Kaktus29

doesn't stand a chance? as some have stated, it depends on situation, numbers, other factors.. First what is the ratio of enemy vs. friend? if we have 4 F-15 jumping on 3 Mig-21 and F-15 have AWACS support, and F-14 circling in the back, and enemy Mig-21 have their military radars out, no awacs, bombed airfield.. well yeah obviously f15 wins hands down.. but hopefully nobody is going to do such a stupid setup for the mp.. i was thinking more of a 2F15 getting jumped by 8 Mig21 .. no awacs, or if there is awacs there is also GCI for the migs.. in that case yeah much more interesting.. also mig-21 should be able to start up from many airfield like strips which are not totally operational, hell vietcong send their migs pretty much from any flat part of the jungle .. this would make ambushes much more likely.. and still f15 would obviously have the advantage (IF notified by AWACS-depends on mig flying profile as they go for the intercept) but a trained 8 pilot mig ship versus 2 1975 f15.. yeah i think its about 50-50.. in this kind of mp setups its about who wins totally, that means one side or the other must wipe the others out completely to call it a victory.. if that doesn't work keep on adding migs until we hit the sweet spot of 50:50.. pretty simple really.. unless some would like for f15 not to have any chance or for mig not to have any chance of winning in that case why keep playing dcs anyway)) we all want balance so we can show our skills.. if the setup is impossible to win its just well useless.. but considering that mig-21 from the 70's was about what ? 3 million USD (that is 70's dollars when they were worth something), and F15 was about 30 million .. so, for 2 F-15 to have a financially EQUAL fight it would mean 20 Mig-21.. well well... i would love to see this battle on the mp))) let the hunger games begin.. considering missiles of that time would be spoofed anyway this would be mostly a gun-gun match.. sweet)) since F15 out-turns, out-speeds, the migs it means migs would have to stay in disciplined fashion together and in a circle pattern, so as f15 comes for the gun kill they can coordinate the f15 path into cross fire.. so as i said, this requires big time training for the mig pilots.. training hard like a madmen.. )) for the f15, much less strategy or tactics, .. only hope is not enough trained mig pilots..

how r u guys going to use the mig21 in mp? .. are there plans of plane ratio vs. the f-15 to make it more challenging? like 8 Mig-21 versus 2 F15.. and wouldn't that entail training in squadrons so you could be effective in mig21.. otherwise going solo against f15 or 2 f15s is obviously not going to be a challenge for anybody..

@dun.. restrain from politics.. especially the lying part of politics..

well in theory enemy could punch IR and radar missile at you, and you wouldn't have a warning that IR is in the mix of those two missiles.. IR is autonomous anyway not being detected by your plane when targeted by EOS, and radar missile would make your RWR alert u.. but in reality in our pc gamers ppl yes i think ppl just lazy and punch "Q" a bit too much not differentiating the two decoys..

yup, when i read about it i thought..wow, that powerful radar eurofighter has sure is powerful if it can't detect a civilian learjet in front of him.. just shows how theory and reality works .. either that or the dude had his radar off and ground control had their radar off or both elements failed because of lack of professionalism(slacking off at the job).. in any way this is just.. so 3rd world accident..

mad max scenario kinda is workable for this mig21.. after nuking major military assets and cities.. a ruined world where of course the AK47 of the skies gets rediscovered by rag-tag units of d new brave world and they offer their services to other groups that wish some assistance in their "restoring" order to our world.. man this is totally single player campaign character play worthy.. imagine pc game Fallout make out with mad max while watching top gun in the background..= THIS...

yes,its different frequency.. like have 6 different frequencies and them change from one target to another in quick succession.. thus making sure each bomb is receiving updates so quickly its almost laser is pointing at that one target only all the time.. i know Russia implemented this already with its Vikhr guided rockets so in 1 pass 2 targets can be hit.. but don't know how far this went and what is the biggest problem.. to me it looks like the laser indeed.. but is it mechanical head that moves it that is too slow,clumsy, or the speed which it receives info and translates it to guidence to the bomb.. anyway, would be cool to have this option.. just seeing a convoy of 40 spread vehicles on the ground moving.. and then a flight of only 8 planes dropping 6 bombs each hits each vehicle at once.. WOW..

to lase more than one LGB to a target or even more targets.. e.g.: you have 6 LGB, and you lase at fast intervals lets say 6 targets, if done fast enough you transmit the necessary information so all LGB can hit their respective targets in one single pass.. now, question.. is it hard to do this because of computer power or lack of, or laser can't switch so fast from one to another coordinate? .. too bad, that would really make even single jets bomber like planes.. with a single pass 6 targets, meaning a flight of 24 planes can literally destroy 144 targets in one pass.. would be a scene in DCS.. especially since we have to script every pilot decision in order for a flight of 4 planes to hit 4 targets in a same pass..

always preferred the su-27,35 over mig-29 but the mig-29kub has got me over.. love the plane, just sexy plane, it feels lighter, deadlier, cuter ))

such trainings are specific for a purpose.. here they are just testing how pilots would react to enemy having short IR range "superiority" .. to me this looks like testing pilots to be ready for a specific enemy where NATO believes would only pose a danger in short range-surprise-heavy ECM environment where such short range furballs might happen.. so it got nothing to do with grippen or tiffy. they could very well use tiffy in the role of grippen and tornado in the role of tiffy.. its about exposing pilots to the shock.. to me this is more dangerous as it shows NATO is training for a specific war in mind..

what do you guys think how it works.. the ability to fire before a target passes you or "advance" firing would mean a system of delivering information of target before you can lock/see it on your manpad and firing into that direction while missile re-locks as it closes on the target.. this is my idea at least.. maybe manpads have a link to EW and other SAM's or maybe even Fighter jets etc.. thus knowing enemy target moving in their position or not... it would make sense.. so far this Verba system is truly one of a kind.. man with this imagine how hard DCS would be for us pilots.. every radar ping we get is information to those pesky manpadders down below waiting to blow u if you dare lower your altitude more than 20.000 feet.. http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20140530/190242026/Russian-Paratroopers-Receive-Newest-Verba-Shoulder-Fired.html

quite allot is known actually, it will be a sub-sonic bomber with stealth features and have new hypersonic weapons for deployment as primary weapon. there was some thought of going the B2 route but are contemplating a sweep wing-body wing concept also.. so, aginor is just being sarcastic or something else ..

@plp ... usa doesn't care what Swiss buy as long as they buy, and buff up their armed forces.. being in the western block Swiss is not in danger of being invaded, but if Swiss don't buy weapons it would give a signal to US that Swiss doesn't play ball and ironically they WOULD be in danger (from financial problems-aka sanctions).. its politics ..not tactical, strategic reasons).. Weapons or NOT, If swiss is in cross-hairs of bigger nations like Germany, France it ceases to exist..same with Czech, slovenia, Slovakia, even Poland.. so to say Swiss need weapons to protect themselves is nonsense, they need them to REAFFIRM their allegiance to their camp.. if not, repercussions come..and they bite more than abrams..

@usar lol.. the assumptions are yours.. i used evidence from history that proved my imperative.. you still keep your assumptions calling them evidence .. my picture looks much clearer.. same as with F117, amazing stealth, nobody can touch it, boom, okei maybe its not 100% bullet proof, but F22 IS.. i'm telling you.. for real. why? who da hell knows.. cuz i said so)lol.. fact is, no, its far from assured thing.. as i said, if it were so assured, F-22 would be already importing democracy in Moscow and Beijing..

its much more complicated as stealth triumphs no matter what.. ECM suites are improving all the time and are more or less as important as stealth features of planes.. Who says F22 will see and range the Su-35 from 100 km? ..with a strong ECM suite F22 won't be able to lock and burn through until 20 miles.. so tell me, do experts on this forum know for sure EOS can't find a supercruising fighter at 20 miles? we don't know.. which is why real defense analyst know war against opponent with 4++generation planes versus f22 is not 100% done deal for the raptor.. war is messy, much of systems that change and alter the equation of what wins where is actually hidden, so no, we will not google it out and make our assumptions of who wins..that is childish and stupid. remember, when hitler attacked USSR german spies had more or less checked everything USSR had, from planes, numbers, technology etc.. yet still were surprised to find T-34 tank and ability to manufacture it in big numbers.. USSR hid the project tremendously well, even to their detriment as to have it as an ace card.. Fact is, war is messy, unless US battles Afghanistan, Libya there is no way F22 will rule the skies against a real opponent who unites against the threat.. that is just reality.. Otherwise US would be already "testing" F22 over Moscow and Beijing..

reason why Swiss need Grippen or Belgium F-35 is obviously for political reasons, not defensive or strategic ones.. in case of major war this small-medium nations(belgium, netherlands, swiss, sweden) act like cannon fodder to the major force that would conduct the war against their enemy.. so Germany, Italy,France,UK, and most of all US would be in 1st category, the small nations are BOUND to spend money and buff up their militaries so US gets its worth out of them when war happens.. how foolish it is for this nations to surrender their sovereignty like that is another question for another thread.. p.s.: @scrim.. lol. Sweden wouldn't last a week if Russia attacked? nonsense, its disgraceful you make such nonsense, Sweden has top notch ground troops, difficult terrain, terrific anti-armor and anti-personnel weapons and determined nation and soldiers, even if US attacked there would be no chance of winning Sweden in 2 weeks let alone Russia.. such hysteria is what makes warmongering elites in Sweden cut from reality and quite isolated from most of the freedom sane humanity.. NATO in numbers is like 112, Russia is like 14.. and somehow NATO members have the right to be terrified by Russia while Russia has no rights to be afraid of NATO.. logic western style.. 1+1=giraffe..

if under total air superiority as any gunship it would slaughter armor and other units, if under heavy enemy air superiority it wouldn't stand a chance as any other gunship also.. but to compare it with other gunships under same conditions i would say its faster,more precise for the role than western gunships.. same with frogfoot, it was intended to be used in situations that are bad, A-10 for situations where air superiority for A-10 is assumed.. and if its not? its not survivable at all..

this is the future, when SAM and EW and other SEAD gets implemented this is where the intensive fight is going to be, .. MP with all this toys is the future.. and later real strategic and tactical decisions and all kind of ambushes at play.. imagine having your SHORADS hidding and looking at EW picture to see if any enemy bird is already in range and close by and defensive fighter planes creating trouble for the attacking.. it will become imperative to have HQ to coordinate all this or else a big wtf could happen with everybody feeling lost as to what is going on..

i cancelled my YT account a month ago, forcing me to join gmail with youtube was the last drop.. i cancelled my gmail, youtube, skype )) i'm free baby.. haha.. switched to Yandex browser, Yandex mail, live perfectly well.. and youtube blocking DCS stuff.. yeah u don't have to be a genius to see why that is so..

..if designed to glide? ..what is the equation to get the distance? ..obviously it has to do with initial altitude, speed, and gliding characteristics of the bomb(aerodynamic shape, wings, probably sweep wings to increase lift as speed drops etc).. so, if SR-71 or Mig-31 would drop a glide bomb while flying at 80-90.000 feet @Mach3 how far would a glide bomb fly?.. i'm thinking about 600-700 km?..am i way off?.. of course one needs calculations not "gut feeling" to know more precisely.. just extrapolating from glide bombs of today with a range of 60 miles already that are dropped from 30.000 feet @mach 0.9 ..

@Blaze, rage.. because it would be immensely cheaper? why launch ARH if you can lauch SARH with same results.. obviously as GG stated it can be done, but probably some limitations in accuracy, responsiveness that would make this useful for targeting slower targets like awacs, bombers, etc..

okei, then how about TWS-ing your many targets and firing SARH that way (by giving a general direction of targets to SARH) and then after appropriate time (computer tells you when SARH missiles r approaching the targets) u hardlock them and guide them in..

we all know about ARH missiles and radars with TWS ability to fire at more than 1 target,but with AESA radars or just better than old gen. radars ability to track and lock more than 1 target increases.. i just want to ask is it possible then to fire at for instance 6 targets with SARH missile (yes you must keep the lock maintained at all time but still, it shouldn't be impossible to fire at multiple enemies locked by radar with SARH missile or is it?)..

very nice use of triangulation, of course much more can be done with proper "equipment".. but for now its as best as one can do.. as DCS progresses-i hope-more can be added in the EW warfare and this will force the SAMs to become much more mobile and intelligent as well to keep up with the changes from above.. all in all, good stuff..

considering how impossible it is to create such big large areas where thousands of units would clash etc.. and computer registering all that in real time i think its safe to say we need a "gamey" option to deal with this but still have a bigger air war campaign going for MP.. i want to ask, would ppl be okei if the "campaign" is not totally in real-time and totally realistic but would simulate for most part reality..like in world of tanks the CLAN WARS, where you put chips into a province and then be challenged, etc.. and have other clans(teams) cooperate with you or not. so a part of it would be a game on strategy map with moves and counter moves, only when confirmation of impact on strategy map is confirmed does the MP ability arise to wage this clash with planes in simulation dCS world.. to make things much simpler for computer, all destroyed planes can be still available for the team, all bridges are again new in a new mision, etc.. only thing that would change is on strategy map(loosing a province means loosing a place to put your planes, maybe oil refinery, maybe some other strategic building) that would simulate a loss of organization, or loss of fuel supply(not being able to field 16 planes for MP but only 10, etc.. with such gamey (not simulation moves) one can create a viable battle of bigger strategic depth while still enjoying hardcore simulation battles in 3D in DCS world.. so, would ppl here enjoy such a mix of "arcade campaign" coupled with our hardcore simulation DCS 3D world of planes,CA, etc.. ? ------------- on the other hand, i guess what is needed is a converging platform that would put results of certain MPs of different games together (steel beasts, DCS World, BF4 etc) in a viable way, so one can enjoy your usual normal MP in any of those games but knowing each battle contributes to a larger picture that may end up your side loosing the war?.. what do you think? ..