DaveRindner

I was/still struggling with -10C countermeasures. So the best results I have had is setting system to Man, set the PROGRAM to E, and leave it. E program dumps both chaff and flares and high rate, and concurrently have ALQ-131 to OPER (emit) if defending radar guided missile. Works well against radar SAMs, pretty well against SAM2 IR missiles, and R-73 head on. However R-73 and R-60M launched at you from your 4-8 will likely hit you. No mater how hard I throw A-10C, they hit. R-27T/TE , jammer on at launch warning, break into the missile , put it on your 3-9, and when it gets within 2-3km dump flares/chaff using program E.

The SU-27 is , AFAIK, late 1980's and early to mid 1990's timeframe. However , I beleive that, F-15C is at best from 1996-98. AIM-120C began deliveries in 1996, achieving full operational capability in '98. For 2003 F-15C, the AIM-120C would be C-5 or -8, or AIM-120D. By 2003 F-15 had HMCS and AIM-9X early capability.

According to Wiki the earliest version of SU-27 to suppourt R-77 is SU-27SM, which is modernised. SU-27B in FC3 is likely not equipped with Zshuk radar of MIG-29C and 27SM. SU-30, 32,34,35S,37 all carry it. Modernized MIG-21 does also. Too bad DCS Mig-21 simms version that is not compatible with R-77 or R-73. I would love to have a systems interaction in DCS: SU-27. Flying it, in DCS, with PFM(or AFM) is extremely enjoyable. Still in DCS SU-27, you can que and fire R-27R/ER/T/ET without radar, as long as EO is locked. One fun tactic to use in DCS: SU-27 is to load up your ship and your wingman with only 4 R-73, and perhaps one R-24 on centerline. Take no more then 65% fuel, depending on mission. THen set up a flight of SU-34 and or 30 loaded up with R77 on all stations, except ECM wingtip pods. Have that flight escort your flight, and have it follow you. Use them as missile trucks, like B-1R concept of USAF. Have them engage enemy at long range with R-77's. While enemy is busy evading 77's, close in, silently(no radar) and use your onboard R-73 using EO and helmet queing.

Don't know if this applies to FC3 F-15. Active duty (non AFRES) F-15C have been udated with AESA, JHMCS and AIM-9X capability. Boeing and Rockwell Collins are primary contractors. System has 80 deggree of-boresight, over-the-shoulder, and compatibility with ASRAAM missile. System is compatbile with F-15C,D,E, F-16C Block30 and above, F/A-18C/D/E/F, and F-22. Be nice to have it. Playing SU-27 with Russian version is really fun. Even if I set AI on excellent for F-15C, F-16C, and F/A-18C. Give them AIM-9M. Vs me in SU-27 with R-73. Its too easy to shoot them down, as I can fire R-73 before they get AIM-9M. So in 1V1 , daylight, head on merge. I fire R-73, AI breaks (left or right), then some pure and lag pursuit puts me on their 9-6 for second R-73, which almost never misses. So there is a built in advantage, in DCS, for R-73. However latest model of AIM-9M the AIM-9M-8/9 is almost as capable as 9X Block1. Well in real world. I think that DCS AIM-9M model is not as capable as it is in RW. On the other hand I find SU-25 and SU-25T AI are exceptionally effective in evading R-73. All they do is break , pop flares, and R-73 misses almost every time.

I like EEGS funnel. You get pretty good aiming, without having any kind of sensor on.

Previous sims of F-15E had it, and videos on YT show it in F-15C. There are three types of gunsights on all American fighters of 4 , and 4.5. Pipper for radar guided shoot que, Lead Computing Optical Sight (the snake), and EEGS gun funnel.

I took advantage of sale to get FC3 and Mig21. Both are great. However F15C seems to be missing some key functions from real one, that should be in FC3. First is AIM-9 cage/uncage function to let the seeker wonder, without radar queing. Second is lack of EEGS funnel gunsight in Close ACM mode when radar is silent. A-10C AA mode has uncage function for AIM-9M, as well as gun funnel. I could not find those two submodes in F-15C options. Also F-15C does have a AirGround mode for CCIP and strafe. FC3 F15C does not.

Flight model appears very realistic. But wind and weather are not. In real world pilot has more interactivity of control of aircraft as it interacts with turbulent air, at varying altitude. Still its pretty close. Some systems are still classified or are NF black boxes. Secure ARC VHF radios, and IFF equipment. JDAMS (GBU-31,38) are under modeled. Especially in their flight and release profiles. I suspect, in real world, release conditions are greater, then in this sim. Once a grid point is entered into delivery system, of JDAM. The release should be allowed when aircraft is not facing the tgt. At 15K feet AGL JDAM should be able to hit the target even if the target is behind or to the side the aircraft. Today GBU-38 JDAM is primary close support ordinance from fixed wing.

I've been experincing bird strike! OK that makes sense. My birds are at 400%

I have been experiencing inordinate amount of engine fire on take off. I figure its has to be becouse I advance throttle to fast, flodding the engine, or I keep max thrust for too long. I watch turbine speed during take off, it never goes above 90%. But I still get them. So when I get this situation I am heavy and nose up. Emergency procedure -Nose level -Pull engine fire t-handle -Activate fire suppression bottle -max thrust on remaining engine -jettison stores. -keep flaps down -gear up Now I need to go around and land ASAP. Except by the time I go through all the steps, the aircraft, nose level or slightly up, is at or below 120 kias, and will not speed up. No matter what I do. Flaps up to level one. Nose down to trade altitude. Eventually speed goes below 100 and its punch time. I would have thought that empty A-10 with 40% fuel , no stores. Can recover on one motor. Yet this is not the case. On takeoffs, wheels up.

AH-1W with Taiwan Strait theater Seeing that both Taiwanese Army and U.S.MC. use AH-1W (Taiwan v is downgraded). Repelling Chinese ampib invasion of Taiwan would be a natural theater.

What happened to X-65F?

Does DCS: UH-1H modeling this effect? I would imagine it would cause vibrations.

Taiwan, South China Sea,Okinawa, Kurile Islands, Aleutians/Alaska/Bering Strait 2018, Johnston Atoll, Guam 2016, Southern Black Sea/Bosporus, Baltic Surprise, Mallaca Straits, Panama Canal 2016, Arctic.

In addition to below posted by another user. I propose the following; SH-60B/R flyable with systems and proffessional flight model AH-1W flyable with systems and PFM AV-8B+ flyable with realistic systems and PFM. Especcially realistic in transitions. Accurate and realistic wind conditions over decks of CVN, CV, LST, LPD, and LHA that would be added. Especially for helicopter simulations. More high fidelity SAM systems from international providers. SPYDER for example. Deck activity and parked aircraft on carriers and LHA(if provided). Landing on an empty deck is not realistic. Infantry ground units defined as squads/teams, platoons, companies, and battalions. Not as individuals.

Is it feasable for ED to develop access to Google Earth and use it. Instead of creating its own database and map?

Would not mind difficult to fly 1960's and 70's bicycle gear, outrigger aircraft to fly . Say Yak-28, M-4 Bison. 3RD party HarrierII Plus would be kewl.

What I really want is carrier operations simulation, including deck procedures, for Su-25. That means having SU-39.

hehe. SU-25T a brick. I may agree with you. I think that , in DCS World, its instantenous roll rate, and sustain roll rate, is understated. its slow and heavy. I find navigation systems in DCS 25T and 25 to be confusing. Not having a missile seker que in LNGT air-air mode is confusing and makes R73 and R60 difficult to employ. SU-27/33 and Mig have much better R73 and R60 employment ques. I really wish full avionics systems interaction. With properly detailed startup, inflight, and shutdown procedures.

Would it kill DCS to convert SU-25T to SU-39. Strengthen the landing gear, add hook and carrier landing sim. Optical landing system 3/4 mile approach, and LSO. I have tried Kuznetzov touch and go approaches. Half the time, main gear gets bent, but plane keep flying. As poor mans carrier approach, I use path marker. Keep it centered on that white spot on deck, keep IAS between 240 and 270, no breaks, full flaps, use power for AOA and descent rate. But its very difficult, as Kuznetzov's OLS is to small to be seen, and I don't think it works any way. SU-33 in FC3 is too easy to land as it does not have AFM or PFM. Thus its too forgiving as far as vertical velocity and trap area.

In Wings Of Red Star : Mig-21. It is stated, with heavy fake Russian accent by Peter Ustinov, that getting the inlet spike was a challenge, and like with SR-71 inlet, there had to be a program to push in/out the inlet spike to prevent inlet stalls. Though not stated in program inlet stall could and often did lead to unstarts. Basically a shock ring that travels through the compressor with great violence and can flame out the motor. So curious, for Mig21 testers, is spike program , manual, or automatic (i.e. no user control implemented). In Col. Rich Graham's AWESOME SR-71 book, those Mach 2+ unstarts were bane of SR-71 program. They were never really solved. Ben Rich spend 25 years managing the program and it was never really solved, only made less common, and easier to deal with in 1980's, when inlet spike got digital control. They way I understand inlet stalls and unstarts is it starts with a rumble near or near, at, or above Mach2, like a stick shaker for stalls, then there is a large bang, then aircraft pitches or yaws. The pilot has to ride it out judge when unstart has passed, bring aircraft under control quickly, or risk high speed stall/spin. All 2nd and 3rd gen Mach2+ aircraft with inlet spike are susceptible. I am curious where this sim stands, if they simulate the motor accurately. Does that mean that air behavior inside inlet is also modeled.

Most realistic opponents of MIG-21, as far as single seat fighters. Are F-8 Crusader, A-4M Skyhawk, and Mirage III (IAF). F-4 is a realistic opponent as real world confrontations did occur, but F-4 is best described as pregnant cow. Its success is due to lack of equivalent replacement, high speed, advanced avionics,and multirole capability. But it is agreed by aerospace historians that F-4 as ACM air-air fighter was outmatched by MIG-21, the threat platform it met the most in combat.

F-4 would be 'nice'. But if I may suggest. There are two other NATO aircraft of 60's and Vietnam period that would be better candidate. Those would F-8 Crusader or A-4 Skyhawk. Both are real opponents of Mig-21, both are single seat, fighter attack.Both could span three decades of versions, 60's, 70's, and early `80's. Both were used by international clients. Namely France, Brazil, and Argentina. A-4 was used by Israel against Mig-21 in '73 Yom Kippur conflict.

I wish that DCS had expeditionary airfields. Those are made from interlocking plates. Brought in my heavy helicopters or C-130, C-17 , landing on dirt strips. Installed by combat engineers. Usually they are short fields.

My consise wish list for DCS: UH-1 Weather cond. Trully dark night with variable moon ambient light, and ambient occlusion shadows. Current night is too bright. FARP is replaced with modern tarp based FARP with refueling blivets. Better peripheral vision masking with NVG. NVG from 1990's have 40 degree FOV. Use of door gunners without external attachment point requirement. Additional gun options for gunners. 7.62 FN MAG, M240E, .50 HBMG, MK19 grenade launcher .50 HBMG forward firing guns. M134 7.62 is a little ineefective against armour. Dual pourpose armor piercing rockets FFAR and Zuni. Basic RWR receiver. Nothing fancy. Ability to define cold start from ground without FARP or tarmac. HOT anti-tank missile for European UH-1 TwinHuey engine option, with currently simulated two blade Hiller Bell teerering rotor. Authentic SkyGray livery. US Coast Guard, Canadian Coast Guard External rescue hoist rig on starboard (pilot) side. blade and fuselage collision with trees. Right now they don't seem to do it.