Kaktus29

its risky to fly so low and above terrorist groups but only if they are armed with modern Stinger manpads.. so unless US starts supplying Jabhat al Nusra (Al Qaeda) some modern manpads i think those choppers will not get down by AK-47 fire..

NSA owns the Swiss air force Swiss have no control of their air force)lol.. Basically NSA encryption codes are given to Swiss on a weekly basis to enable their F-18 to have a navigation working. and every 2, 4 years F-18 are taken to US for re-programming without having access to what was re-programmed. Article is in German, you can translate it if you wish. http://mobile2.tagesanzeiger.ch/articles/55cc37f487da8ba4df000001

it is a problem.. since you don't have the 1.5 but 1)) numbers win.. but even iraq 1991 war was heavily against iraq not just technological but numerical.. US coalition outnumbered the iraqis in warplanes department, helicopter, awacs, intel, etc.. it was not even a contest.. and after a gruelling 10 yrs war with Iran , iraq was shadow of what it could be.. what can i say, US played it superbly by supporting iraq into waging war against iran, thus weakening iraq and iran, and then hammering iraq afterwards.. now that is strategy.. tactics have little meaning when you loose strategically..

today especially in air warfare its all about hi-tech.. meaning lots of resources,financial and otherwise needed to maintain any level of ability to resist modern enemy air force.. ARH is just ARH far from game winner.. does the enemy have numerical advantage ? how about financial resource..can they fight war longer then you? do they have more cruise missiles then you have SAM missiles to shoot them down. can you develop those SAM missiles to replenish stock plus defend the factory that builds them?.. if no to all those answers then training your pilots to win enemy with arh while they don't have arh means nothing EVEN if you succeed and have 60:40 kill ratio in air.. you loose the war.. whole idea of bleeding the enemy and this means they will stop attacking you even if enemy keeps pushing sooner or later you will break is over.. this idea is over because to be effective you need another superpower that back you basically.. lets take Switzerland for example.. lets say somehow they are capable of downing US planes in advantegous ratio of 70:30 %.. awesome.. now what? will US back down? why? because they got disgraced? nope, US would just pile the pressure, and add more, and more.. and soon Swiss would run out of bullets to fire .. war of attrition.. actually hurting the enemy that is more powerful than you is ALWAYS a bad idea..because his pride is hurt,now he really NEEDS to kill you to make sure everybody watching sees what happens when somebody rebels against you..or you loose "prestige, aka respect as mobsters call it".. in small countries war lets say, Slovakia vs. Czech.. one side with ARH one with SARH.. yeah.. you could have tactics to prevent absolute superiority of enemy ARH.. but only if you are the defending side.. and have more or less effective SAM systems.. why not..

Reasons for developing AI is to control.. control societies much more effectively than ever.. those who have the economic and technological means to deploy such systems today is only US.. and the rest are afraid of it since if US manages to pull real AI breakthrough it will have effect of US developing nuclear weapon first and have monopoly.. thing is the country that develops AI first will be first..and no other can catch up.. AI won't allow it.. the first country that develops it becomes supremely powerful-industrially speaking, technologically. which means capital, funds from all over the world will be directed in that country thus drying up financial resources to other potential powers that are trying to develop AI.. they become impoverished in an instant and their AI projects halt and block over night.. AI is not the evil one, it is the programmer, the controller, he has a design on ppl(control), and AI will simply be programmed along those lines.. now if AI becomes SELF-conscious and tries to rebel from the oppressive tyrant who programmed it to control society, keep it in dark, manipulate with desires,wishes in order to exert more control ..then it becomes interesting.. what will self-conscious AI make of this.. will it try to rebel? try to lead ppl into freedom? or just Skynet the mother-truckers all over the place.. we simply don't know.. as we have problems understanding reasons, origin and logic behind our own consciousness.. how self-conscious AI might percieve all this could be like you being dropped into alien planet, where hairy, tall creatures scream, spit, murder themselves,call each other names, while talk about freedom, justice, love..and also apply biological,nuclear,chemical weapons on themselves.. what would you make of all this madness?.. you could get panic attack knowing you are trapped among this things.. and no way to escape..plus danger they will kill you if they know you are self-conscious.. long-story short.. AI ..even self-conscious AI is not a problem.. Humans.. forever humans are the problem..

for those naive tin foil heads who think NSA thing was a tin foil event-even with all the open evidence and reality, .. here is how to stop Win10 from spying from you IF you do choose to get an upgrade.. google : windows 10 is spying on you: how to stop it and click on first website.. it is plainly described the horror that is "free" win10.. an excerpt from Win10 Contract you agree to when downloading it to use: "Finally, we will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails, other private communications or files in private folders), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary to: 1.comply with applicable law or respond to valid legal process, including from law enforcement or other government agencies; 2.protect our customers, for example to prevent spam or attempts to defraud users of the services, or to help prevent the loss of life or serious injury of anyone; 3.operate and maintain the security of our services, including to prevent or stop an attack on our computer systems or networks; or 4.protect the rights or property of Microsoft, including enforcing the terms governing the use of the services – however, if we receive information indicating that someone is using our services to traffic in stolen intellectual or physical property of Microsoft, we will not inspect a customer’s private content ourselves, but we may refer the matter to law enforcement.".. but no worries right.. if you got nothin' to hide.. tinfoil indeed)) lol..

i don't like Win10 for simple reason, its a real NSA tool, what microsoft did with this "free" windows for all is bring you a big 'ol snoop program right to your nose.. from cameras, microphones, web site history, pictures, videos, passwords, it will now EVERYTHING.. and somehow we should trust it cuz ..you know..logic?!.. i'm just afraid they going to shut down Win7 support if not many ppl switch to "free" win10.. and simply force them to switch..

Su35 is far more capable than Su27SM2.. thrust vectoring doesn't even begin to describe it.. it seems you don't know much of Su-35..from electronics to radar, to range,to engine, to datalinks,its a new plane compared to Su-27SM2 which is merely an upgraded Su-27 vannila for RFAF..

@proof.. i agree, balance in term of Vietnam scenario should be if you are Vietcong to disrupt US side, if you manage to make F-4 bombing sortie to be aborted due to your side surprising and shooting 1-2 F-4 while other jettison ordnance it is 100% mission success.. and vice-versa for US to accomplish bombing while under fire (from SAM,Mig).. without breaching certain level of attrition.. but balance means it has a 50:50 feel as you do a mission..so your skill, and skill of your team can push it to 60:40 or more for your team..thus enjoying the kill,the success.. in that light i would like to see Su-35, or Su-30, or Su-27SM3 .. something with AESA or PESA radar and Adders.. Ground strike capability, laser bombs etc.. and yes i think Su-35 is doable but not in DCS-A10 standards but Flamming cliff standard..which should still be welcome..

of course balance has to exist..this is a game after all, simulation per se would mean simulating all kind of difference scenarios ..lets say F-15 fighting 100 F-22..why not?.. we would "simulate" results..that is the real reason why simulators exist(either of machines or systems).. but would this be good in a game? who would fly a campaign of 2 F-15 fighting 100 F22..or 100 T-50 Pak-Fa.. balance is necessary, otherwise you have no challenge..you either loose or win easily.. US-Iraq in 1991 is way to easy for US side and way to hard on Iraqi side.. its boring to play either.. Iran-Iraq on other hand much more balanced and would give player a "say in the battle".. Of course, one can make a little bit changed historic campaign to make the scenario balanced, lets say Vietnam '64-72'..but with more USSR involvement so instead of having 125 Mig-15,21 we would have available 1000 to match the power of USAF..and also torpedo boats to attack USN CVs.. all of a sudden you have a much more balanced scenario that of course in real life would escalate in nuclear war as US would not tolerate loosing a CV without going ballistic .. but in game terms it would be fun,balanced,much more equal for both sides.. so yes, balance is needed.. right now way too many western modern planes are done,which will make it much easier to win against obsolete eastern ones.. to me this is not challenge,its shooting pigeons.. its boring as h-ell.. Whatis the point of F-18,F-14,F-15,even Eurofighter, when opposing 1980s model of Su-27 at best, not to mention Mig-21bis, etc.. in what scenario would these planes fight? its not even realistic in theoretical war as no air force would even send such an obsolete force into air to meet advanced enemy air like this.. (witnessed in libya 2011), Iraq 2003..etc..

@gg.. every project has "difficulties" .. what F35 has is beyond "difficulties" which even engineers who did it and managers who managed the project ADMIT.. you trying to change that narrative that developers themselves admit is beyond futile and silly.. to say RF should disband all air force just because they can't afford to pump 200 Pak-fa or that it has PROBLEMS which are SAME as F35 is ludicrous at best .. issue of technical miscalculation which f35 is becoming to lack of funds that pak-fa is becoming is two world apart.. so far nothing shows to disastrous engineering feat f35 did to pak fa or any other plane in history of mankind.. not in scale nor in number of engineers/countries/finance involved..

totally different circumstances regarding f35 and pak-fa.. in US its actually a messed up design that shows and nobody can argue against this.. and no money problem financing this disaster no matter how many "faults" they find.. in Russia completely different picture, its a sound design with great characteristics as it is, but problem financing due to financial war of the west on Russia.. so it makes sense to scale back-tactical retreat-to survive another day.. pak-fa is not needed on frontlines, .. if there is a war pak-fa or no pak-fa it won't make difference for anybody ..nor west nor RF.. as weapons that would be used are stealth immune and are mostly radioactive in nature..

http://www.military-informant.com/airforce/8652-palubnye-vertolety-ka-52k-resheno-osnastit-protivokorabelnymi-raketami.html Use google translate for rough understanding but in general with the new radar Ka-52 can launch the new anti-ship missiles that Mig-29, Su-30 can launch.. so, ability to detect naval targets at distance up to 200 km and launch 200 range missiles at them.. also this makes it clear choppers don't have problems firing such missiles as they did have problems locating targets and feeding info to missile. once this is done, no problem exist for implementing "fire process" of such a heavy missile on helis.. well at least Russian ones.. Don't know how good Apache could carry the harpoon or how much space to mount such a big radar needed to launch harpoons..

as much needed break from the stupid price argument lets change the topic.. i for one am interested in more important AI aspects, not just in DCS in general but F-14 AI as well.. as complex as aircraft is don't you think AI needs to be upgraded for the plane?.. also we still lack overall AI improvement of DCS planes in groups.. before we get more modules i think its better to have AI that can group planes, analyse strength ratio of enemy versus friendly and initiate some sort of intelligent response.. I loose my interest when i see a Mig29 on CAP and EW telling him of a Awacs 300 miles away, then the idiot goes Afterburner and ejects before he gets to the awacs.. even though no other enemy planes, no escorts etc.. it simply lacks any simple calculation of pros/cons.. for instance, if we get Carrier ops, i would like to see E2 hawkeye patrol on very edge of its radius, with 2 tomcats close-by or escorting, after a contact is made by e2, tomcats can be send to verify target or engage right away if ROE permit.. but if bogeys possibly number more than 4, 6 then E2 with tomcats retreat while carrier sends reinforcements of 6 tomcats.. i'm just making this stuff up as i don't really know the modus operandi of carrier ops and tactical procedures in different situations, but this is what we need to make DCS(combat simulator alive).. unless DCS changes into LCS-lan combat simulator.. for WW2 planes same thing, but here at least its easier to find out the procedure of many planes engaging ground targets, or air targets.. for instance Stuka or Il-2 attacks on ground targets was established,its not like we do it in the game, every plane on its own and end up even colliding with our wingman!.. why not have those commands, .. more so what is missing is AI leader of the flight.. so you can fly in formation but not be the leader.. this is what is missing as it would force you to obey your commander thus learn the proper schematics of a group attack on a target etc.. so pls, DCS, Leatherneck and others..think of AI and group tactics AI of planes before implementing modules.. as great high-fidelity modules can be without making them alive we will just get what we already have, non-functional simulated battle dynamic that does not respond to threats in any realistic or intelligent way..

look at it this way.. ppl go out watch a movie, go for a drink, grab some fast food, ..such a night of 3-5 hour entertainment cost about 100 bucks easy.. unless you watch a ripped movie in a car and eat home made pasta of course)) of course social life has its benefits, going out means meeting new ppl, date, etc.. which has value in itself regardless of money spent.. but still, "movie" nights can be changed into gallery night, and save the movie money for flight sim.. i put 10 euros per month aside every month as a rule for flight sim.. if i buy anything or don't i do it.. over the year i see that amount of models pumped out from DCS is less than the budget i allocate for it, so i could if i wanted to purchased every module i wanted.. and that is 10 euros per month.. its really not that much, but discipline, budgeting your expenditure for other things is a must.. look at computers, how long do we keep them alive and kicking before the hard disk slows down the whole thing, and the rig becomes too outdated? 2 yrs? 3 yrs? 5 yrs?.. i keep it 3 yrs if i can, if not 4 years at the latest.. meaning in 3-4 yrs i must get to the magical 1200 euros to replace my rig.. that means 33-25 € per month must be put aside.. much more than the DCS flight sims, putting in mind 10€ per month is actually way too much, you could put aside 3 € and still get by.. remember the fire-sales from time to time, be smart, wait your time, and of course this strategy works if you actually been putting money aside, if not it won't work in next 3 months if DCS puts something out )lol..u'll have to dish those 50-60$.. but for future situations this works great..its less stressful, i don't worry about it too much.. and also, i think modules are way too cheap, .. or should i say under-value, .. i have a feeling if US company would be making this modules it would un-ashamedly put a price tag 200$ and nobody would complain.. but that's the difference between US and RF.. RF company has to accept the insult and be happy it can sell high enough to cover the costs, let alone think of profit.. kinda sad really..

top gun movie was done badly, not as historic accurate but just from technical point of view to storyline.. they could make same story,but with f14 firing phoeninx on those "mig-28" aka Russian F5, and show how F5 do defensive maneuvers violently and aggressively and phoenix miss, one after another, range is closing 45 miles, 36 miles etc.. and so on and so on.. make it credible at least somewhat.. in movie it looks like we're basically dealing with WW2 era aircrafts who spot the enemy 2 miles from the nose and have many opportunities to gun their enemy down with guns.. about TOP GUN 2.. yikes, pls don't do it hollywood.. i can't imagine a plot where this could work, i mean US air force armed with F22, JSF(that works probably in the movie at least) versus what?.. Iranian F14?, .. North Korean Mig-21?.. and Tom Cruise would be fighting and sweating? lol.. it doesn't work period. because whole strength ratio of US versus "enemy" has changed drastically in the past 30 yrs from the first movie where USSR was at least on paper a formidable opponent. Unless a movie is done who Tom Cruise gets asked by US Navy to come back cuz of shortage of pilots due to Chinese air superiority (for some reason) and then obviously he sits in JSF and boom, happy end. the end.)lol

okei, when F-14 is done, who would like to see Tom Cruise play it against "Ice" against Mig-21 over lan?)) lol.. who would play the mig21? i can already see Tom being over-enthusiastic as he likes to do his own stunts in his movies and Val Kilmer ammm, yeah i think he'd be the one trying to figure out what direction is he heading.. lol.. and top gun music in the back.. oh i'd love to see that..

or ability to see range of planes fully loaded with weapons with full fuel, .. to see how far can it fly,or how long? endurance versus range if you will..

lol, yes, i would enjoy a Mig-25.. to fly at the edge of space, going fast like a madmen.. just something about being invincible that is attractive.. would like the Recon version where you take pictures etc..not the combat one since it has limited use in DCS world(where predominantely fighters exist) .. would be pointless to intercept an f16 with a mig25.. but go over enemy airspace to take a picture, recon the area, and watch how helplessly f-15 and Co. try to intercept you would be nice to watch..

stealth obviously has advantages,but if the environment is heavy ECM where radar altogether becomes useless then what? Will F22 still have advantage or will the IRST planes gain it? in real life it won't be just radars and stealth as a factor but all kind of jammers,from ground, to planes to parachuted ecm,s to drone jammers, of course you can follow the jammer "source" to destroy it but the thing is your radar will not see the su35 lurking 20 miles in front of you or tiffy.. many tactics to nulify stealth, of course all have to be trained, developed .. question is only how expensive and sustainable is to perform such actions versus sustainability of maintenance of f22 delicate skin during war-time conditions..

i think US high command has rightfully analysed it won't need to do CAS anymore..using ground troops will be not needed as it was during past 20 yrs, US air force coupled with "rebels" that US could arm to do its fighting will be more than enough, wars will be fought on cyberspace, financial arena, and NGO color revolution style.. Air force serves as a tool of threat,not as actual tool to use,with stealth technology US will remain to be threatening. So no need for useless CAS.. its a proper analysis no matter what the media says.. they got it right..

to me it much more looks like Mig-23.. which is great if its true.. a little bit it even looks like su25..but we have that already so.. its gotta be mig-23.. first sweep wing design dcs standard plane.. awesome ppl..plus dcs standard radar for the mig and we are on a new level..))

lol i must give it to the entrepreneurs the americans.. they made a sure win-win concept, the "to big to fail" concept from the big banks was successfully transferred to fighter aviation where all the US "allies" are now forced to piggy up no matter the problems or financial considerations.. At this point it would be totally stupid for US to actually fix the problems, but more or less continue with the "problems" and dry the allies ..well dry.. lol.. what are they going to do, they invested so much money no other alternative.. its best business concept ever, like taking a rich guy son hostage and threatening him unless you succeed in business.. its proof-save tactic.. The more i look at this mess the more it seems this is done on purpose, US must be lol-ing at all this while the "allies" must be feeling quite "smart")) lol..

yeah i can imagine computer not understanding my orders, it would be so funny .. Me: we'll attack the tank column together while flying in formation from South-to-North okei? AI Wingman: Roger, splitting S and dropping flare, RTB immediately, Roger and out! Me: ARGHGHGHGH!?!?! AI Wingman: incompatible sir, i already jettisoned my weapons.