ShuRugal

Perhaps I am simply misunderstanding the nature of the disagreement here: As I understand it, the argument is that there is no relevance for AAW missions in a helicopter. The document in question makes a very strong case that AAW missions ARE relevant for combat-capable helicopters, and presents this argument as the key reason in resuming ACM training on USMC Cobras. Since the discussion here is about the relevance of AAW mission and weapons in combat helicopters, the paper indirectly supports helicopters being prepared for AAW roles, as it makes a strong case demonstrating the relevance of helicopters in that role.

spot on with this one. I love it when an F-15 tries to merge with me using only the art of "bank and yank". The SU-27 can fly slower and turn tighter than the F-15. The margin is small, but the Flanker is docile enough at low speed that it is very easy to leverage. I had a situation recently where I suprised an Eagle from the side as he crested the mountains southwest of Nalchik, and I didn't have to fire a shot: He went full-dirty (airbrakes, gear, and flaps) to try and slow down to get inside my turning circle... and fell right out of the sky like a brick. To the OP: The best thing you can do at the merge in an F15 is to launch an AIM-9: This forces me (the flanker) to defend against the missile. I have to pop flares (makes me easier to see, if you have that problem) and forces me to make hard maneuvers (bleed energy and potentially open my six to you). Like the guy in the video says: winning in ACM is all about creating problems for the other guy faster than he creates them for you. In the F-15, you have the ability to do this going into the merge with your more-reliable missiles.

How? The document cites numerous examples of helicopter-on-helicopter and fixed-wing-on-helicopter engagements which had nothing to do with the USMC, and even notes that the British services added an ACM segment for helicopter flight training as a result of their own experiences in real-word engagements.

what Catastrophy said: In the mission editor, there is an options page which has settings that override the settings in your DCS World options menu. The mission creator can set these options to force limited stores, disable exterior aircraft views, and control what is visible on the F10 map, regardless of your preferences in DCS World options.

I have an nVidia graphics card, and the ShadowPlay feature that came out last year for nVidia drivers allows me to capture with no detectable loss of framerate.

here we go, managed to make an improvement over my first posting: held the glideslope better once i inserted, touched down on the right-hand side of the runway, and did so firmly within the TDZ as shown by the tire marks.

Deadsticking the Flanker is always fun, very forgiving aircraft in that regard, glides for days. out of curiosity, why did you keep the centerline store? I usually dump it all if i'm landing with no/low fuel.

sounds to me like you are flying with your flaps extended. This will greatly slow you down, to the point of requiring afterburners to get over 700 km/h. Since the SU-27 flap indicator shows the automatic wing droops as well as the flaps, the only way to reliably ensure they are retracted is to look for the two flap-position buttons below the throttle. One is orange, the other blue. The blue button needs to be depressed.

as the anti-ice system draws main engine power, testing main engine power with them on will return erroneous results. It won't hurt anything to have the anti-ice off during startup checks. Ice won't accumulate fast enough to be a problem. Just remember to turn the system on before takeoff (if conditions require)

use the kneeboard. It's basically a free GPS, just remember to hit the key to mark your position (i think default is rctrl-k) and bam, instant view of your position and heading alongside convenient marks showing the mission waypoints.

the problem i have is that if i wait to engage until the -34 starts his engagement, the F-16 takes a shot, and the -34 ditches his weapons. There is a stupid narrow window between when i can pull ahead of the -34, and when the f-16 engages...

Is anyone else finding this mission to be a complete PITA? I've failed it half a dozen times now because every time i try to engage the picket fighter, i get too far from the SU-34 and the mission fails. How am i supposed to defend this guy when i'm tied to him like a flail?

Well, since the point of this thread is to show off the best landing you have managed, let's see y'all do 'em better. I never said mine was perfect, just that it was the best (from the perspective of precise control) i'd done in the flanker. I could certainly have put it down closer to the numbers, but I'm perfectly happy with a light touchdown anywhere inside the touchdown-zone as indicated by the tire marks. As to touching the runway, maybe? It didn't make the scrape sound when I was executing it, but on one of the track replays, it did (but not, interestingly, the second time i played the track). Shame I can't check for paint damage, or I'd know for certain.

ah, so i can't have the full URL in the tag. Thanks to whichever mod fixed my OP.

umm, way to miss the point? I don't care about the service ceiling rating, or the absolute ceiling. I want to know how high other people have pushed their Flankers.

Just managed my smoothest touchdown and rollout to date with the Flanker. Final vertical speed was under 1 m/s (HUD repeater showed 0).

So, flying the Ultimate Argument campaign, I have made a habit of seeing what kind of speed and/or altitude I can achieve when I RTB. I managed a new personal best today, 32,671 meters ASL, beginning the climb at 14.8 km MSL and 2,523 km/hr TAS. What have others managed to pull off?

Well, it would seem that something was done in this last update: twice yesterday, I noticed that when another aircraft is at the range where it would be rendered as only a pixel or two, a blurry grey blob is superimposed on it. I'll try and get a screencap of this effect if i can, make sure i'm not just going nuts.

I'll thank you not to put words in my mouth. As you, among many others, are so keen to point out every time a thread about "why is DCS making XYZ module instead of finishing EDGE" crops up: they have more than one programmer on staff, and they are (theoretically) quite capable of multitasking. I'm glad I'm not running things too, I'd be ashamed to let such condescending remarks be posted on my public forums in my name.

because we've been waiting for "soon" to arrive since 2011. I don't want the solution when EDGE comes out, I want the solution while i'm still young enough to grip a flight stick. This is a solution I have used in the past, and it works very well if you're willing to spend some time fiddling with it. Until you try to fly online, and realize all the fun (read: populated) servers have labels disabled.

chiming in on this issue as well. somewhat disappointed to learn that this game-breaking problem has been allowed to persist since last year....

where the tactical situation allows, flying along the center of the valley to engage mountain terrain targets is ideal. for targets on steeper slopes, or at elevations for which there is no level path to approach over, the only thing to do is dive at steep (80 degrees or more) angles. It is critical to begin such dives from high altitude at idle power. using airbrakes and flaps helps to retard dive speed as well and allow for safe pullouts.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=50522

one thing to remember with the SU-27 is that the CCIP piper is placed based on the radio altitude of the aircraft. If the ground you are flying over is significantly higher or lower than the target, range accuracy will suffer.

I would also love to see this happen, but that loadout page appears to indicate that they would go on weapon stations which do not exist on the KA-50 modeled in the sim.