Jump to content

Bananabrai

Members
  • Posts

    1026
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bananabrai

  1. I think so as well. It all depends on so many factors, but in general I think the ED coders know their code, classes, etc pretty well. Also the CH-47 is at least system wise not as complex as an Apache, Hornet or Viper, and at least in the widest understanding in terms of modeling for DCS uses similar code etc. Then there is the FM but that is different for everything... In general I also think less complex modules like the WW2 birds took not as long as the complex ones, and they also got faster if I think about the Mossie for example. By now it's their 5th helicopter and I think they know what they are doing. Could still be 5 years out if they only have one guy sitting on it, in the end it is just speculation. What if it is 25 month out. Will you buy it then only one day later? Or not at all?
  2. The kings are helping us to understand. How honored we can be. Lovely how much you care. And so professional... Ah sorry, forgot you said it is not your job, I guess I imagined the rest then.
  3. I also didn't hear of particular good bombing equipment in the 104G.
  4. I am not sure how much data HB has to improve it, in terms of accuracy and in terms of making it work with all current DCS radars again. But I also think it should be a little more accurate and also work better in terms of DCS. I think the ELINT performance of the Viggen and also the HTS are a bit nerfed. At least I have some knowledge/experience to believe so. But EW is also a very sensitive topic on the other hand.
  5. So ist es. Hab schon nachgefragt bei ED, dürfen wir aber noch nicht haben. Ich mag Discord auch nicht mehr so gern, aber es natürlich auch einfach der bequemere Weg zu kommunizieren. Man kann Informationen (leider auch viele Sinnlose - siehe manche Posts) halt einfach viel schneller zu Verfügung stellen. Bis auf weiteres bleibt das also wohl erstmal so.
  6. Was that 'no' to me? Because you were saying no but still making my point. Besides, you are not the only one flying real aircraft. And if you have flown so many aircraft, you should know that there are many air frame specific differences between aircraft. Or do you want to tell me a Cessna lands the same way and as easy/hard as a F-16, B747, C-130,...? Thus I still think that AAR per se is not always harder IRL than in a simulator. It will depend on many factors for both sides: what WX you face IRL, which aircraft do you fly, which type of AAR your aircraft uses, how "well done" are you after your (training-)mission. Same counts for the armchair flyer: VR or monitor, good frame rate or old rusty sh*t graphics PC, had a bad day or a good one, excited or annoyed, do you already know the module or not,...
  7. Well, the FM got better, but the multi crew got worse I think. Maybe I was just unlucky that day, did it improve for one of you guys?
  8. Might be air frame specific experience? Most pilots I heard, say it is easier IRL, same with learning to land a plane, as you have the complete package of feelings and correct view and not like on the computer a 2D Track IR or not perfect to real world VR view. But that were also probe fliers, mostly Tornado and Typhoon guys.
  9. You choose the C-101 to be se*ier than the L-39? After I re-bought the Kamov now and enjoy the Hind so much, I need to fly the L-39 every now and then.
  10. I wonder: - How you assumed our TOR as modern. It's a CW plane and we do the non-modernized CW version of it, which we stated. - And then the iCH-47 we are getting (w/ MFDs and modernized systems etc., like the AH-64D) as CW instead of modern (besides, there was an ingame video of that) - Same for the C-130J with MFDs glued everywhere as CW? - And in general the difference between 'Nam and CW (e.g.: F-4E -> CW ?) For your question: the J-8 probably is still some time away. But you'll rate it somehow.
  11. Mir ist leider ne doppelte Plannung rein gekommen Wobei ich fast nochmal überlegen könnte, ob ich mit meinem Schwager Samstag dort hin komme, wäre eh kürzer aus Memmingen. Finde die location auf jeden Fall mega. Finde das könnte gut eine default location für 6x im Jahr sein.
  12. I will try again with working ILS. I think it starts working from 6 knots wind @GND level.
  13. B-1B, P-3C, ... so many nice big planes that offer interesting game play... Even a C-130H would be awesome.
  14. In the Viggen slight differential breaking is working as well. Could work as well. I always disable the NWS in most planes, F1, M2000, F-15E, F/A-18, F-16... Mostly at 60 knots or even earlier, as soon as I know its rolling relatively straight.
  15. Bonschab? Ist nich so weit von der Strada wenn man im Süden abfährt. Isch bloß die Manchinger Stroß nauf. Und vom HBF auch ned. Und parken kann man auch recht ok.
  16. I saw it. Just saying we had many SO campaigns coming over the years. I think it is time for a MP campaign.
  17. A-A TACAN is still not working. Is there a timeline for a fix? Would be pretty cool to fly the bird with yardstick.
  18. Which does not fully confirm something is usable or not. I know bus systems. EF is glued together by them. With that logic we should also have every US arsenal weapon on the -15/-16/-18... I know that a bus makes it a lot easier to integrate, I am not fighting you 100%, I would love to have an AGM-84D and -119 on the Viper, and for sure it is possible. But still the software of every computer and BC on that bus needs to know those new signals, so patches are involved, testing the new SW, etc. And the Spanish never integrated such a fictional patch/upgrade. That is the difficulty I see.
  19. "Player" should still be there, even in coop. And Comms could go to coalition instead of Player.
  20. A sea search mode must not be related to the capability of shooting the missile. It rather is about a rail that can release the missile, potential data connectors needed, a LRI that sends the firing command and hands-off data from an attack computer to the missile or something in that manner, whatever is the data flow of the AM.39, etc. An example that comes to my mind: The German F-4F had the hard points for the AIM-7, and a comparable radar as the F-4E, but the firing module/LRI was removed from the avionics bay/radar, so it could not fire AIM-7 Sparrows... All this doesn't mean I am against it, it is meant as an explanation instead. I'd also rather see an EQ6, cause that would also bring an AS.30L and potentially the Kh-29L. I am not really hot about the M anyways, but that is personal preference and I will still enjoy it probably. If they can find data that it would have been able to shoot system wise and it didn't because the missile just wasn't acquired, I am happy to get the AM.39 for the F1M. At least we should not play DCS: Procurement, otherwise we need to limit our DCS stockpiles for EVERYTHING pretty drastically ^^ Lets see...
  21. @Bremspropeller, we should check this out. Will coop be possible?
  22. Hi, verkaufe meine Virpil WarBRD base und den Mongoos T-50CM grip. Ist auch auf kleinanzeigen: https://www.kleinanzeigen.de/s-anzeige/virpil-warbrd-base-mongoos-t-50-cm-grip/2503735281-225-7615 Bei interesse einfach melden, gern per PN oder kleinanzeigen oder Discord (Mailman#irgenwas^^)
  23. Is there somewhere data for the airfields on the Syria map, for example Akrotiri? Also, I guess the synthetic RWY is just displayed if the ILS is active, correct? I set up everything to my best knowledge, for Akrotiri: Position that is displayed in the info box when you click the F10 map airfield symbol 287,0° QFU and 3° glide path 109,70 for the ILS, set to ON APP mode, SYS cmd sw AFT No luck. But I also didn't get any ILS indications anyways. There is still this issue that sometimes RWY is inverted in use or the ILS is only active from a certain windspeed or something
×
×
  • Create New...