pepin1234

I am really tired to keep this discussion, there are tons of thread talking about. They just don’t want the Russian Aircraft win in this simulator. We have years asking for this unfair treatment and bias against aircraft that in reality are really capable. MiG-29 is the most ridiculous affected in this bias action by developers. I can’t get a decent performance landing this aircraft instead the rest they are pretty handy, and more... They are showing all the opposite that in real life be. Bugs everywhere and they even don’t talk about. Systems missed that are really needed in combat. Is obvious... what else we can say. I don’t want stay playing a product they manipulate all the way. In this forum is a rule that is prohibited talk about political issues. Look who make the justice here... what else... they suck. Good bye. I didn’t post in months here. Is just a waste of time. After The fighter Collection got the control of ED all was settled for Russian aircrafts in this simulator

They work for the WADA... just saying. At this point I don’t give a Sh*t this simulator until they show a transparent behavior. Sorry but I can’t spend my time in something is clearly manipulated. At the same time they let the forum users trolling the Russian aircraft threads and posts. So in 3,2,1 now you will have trolling this thread as well. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/12/09/sport/wada-ban-russia-decision-rusada-doping-spt-intl/index.html

I just gave up to follow this forum. Too long wait

I was thinking the same, until I released this aircraft was a disembark support task only, in a soviet tactic only. Then was really useful in this case. About what said Silver Dragon that sound totally BS. This aircraft is a museum piece and a 3rd generation aircraft. Will be a good module anyways

I was expecting the launch as well...

This. By the way. We already have TACAN in mission editor (WIP). What about RSBN?

Do you mean an open source project. This will be awesome in a 3rd gen aircraft like this iconic one.

I feel sorry for that. Human lives lost and an iconic aircraft crashed. R.I.P

First you were all the way telling you can manage the difference in metrics and feets calculation By youtself. Now after after I told you this is not the right way to do it, you tell I want something become bla bla. I gonna answer again. The comm in combat between two allied aircraft that use different measurements units systems is not recommended. We will be pleased to use meters in a simulator with freedom to use an aircraft in whichever country you want in a fictional battle. The case of the Fj-17 it is unique because it is made by two countries that use meters and feets. Question for you? What is your problem with our request? You seem to be in the management meeting of DEKA to answer all the question by yourself? If you want to go even more far then ask ED do not set full simulated modules in every country as they do because is not supposed to be so IRL. As you don’t want meters in a aircraft made by a country that use meters is kind of weird your behaves and please can you explain more clearly why this hurt you so much that push you keep posting in this thread saying again and again you can manage meters and feets in a single combat group. We hear you, but not everybody is forced to do things like you. As well not even try to buy Ka-50 V3, is coming with something that hurt your authenticity values in a DCS module.

Maybe because they see you accept change it your whole aviation measurement and you must fallow this rule by inertia. It’s not apply for everyone. Ask ED this question. We are in JF-17 forum by Deka.

It is not recommended. As Pakistan request feets to adapting F-16 then you see there is not worth it what you personal can. We don’t go alone, we fight in groups.

I didn’t now about FC-1. That great question. Will be really useful at least the metrics in cockpit. If them were purchase by Chinese or at least were a join venture with Chinese then probably the avionic for JF-17 should have options for metrics in cockpit.

Again you mix Apple with orange. We are not civilian simulator and have nothing to do a combat situation with a aircraft passenger approach and comms. We don’t need to go feets because we don’t have the right aircraft configuration. I want to be compatible with all my hardware around. My AWACS, GCI and SAM radar is in meters. I don’t work in feets.

You are talking about a passenger aircraft? We don’t contact international towers in airfield and we need compatibility to comm each other to threat response quick as possible. As Jf-17 come only in feets measurements this aircraft is made to work in a western combat group. I will not make any math in the middle of my combat tactics. So for me this aircraft is for blue side or for separated combat groups. As the developers told this was made to have a good interoperability with Pakistani F-16, then Jf-17 is not 100% ready for international market sale for whole market. We are an international community, not the Pakistani Air Force, also this aircraft is not yet in 3rd countries operator, so is up to them.

They can. They don’t want to do it. Any FC3 level aircraft is not a problem. Some games companies already simulate Russian aircrafts with name, weapons and everything that show they are making a Su-34. Very suspected that here they said they can’t make modern Russian full simulated aircraft and at the same time they say they will not make new FC3 level aircrafts. So they said they can’t because Russians bla bla bla and at the same time they close the door with the only option to bring modern Russian aircrafts as FC3 level. go to the daycare with this story...

Did you test the google translator app? You can translate documents with the photo scanner option. Not 100% perfect but you get some help. The technical words will be tricky maybe.

You are showing a good level of 3D.

I am very curious about the Fighter Collection Group next move in ECM regards after having this longer range actor against the low realistic radar behavior with ECM inside 50km. If they make a move now to protect the aim-120 launcher after all the request been made to change this fake super TWS and lock hold it forever inside this fantastic 50km they keep up like a bonus. If they make a move after this missile get in the game then we will see all the request made before as a laugh in our face.

Wait and keep looking for red side. Life will tell.

Well if this is the last statement for metrics I just will not buy this module. I will stay off from DCS anyway as I do now.

that was forced imposed after WW2 to the rest of Europe and the USA allies. The most confortable and standardized is the metric systems. The European countries can easily remove the British imperial systems for aviation, they just don't needed and was not supposed to be official in our aviation measurements. Metrics is awesome and imperials system is a nightmare. I have experience with both. We just need keep metrics as IRL is the most user friendly for many science and physics study do. That's why metrics systems should be keep it as an option.

F-15C in game flight physics are the most insane exaggerated product of DCS. I was thinking the Fighter Collection group will make after F-18 launch some move in name of the real simulation but I was wrong. They want to keep this UFO without change date limit forever.

The most tricky is set the SR radar in the best spot to detect with time the incoming missile. All Soviets SAMs with radar guided missiles can shot down cruise missiles as Syrian Buk and OSA did IRL. Even Kub system can do it with a modernized SR unit. This IRL of course, in game is a different history. In game for Bluefor: Patriots and Rolands, Rolands were for long time over performance and now just work maybe against Kh-31P. Just do your test not sure of that. Anyway Kh-31P in the ballistic mode flight path is really hard to beat IRL. But in game is the most stupid anti radiation missile but ED just don’t care about that. In game Redfor: S-300, Tor. Tunguska in some cases only, like Cruise missiles. Ships: all ships with CIWS can shot down incoming missiles. The result varies depending in the size of the incoming missiles, speed and the amount of CIWS in build in the ship.

Just roll to the opposite direction the enemy turn and then turn onto his tail.

@uboats can you please set in special options the European metric option. This imperial British gonna be tricky for interoperability between the countries aircraft that never use this metric standard. I am pretty sure Pakistan engineers will set meters by client request IRL. I don’t feel good with British imperial settings to intercom each other.