Bananabrai

Actually its not an F-15E. Sorry, couldn't resist

Ne, das passt. So auch mein Kentnissstand. Gelb = live warhead, Braun = live propulsion. Es gab noch ein paar mehr Farbcodes meine ich, Rot war doch auch noch so ein ding, und schwarz habe ich glaub auch schon mal gesehen. Das wäre dann eher wieder was für eine 120D und sowas wie die METEOR, wo es einen uplink und downlink zur missile gibt. Damit kann man dann verschüsse durchspielen, der Rest wird dann "bogus"-style berechnet, um interceptions zu trainieren z.B. Am Ende schaut man dann was der Flieger an die Rakete geschickt hat und zurück und so... Da will ich aber nicht mehr ins Detail gehen, sollte so aussreichend klar sein. Für DCS nicht interessant. Und DCS an sich ist ja ein Übungs-tool, man würde damit nur eine Simulation in einer Simulation machen, wir können in DCS ja "live" schießen ohne das ernstes was passiert, der feuchte Traum eines jeden Piloten. Ist also eher so ne role-play/milsim Sache m.M.n.

Kinda true. ED are not the fastest with most announced features/etc. (for good reasons - this isn't supposed to be a rant), but WW2 birds they are releasing fairly fast. Mossie, Anton, etc. were all fairly quickly released after their announcement, at least it feels like that to me. Hind as well I have to say.

FYI/Nice-to-know: Die Dinger heißen teilweise CATM-9 oder ähnlich. Das C steht für 'captive', sprich das Ding bleibt am Flieger/kann nicht abgefeuert werden. Ist generell üblich solche missiles als "captive missile" zu bezeichnen. Im selben Zuge bedeutet 'ATM' so viel wie "air training missile" o.ä. Ich glaube es gibt auch so Bezeichnungen wie TGM (training ground missile oder so) Die nächst kleinere Stuffe wäre dann "bogus". Das ist generell geläufig wenn nicht mal am Flieger hängt, sondern du in deinem Flieger nur im System vorprogrammierst, du hast fiktive Missiles dran. Das nur nebenbei für die neugierigen.

For some reason on Syria map at least wind seems to be inverted. Wanted to write a bug report, but forgot. Have to check if someone did it already. Lately (last couple of weeks-month), we always had to land with tail wind if we wanted to use the ILS. Paphos and Incirlik are affected for sure! PS.: tested with F-16C and Mirage F1CE ILS is a bit frustrating at the moment, at least in some map/module combinations with no clear issue apparent as it seems

True. I agree. Just mentioning. I hope ED uses Jira to keep track of ideas^^

And the DEK I'd say. Plus a little bit of SSK and MK?

I am aware of these problems. On the other hand we have an AI that is seeing you well or not well irrespective of paint scheme and daytime. It cries for a solution with DCS promoting itself as the most realistic combat simulation. I just wanted to point out that problem, as Droopy was pointing out the need for ghost grey paint schemes. It's just not a factor in DCS, sadly.

I'd go so far and say that in general older birds are a better preparation for the Tonka I also update my statement and say a mix of Viggen and Mirage 2000C is a better prep, system-wise. Still different tough. The Viggen part is really how you also operate the Tornado. There are some nice parallels with GMR (ground mapping radar) radar controls, like linear and logarithmic modes, the wave modulation, etc. The functions are surprisingly equal. Also the whole idea behind INS updates are similar enough, and of course the concept of operation & mission. Flying-wise the FCS should be closest to the M2000 I'd say, but never flew one of those IRL myself. Also keep in mind, aerodynamically they are pretty different. Maybe @Bremspropeller can evaluate the aerodynamic differences between the M2000 and PA200. But you will also find a close enough AG-radar and INS (which also likes NAV fixes) in the M2000, that being some sort of prep for the Tonka. With both, Viggen and M2000 being European concepts, you will later find some things in the Tonka we just do it that way on this side of the pond. In general these older birds and also F1EE/M prepare you for older tech that is still trying to be sophisticated. You could try and use the A-4E terrain avoidance radar mode, that is also close to the TOR's TFR scope. Many many thanks also from myside to @Reflected and @baltic_dragon for your "yes". Initially I brought the idea to ask you guys for a campaign to @OPEC and thus I am very happy you want to do it!

Die designations werden bekanntlich ja meist schon in der Konzept-Phase festgelegt, in der die YF-12 und F-111 auch noch Abfangjäger waren. Wer weiß, irgendein Blattpapier hat wahrscheinlich gewusst wie die -117B geheißen hätte, vielleicht A-117B, oder B-117B, oder oder oder... PS.: Seine Aussage wäre übrigens eine von der Art, wo man schnell mal zurück rudern muss. "Da hat er sich bestimmt versprochen". Denke die Einstufung der F-117A ist immernoch auf die ein oder andere Art erhöht. Es gab ähnlich Aussagen zur SR-71 die auch nach und nach wieder Verschwunden sind in den 90ern und 2000ern.

Dazu hatte ich mal bei NineLine nachgefragt, weil ich da bei uns auch Moderator und Community support machen werde. Das geht erst wenn man nah am Release ist. Kann ich nichts genaues nennen, aber das wird erst freigeschaltet wenns dann auch nicht mehr lang dauert. Bis dahin muss ich leider also auf unseren öffentlichen Discord verweisen.

Ist sie. Mindestens so sehr wie die F-111. Ich empfehle dazu die FPP episode zur F-117A, dort sind Details zu hören. Es gibt viele Bezeichnungen. Manche sind gut, manche verwirren, manche flasch, alle sind Marketing. Stichwort MRCA Tornado. Mit der AGM-154 kann man die AGM-62 in jedem Fall vergleichen: Kein Antrieb, Gelenkt, erhöhte Reichweite im Vergleich zu einem einfachen Bomben Projektil. Ist die AGM-154 dann auch nur eine GBU-154? Man weiß es nicht. Außer ein USAF Schreibtisch-wärmer im Pentagon. Der weiß es sicher.

Da gibts ein einseitiges DIN A5 Kniebrett. Da stehen alle Codes super simpel erklärt drauf. Code rein, Code raus, fertig. Sind ja nie mehr als 6 Zahlen.

AS-30 und Exocet wären schon ne schöne Sache. Bin ja auch so einer. Aber sie macht auch ohne den Krempel Spaß. Die CE ist super simpel zu fligen an sich. Sie wird quasi wie eine F-5E bedient, man kann sich schnell alles merken. Das Radar ist davon ein bischen ausgenommen, das ist natürlich komplexer als bei der F-5E und braucht ein bischen mehr Hirnmaße, aber ist auch kein Hexenwerk. Fliege die CE zur Zeit oft mit dem Bremser hier unten. Was ich im Text unten noch ergänzen würde: Selbst die CE hat ohne AAR schon ziemlich lange beide. Sie ist echt relativ schnell im cruise und trotzdem sparsam, die Viggens waren immer zu erst JOKER und BINGO, und dabei noch langsamer im BUSTER. Ich glaube wir hatten teilweise schon 1,5h round trips mit kurzen dogfights mit MiG-19 oder -15 etc., 2-3 Gruppen abgefangen, heim, und immernoch 1500-1000kg sprit. Eine EQ6/7 fände ich auch mega, das ist dann fast schon die 80/90 Retro-Eierlegendewollmilchsau. Aber bei allem was noch so kommt an Modulen, nehm ich dafür dann auch einfach ne Phantom oder so.

Especially during night and bad weather the camouflage effect of a certain color and pattern is supper important... Sorry for the sarcasm, I agree for planned defaul skin PVP, but that's it at the moment. Skins are client side only for now (I hope that gets changed at some point, like it was in IL-2: 1946). I see the problem that every clients skin of a server then needs to be transferred via internet to every other client and skins having several hundred MB sometimes, but I believe there could be a solution. Range based, lower resolution, ... Even worse, the AI doesn't care about color atm. And why should it. Player Bob could have a bright pink/red/yellow skin, but other clients see him as default gray... AI always sees us the same way. It doesn't care about night as well. Which is a bit frustrating to be honest, with such a nice night attack aircraft coming and not being able to use its full potential and not dominate and use a potential night time disadvantage/lacking capability of the enemy. (or the Harriers N/A potential as well, just as an another example)

I suggested somewhere else a simple mod, how things would have been done IRL during war times (which we regularly have in DCS^^) Right clicking the bright buttons sticks a piece of tape on it. Has to be 3D modeled though. Alternatively a right click could just make the button darker, as if it was painted with some paint available in Tschad... Maintenance guys had nice ideas during deployments.

With this I agree. I am not so rushy on new and fancy equipment, of course it's nice to get new toys and play more, but they should take their time with S530F, EE, elc. But with the radar I have to agree. It is still not possible to properly control brightness, contrast, gain, etc., which is crucial for night time interceptions. Also I have to admit now that the noise looks really static, contrary to what I believed and stated when the module was not released and the radar was showcased. What I'd really like to see (and I think Aerges are the once that would do it, because they did neat stuff like ladders, helmets, GPUs, etc.), being able to make these weapon select knobs less bright in night. How? Well, of course fighter pilot / mechanic style. With right clicking, stick a piece of tape on it -> dimmed like a pro.

Thanks, perfekt!

Does anyone know the dcs internal airfield numbering on SA map? Like: Mt. Pleasant = 2 Rio Gallegos = 5 Ushuaia = 7 Ushuaia Helo Port = 8 San Julian = 11 El Calafate = 14 Specificaly for a modded liberation I need: Aerodromo De Tolhuin Rio Grande Puerto Santa Cruz Comandante Luis Piedrabuena

I think nevertheless I should be able to hang at least some "convincing" amount of Mk-82 to the CFT. something like 6 per side should be possible, shouldn't it? I know that it is the prototype, also has the other engines, which in my eyes have the cooler looking nozzles and reheat colors. If I remember correctly they should also be less powerful, which I would also like, more challenging. But I take the E as we get it anyway. Just a cool bird.

For me the main thing missing (but that counts not only for F-117A, but especially F-15E, TOR, and everything else as well basically) is: Limited SA of the AI during night time and of course bad weather/inside clouds. This would give the opportunity to plan for example strike missions in bad weather, where CAP is not possible and SAMs also might have limited SA due to wind or what ever. This would benefit the Nighthawk as well, as I think it would really shine during night time DEAD runs etc., even with the simplified RCS model. So I agree, the RCS model would even be ok-ish like it is, just not the rest. I was doing a night time CAP flight yesterday with @Bremspropeller on FP Levant - Damascus Steel (that would really be a perfect name for Syrian ...-actor...^^) SA of the AI is definitely too high.

Well, I don't remember the part where I said that. I just used the term "miss out on MP". You are definitely right in at least 50% of the criticism, but I have to say, you didn't find the right people then. Up to you of course. I did not say one is the holy grail and the other is hell. There are some nice SP things around, that's for sure. From what you say, we were definitely not on the same servers. I omit Air quakes or grindy servers immediately.

Doable, but sounds a bit weird, like flying the F-15E from the back seat alone.^^ I will never understand how someone could miss out on MP if there is not a huge variety of nice scripted campaigns for any module + dynamic campaign. There are nice campaigns, but simply not enough I think, at least for my taste. Also SP download section offers cool stuff only every now and then.

Especially the AAA is initially too accurate, talking mainly about first encounter and situations of surprise. This is problem and I don't know why ED is not simply fixing this, should be fairly easy. One of many qiuality of life improvements that are needed. The biggest problem I have with Ivan is his permanent bread-mode. Rooster can be quite stupid sometimes as well, not stopping to call me 50nm bandits close to a merge when I cry at him to shut up, but what I am missing in the Hind is that at least he is suggesting me the next target can calling out some MANPAD if he sees it. Just some little small smart things, that would be so great. I know he is WIP, but I don't understand why programming some F-16 bleed air door logic or flat hat rivets have priority over such things that make flying some modules a bit frustrating sometimes. Sorry for the rant

Easy to fix: do multiplayer