Frostie

I think you two are talking about two different concepts of flying in a public server, just as effective as each other. Flying with a wingman is not only beneficial for support but also relies on discipline from both to make effective, the concept of flying solo effectively requires more cunning and without the discipline imposed this becomes easier as you have a freehand, this can be very effective in a public server full of disorganised bandits and friendlies. Rather than supporting a wingman you are using friendlies, unknown to them, as bait. There is no distraction of positional sense in relation to your wingman which leaves you to focus on the task at hand, gaining a good position on the horde of bandits. Flying with a wingman is far more beneficial than flying solo but in a public server full of randoms sometimes it can be just as effective to just go solo.

Having buttons to push in the cockpit does not make you a better pilot, my missus knows her way around all those crazy switches on our washing machine, does that make her a better pilot? A bit of a strange one but what I mean is that switchology doesn't make the pilot. It's not the fidelity that makes the pilot, it's understanding procedures, flight parameters and tactics that make better pilots. The MiG-21 for example is not a hard aircraft to fight in, there is no overwhelming complexity to it some would have you believe compared to FC3 aircraft. One of the toughest challenges is learning the start up procedure which is not saying much. The challenging part is the fact it gets pitted against far superior platforms, that is what makes the combat tough. If you created a server with MiG-21 vs Su25 then those Frogfoots would be dropping like flies, similar situation to 15 v 21 but those 25 pilots would't have the fidelity excuse to fall back on. :)

So basically you're agreeing with me that radar guided missiles have shot down NATO aircraft in recent times as opposed to NATO aircraft have not been shot down by radar guided missiles. Why try and make something more than what it is. Have you considered the amount of A2A shots that have actually been taken on NATO aircraft in recent times, after doing so you can then come to the conclusion of the original claim of numerous radar guided missiles being fired at NATO aircraft in recent times swinging a long way in favour of SAM systems.

I'm sorry but I never once mentioned A2A, my response was to the claim that numerous radar missiles have been launched on NATO aircraft. I doubt very much that original statement was intended as A2A.

They suspected R-40TD the T was the older variant, what actually hit will probably never be known.

F/A-18 was believed to have been shot down by a MIG-25 in the Gulf. But regardless my point was surface to air without doubt, do you really believe there have been many launches against NATO aircraft from enemy aircraft, I don't think what they have faced in the air can be deemed as a threat to air superiority do you?

Pk data gathered from a war is not a true reflection of a missiles capability. This can be seen from the huge variation in results, for example Desert Storm Aim-9 had 0% Pk even excluding the accidental shots, where as Falklands Aim-9 had 70% Pk, the same missile with contrasting results. There is no set pattern in how a target responds to a BVR shot you need to realise the time of flight is far greater than any WVR shot so many things can happen during that time, more missiles can be fired, targets can turn cold, the shooter can go defensive himself trashing the shot so many variables affect the outcome. But one overriding factor that is missing from that paper is that the force with the greater use of BVR missiles won the airspace and that is all that matters.

Easy mode? The workload is relevant to the aircraft generation not the level of module. This lazy labeling of FC aircraft is tiresome, get yourself in one and let's see how well you do. :D

That being said how do you find other important tools for BVR such as the Beroyza placement compared to the TEWS, personally having the HUD, radar and TEWS all high up in the cockpit seems a much easier option for quicker SA building.

All of them, keep promising myself some stick time in each but the opportunity to do so is always few and far between. The Flanker, Ka50 and MiG21 are my primary choices. I'd love more hours in the P51, BF109, F86, MiG15, Mi8 and Huey all great modules. The A10C is amazing but boring, i'd love to see the Su25 vanilla in full DCS glory as it has always been one of my fave rides, everything you do in it, a2g, a2a, landing, it always feels like a great accomplishment, it makes the Su25T feel like easy mode.

:megalol: Opposing ground forces don't have to mirror each other, heck for variety it is good to have two completely different choices for A2G. Not to mention the aspect of easy IFF when such airframes face each other at certain choke points in a map. Red v Blue is good fun and always will be. We tried making unbalanced missions on the 51st server a few of years ago, the complaints were ridiculous. It stems from a lot of people not wanting or understanding dynamic missions that require team work, they just want to hold all the aces and shoot everyone down by themselves. Thankfully Blue flag made the breakthrough and showed how amazing multiplayer can be.

The irony of automation, give me a manual prop pitch over an auto any day.;)

The fun thing is you don't need to press the S button to break the wings. Mastering the DCS Flanker FM has got to be one of the toughest FM challenges in simming. From low speed negative Gs putting you on your back as you plummet to your death, high speed defensive breaks snapping your wings off, auto pilot nut case the burden grows and with it still in beta there is plenty room for more, bring it on I say much more enjoyable than the humdrum F-15 FM. :D

I guess thats the difference between PFM and EagleFM. The tolerances of PFM must be so tight no room for any overmodeling only the other way is allowable. Contrast with 3rd party FM which may have more open limits, mixed bag.

In a busy server if you don't have a wingman supporting you and giving you a picture then it is NEVER safe to turn back in, period, you just have to hedge your bets. All this airquake mumbo jumbo means nothing when the reality is unless you've got a radar pertruding out of your ass you're never sure what is behind you. Plenty of pilots including myself have thought that they're safe as houses when they turn back in only to get a nasty surprise.

Is there a list of entrants anywhere?

Great news. Can you give me a link to this Titanfire i'd like to download him. :)

1. Not sure what you're generalising here apart from uncaging the seeker, the simple process is automatic in FC. 2. I'm no expert either but AFAIK there are a couple of modes missing that are exclusive to the F-15 which is not apparent with Falcon those being Super search and Sniff mode, other than that the lack of bar scan selection is missing, instead of a choice of 2,4,6 or 8 you're stuck in 4 bar, the TWS has a high data rate as well as normal mode, in game I believe there is no rate and it is real time which is better than either mode. Also there is a lack of contact history. The majority of modes are there or thereabouts. The apg-68 and 63 are two very different sets so features shouldn't really be compared. 3. IFF modeling is an issue whatever simulator you fly, not solely an FC problem. 4. The aircraft in FC use seperate jamming systems that are either built on or attached externally, the radar is a seperate system.

Sounds like maybe you have the Mitsubishi F-2 mod??? http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/668690/

Over the last 20 years considering the opposition has been extremely inferior there has been quite a few radar guided hits on NATO aircraft.

Just flying MIG-21 should tell you this isn't the case. One button to lock, one to launch. More modern aircraft have the advantages of one switch close combat modes with auto acquisition and HOTAS designed purely for all combat to be performed with a simple press of a button or two without letting go of the controls. To say that combat in modern aircraft requires complex switchology is from someone who doesn't understand modern combat.

I'd hoped that this AoA radar issue would have been fixed in the latest update but it is still the same. Any news when this will be fixed?

Banned I guess, I saw a lot of banning and unbanning happen over the weekend. Maybe slmod going nuts.

Nubs in FC3 aircraft with simplified reaction times, let me have it real so I can press fifteen buttons to lock a guy up and seven to fire the missile and then they have to solve a sudoku every time they want to deploy chaff and flares, surely this is how they design real fighters. :bounce:

Something wrong with the radar for me since 1.5.3, it's scanning approx. +5º to +24º.