Darkwolf

Don't really have the time to dig into this, however the japanese are working on something similar. :thumbup: DCS will greater than ever

Well. No matter how one can put it, that is expensive. :music_whistling: (edit - it's not a matter of value vs cost, it's a matter of cost vs average income) But anyway ... Everything in DCS is expensive, from modules to hardware and all others things. :D If one can't afford it, they is still the option to wait a few months for sales period, which are periodic. :thumbup:

How come it's harder to translate a manual than to code 3 plane ? :D

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

Despite I miss the weekly update, I currently enjoy a lot all those speculations thread. :lol: Lot of fun to see, and anyway we have update about ED or someone else nearly on a daily basis... :music_whistling:

Since it is unlikely we'll ever get a Mig15 manual, does anyone knows if they is a decent FSX Mig15 manual in case we can't find a real one ?

Lots of reference to "the other game". Most people don't play Falcon 4 "simply" because they like the F16. They play it also for other reasons. You need to compare the simulator overall, not only on the plane they got. I won't make that comparison here as it's not the place to do it. From my little point of view, as soon as the F18 is released, if it is as hardcore as the F16, lots of Falcon4 crowd will come to DCS. I may be wrong, but at that point they will have an aircraft comparable to their F16, in a better looking world and with more feature. For now, DCS has no multirole of that kind to offer, so they stick to Falcon. That you have a F16 or a F18 doesn't matter much. Most "expert" will be nickpicking the specifications difference - at the end of the day, you have two gen4 multirole.

f****** cheated AI. See ? the missile go lead pursuit O.o

I do print a lot at the local place, however i use regular B&W copies with binders. It's cheap - and I don't have to worry about coffee/beer damage :D

SFM is a no go for me. However, some beginner may appreciate it. Keep in mind NOT everyone is ok with EFM or full system modeling. ED forum is not representative of DCS community, since only the hardcore players are around. the other 99% of DCS players just don't even know the difference between AFM/EFM/SomethingFM.

It's going nut in France. I settle back there next month. I shall get a gun as soon as I arrive.

Does that mean they'll be no manual on the 15th ?

Stats shows 22%. If that's the same calculation than in France, that is surely a way less that are able to communicate more than the basic school "hello, i am wolf". (France showing 50% while from my experience is nowhere close to 20) So yeah, i maintain that this thread should have been posted in spanish in the spanish section, and on relevant spanish sections. ;) Also, from my experience in community stuff - I don't believe more than a couple of % of DCS customer are actually on that forum anyway.

nearly no airflow on the rudder at 90° ! Wouldn't it be better to use disymmetric thrust ?

Wait gentlemans - Why create a poll about spanish language in a English forum ? the primary users of an eventual spanish manual will be people that don't speak english. Do you think they is a lot of them in this forum ? :)

Impossible to do without ED modifying the code. Which is unlikely they'll do. Nothing prevent you to stick to the training version until you fulfill all the training :)

I stopped breathing a couple of time. :D Unsure I would have the balls to go that high. Maybe if a fresh pack of beer upstair... I would definitively have a try tho. I'd rather climb that high than go underground.

I did several cobra with entry speed IAS330 and exit speed as low as IAS230. No issue at all :D

Well - We have already some fun stuff in DCS so why not. But now people will ask for R77 in Su-27. :D

As for now you just qualified Wikipedia of "unreliable" without even showing hard data yourself. Ok Just kidding. Just to be pointy - Studiing history, Wikipedia helped me a LOT. Wikipedia can be a great source of data but can be wrong, As ANY source of data, cross check of things are often necessary. I just can't stand the way you put it :D Old people on the forum will now feel even more older. :music_whistling:

Let's put it that way. You have a ENORMOUS range advantage. Why are you merging ? I would maintain standoff, and shot targets from range. As per my stats since mid november : Missile Shot Hit Acc% R-27ER 27 8 30% R-27ET 11 4 36% R3-R 14 12 86% Beyond those numbers - I use a lot the R-27 as a "get the **** out of my area" missile. I won't go deep in my tactics but at least half missiles are just expanded to have the target where I want it to be (or away from where he doesn't have to go). So even taking that into account, that still a good 60% vs 86% accuracy. Also, the two missed shot with R3-R, I clearly recall those, I just shot in a situation where the missile couldn't physically hit the target so my mistake. Conclusion : R-3 series is just "shot once and have a cynical laugh". while the R27 series is more a "lottery" missile - even at comparable range. I would actually love to have some on my Su-27. That is DCS data, I don't take any real data or tactics into account since DCS isn't reality. :D

Despite I would side with the OP opinions, GGtharos clearly explained the current situation. :smartass: Regarding IFR - I don't see where a "black switch" is needed. First - Easy way - You can just set fog to 30 centimeter. Second - Realistic way - Just NOT look thru the windows - You pan your view down to the instrument and fly without lifting the head. This is one of my favorite exercice. :)

Whoaw. Don't ask too much - We are already waiting for the Manual to be finished, and the F-86 manual. :D

La spécification, c'est que s'il était armable dans DCS, personne n'achèterais l'autre. :D