A.S

your opinion ...fine my opinion: you havent flown Falcon at all, so i have difficulties listening to that. in respect.

@yoda: how much lift you can create on a 90deg banked f-16 (watch the shape of that craft) with altering your AoA and pitching up with rudders? next: try this...take the F-15 (2.0) fly 550kts . full fuel..no payload...bank 90degs (knife edge pass) ...start at 1500ft ...now hit full the rudders and make a full loop in 90 degs bank finishing it ....realistic? :D (if something is well made, i compliment that !!! if there are flaws, i say it too, i have no contract "to be nice") ;)

if 4-5 posts with numbers (so everyone can see them) is spamming ....sorry then.

.... You need something? ...ask next time :smilewink: PS: your attitude here and in HL due to your Moderator/Tester status is slowly getting out of hands

I just decided not to share.... if someone wants to look into with serious and honest intentions..he can pm me. (my bad, i should have sent those infos to someone, who can work with it like yo-yo rather then posting them publically for you all just to be bashed..oh well ..just shows once again....)

SPAM? ...oh great ..thx.... ..(you just deleted something you probably never had a chance to look into, cuz crypted...but oh well ..hehe)

@Case: do you need anything else then numbers, or can you compare by just reading that? :D

http://www.metavr.com/downloads/MetaVR_F16_BurlingtonVT.wmv :D

Test F-15 in numbers Test in numbers (slighty tolerances probably due to test accuracy, although i tried to be very precise.) Test was executed according to given F-15 real EM-chart: 37000lbs Grossweight, F-15Clean, PW-220, Sea-level..no Flaps Testpoints: (sustaining) Mach 0.290 = 15,8 deg/s 2.956G Mach 0.350 = 16,3 deg/s 3.630G Mach 0.400 = 16,8 deg/s 4.210G Mach 0.500 = 18,0 deg/s 5.530G Mach 0.600 = 18,6 deg/s 6.800G Mach 0.700 = 19.2 deg/s 7.880G (Lockon G/AoA limiter, but still fine) As you can see, lockon 2.0s latest patch is - in terms of F-15 - pretty accurate, which is nice and worth a compliment. Further regimes i havent tested (also no other yets, well, i have but...not this way) anyways....just shows the errors from previous release are nicely fixed. With full AB and max pull mach 0.290 was the slowest speed i could sustain, slower just doesnt fly (under that testconfig), which is also nice. Next thing im going to do, is testing other jets in comparsion (grossweight etc etc), their performances and "handligns" in different regimes, rates, radius, accellaration etc....that shall give enough picture to see how to fight with them. Whatsoever- drifting off here- Good Job so far DCS !

:)

:thumbup:

:D ...go tell that the IAF ...

I have to agree with Fusion. Ask ANY fighterpilot who finished UPT and is in active duty, what he will tell you about modern close combat doctrines and why it is STILL very important. ..man, they havent put a gun on the raptor to simulate Lockon :D

Nice Fahh, good to hear. Sounds interesting. Looking forward to try it too.

This doctrine has been punished badly in Korea (correction: Vietnam) War, where the NAVY relied too much on their missiles only on the F-4s without guns and quickly changed their minds by adding gun-pods on the NAVY F-4 fighters after loosing couple airframes to the migs which came to close. It is more like "what you do if this case really happens". BFM is not only elementry in flight schools, it is even nowadays with all the modern far-range-weapons an important point. But, if you have a chance to watch EM-charts of real F-15s and Mig-29s...just by looking only on that...you can see ..what to avoid, what to do, where your strenght and your weakness is in such a DACT encounter.

On that question "is gun really that effective?" we spent -no kidding- one day including ammonition infos, velocity, dispersion, kind ..you name it....and this question has been already somewhere answered in this forum. For me its "ok" how it is, but yes damage is really strong once you hit a plane..almost like either "full dead or no dead" ...missing detailed other damages and malfunctions due to shells ..i agree on that. Flaps? No, they dont and its explicitly warned to do so in the real manuals ..in other words not to alter the flight performances by manupulating the flaps in combat ...whereas ..its still up to the pilot to decide in very critical cases to use them or not.... provided he is in a regime which does not crack up his airframe by doing so. Old saying: There are rules, and laws. Rules you can break, and sometimes you should, but you cant break laws. (physics) The Mig-29 in 1.2.1 ..i havent tested yet..only the F-15. ...will be the next things to do...

Justified question! My opinion or expression is/was/can be based on numbers (flightperformance real data bla bla) and/or i can explain you in cases and examples in details why errors in modeling can lead to major differences in the outcome of a dogfight compared to a real one. Passion and expierience over years, but no, im not a real pilot. But we have enough real jocks around here i think who can confirm probably in similar or better ways. If i say "feel" ...well dont take that for granted .. But, what would your question have been anyways if i would have been a real pilot ? :)

No worry, we already smiled about some ideas brought into this patch like "hehe, who made have suggested this" :D

The Flaps "solution" is also fine. You can not manually toggle them in old fashion, but you can "activate" them to be deployed under 250kts and they retract again once exceeding this speed (which is nice), but if you forget to deactive them, they will deploy again once under 250kts. The drag factor of the Flaps is significant how it should be (just the size of them and the postion compared to your board alone supports this logic) and this is also fine. You dont use them "to turn" better and you cant, great. Only in very few cases like a very slow situations like high alt scissors you may use them to "lift" and fight gravtiy where both fighters have nothing else left to do so...or maybe in descending scissors to reduce your droprate....etc etc...but not "to turn" better or to gain angles for the last few degrees missing before firing. If you do so ...good luck turning into a "sitting duck". I flew intense rounds with a very good pilot (he may reveal his name on his own wish) and it was the first time we both felt one thing: "THIS IS MODERN JET-DOGFIGTHING". Speeds, seperations, related turningrooms, AoA considerations, entering-room, aspects, vertical generalship (an expression by KV), the importance of a patient hand and the timings of "pressing" and "unloading" in that counterplay including maneuver geometry and history....all those things NOW reflect very close the brilliance given in AF. Even though the damages (damage model) consists of mostly only crucial parts (like "one engine", hydro etc...) and futher detailed malfunctions are missing, it is not so easy to gun a smart pilot who is aware of gun defense and denying firing solutions...so even here gunnery skills are required now (working the piper and what after miss ....etc etc). Compared to "1.12 style dogfighting" (pull as hard as possible as quick as possible and fire while "standing on your tail" with no speed left in hope to lazer-hit the bandit ...or creeping alltime around just below corner-speed with lift and nose on bandit thinking only (dont think with your gun: quote Paploo) ....well those days are over and i have to say - even though i thought i never would say this - NOW you can and must apply proper BFM flying to defeat your bandit in Lockon, which is GREAT.

Ok....NOW we can speak about proper flying and laws to be taken care off in a BFM scenario. I made couple rounds vs a very good pilot and it is excellent (only F-15 though, rest to be tested) Also the "numbers" to be tested also though... but if there are flaws, then i think they will be minor or/and due to the SFM (like the ability to make a full loop in a 90degs bank only using rudders), but the BFM scenarios accurs totally logically in beauty in most aspects which is very fine. To make it short for now, the F-15 has to be flown like one, favours you if you do, punishes you if you dont. This is just a quick impression of mine, but IMO this is the best BFM plattform ever in lockon series and further tests and opinions to come. Would also love to hear your all opinions as regards this topic. Looking forward to prepare TCL for 2.0 with pleasure. And where the #### is Yo-Yo, let me give you a wet KISS :D Good Job!

..................testing

All of you should respect ALL sims and projects in that branch, maybe they be delayed, old or full of errors. Nevertheless its work for YOUR entertainment. Bashing one sim against another is ridiculous. You should at least fly and try various sims (even as DEV) to get a better picture and to learn. But a healthy amount of criticism (creative) is also ok. Just my thoughts.

@Evilbivol-1: Noone expects perfectionism, but is this case some of us really wondered -no bad feelings- if actually ANYONE has ever flown what he has programmed, and if so, how he could have missed that. And yes, much succsess in fixing it for the interest of all. Look, we are currently very eager to support this community further by placing 2.0 into TCL too, but unfortunatly it is not useable in current situation whatsoever and its implications in gameplay. So, yes we want DCS to be "better" .....all we (those, who dont make it) can do right now, is to point out flaws.

The matter of fact that he is a real pilot (im not impressed by that at all, but respect the person) doesnt change the fact that 2.0 has errors needs to be fixed!

AWESOME !! I am still trying to get the :D out of my face. "LoooK mOOmAAA, Hands freee" :lol: PS: in favour of Mr. Newton, lets say..he just wasnt fully right ..hehe ...guess Yo-Yo will think about this and fix it ..i have THrust...erm sorry...Trust.