information to do a Wild Weasel variants which were 2 seaters, would they be able to licence out Jester AI for the EWO?
-
Also double the variant's that squadron used. I know looking at this post It looked like you found someone doing the Thud. Even if we have enough open-source information to do a Wild Weasel, the remaining question issue would be an AI EWO. I know there is a lot you can't or won't say however if I were developing the module and I weren't Heatblur I would aks about licencing Jester. -
The image is labeled 357th which was part of the 355th TFW. During the Vietnam war they were a composite wing, they also operated EB-66's my dad was an EWO with the 41st TEWS. He initially wanted the Thud then changed his mind
-
No thud is airworthy. There have been an atempt or two. So DCS is the only way for the Thud to live on.
-
The initial Thud Weasels were F models. The real issue though is whether or not we can get the proper tones
-
we'll have to see if a FAC can chime in.
-
Someone's asking about adding Ronald Regan to the Super Carrier pack. While I like the Gipper and think that will be awesome, let's take a moment to think about his VP George HW Bush. He was a Naval aviator so we'd need a flyable TBF/M module that inludes his plane as a livery. Next we'd need the independence-class light carrier San Jacinto lastly the carrier which bares his name
-
Why not ask for the whole class? Regan would be awesome but if we get the Bush I'd love to have his WWII carrier the Independence-class light carrier San Jacinto
-
I'm not sure that is the case, the job of the JTAC/FAC is to act as the eyes on the ground and reduce the odds of friendly fire. While we're at it I'd also like to see some imporvments for Airbone facs
-
I know but I think writing thud would be funnier than writing bump on the F-105 thread
-
Thud What would be necessary to get the G?
-
When we get a Navy Phantom it should have the VTAS helmet mounted sights
upyr1 replied to upyr1's topic in DCS: F-4E Phantom
these are legitimate reasons not to have them. However, if it is difficult to model them correctly then the discussion is moot. -
When we get a Navy Phantom it should have the VTAS helmet mounted sights
upyr1 replied to upyr1's topic in DCS: F-4E Phantom
As much as I want the E, I hope we can get the D as well. My understanding the D would basically have a navy flight model and share a lot of avionics with the e. -
According to another thread laser guided weapons are hardcoded on the ground
-
When we make a template for a sam system, it should show up as available for any nation that uses said sam with all of the components in question
-
I think this is a good argument for the advanced Phantom 2K-type upgrades if we can't get the G. No USAF version of the E ever carried the HARM so there is no realistic interface. However, I would have to double-check if there is any advanced upgrade used by a foreign air force that uses the HARM.
-
Even if there are no plans for a G we need a better EW environment
-
I don't expect to ever see an HI G, however I'd love to see as many EW changes as possible so that we can at least get AI EW aircraft I'd love to have the EB-66 and F-105G, I don't know if we can but I'd love to see someone do a FOIA request, the worst thing that will happen is they say no. The real question is how many of these manuals are leaks vs real open-source material. I remember some time ago there was the SAM simulator I'd love to see the author convert that into a DCS module
-
Anyway since we only have Red, Blue and neutral your thoughts on having 2 irregular factions that incorporate everything vs multiple irregular factions that are themed by time/era?
-
Then when you are building missions don't use historical mode. Having the option to lock assets down makes it easier to build historical missions
-
I figure there are two ways to have more generic archetype. One is more irregular factions such as partisans, guerillas and so forth the other would be to have historical mode check the date and theater. For example you are using the Normandy map the irregulars are basically French resistance or werewolves.
-
I think that would be better as an additional model
-
There is no way we could get an HA Growler, we might be able to get a decent AI one, provided ED improves the EW module.
