WHOGX5

Well, you're partly right. Actually ROKAF doesn't have any Block 40/42s in it's inventory and it never has. It only has Block 32 and Block 52s. The Block 52s were however ordered with the 'WAR' HUD and the LANTIRN system. The ability to project FLIR on the HUD was never lost in the Block 50/52, the US just decided to have the narrow angle HUD and to stop using LANTIRN on their own Block 50/52. Export customers could still order whatever they wanted. Yes, and who doesn't want that? :D It's got FLIR rather than Night Vision thats displayed on the HUD and it has terrain following radar which allows you to fly at low altitudes at both day and night without risking your life every single second. :thumbup: Gotcha! Thanks for the info.

It added new capabilities (avionics, weapons, etc.) and gave the Block 40/42/50/52 Vipers a high degree of commonality with both each other and the MLU upgraded NATO F-16s of Belgium, Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands.

With the upcoming release of the F-16C Block 50 CCIP I can't help but feel that it would be a wasted opportunity not to model the F-16C Block 40 CCIP as well. That incentivized me to do some research (see Google) to find out how big the difference actually is. What I've found so far is: Block 40 has the wide FOV 'WAR' HUD and the LANTIRN TGP and FLIR/TFR pod. Some CCIP Block 40's don't have the Bird Cutter AIFF Antennas on the nose due to budgetary constraints These are the only real differences I can find. From what I can tell the Block 50 at it's inception retained all the structural changes that had been made to the Block 40. Then when the CCIP upgrades started happening the Block 40 got the same internal upgrades as the Block 50 (Color MFDs, new avionics, AIM-9X, JHMCS, etc.). Also, the CCIP upgrade for the Block 40 is said to have taken 144 days per aircraft, and it started in 2005 so there should've been plenty of CCIP Block 40's by 2007. Just wanted to put that out there. :D Does anyone know of any other differences between these two blocks?

Don't quote me on this, and please correct me if I'm wrong: I recall the AH-1 in the pipeline being revealed as the Golf version or some similar old Cobra. The only reason I remember this is because I was so incredibly pissed off at the fact that we weren't getting the Whiskey Super Cobra. Please tell me I'm wrong. PLEASE!!!!!!!!

Razbam managed to make detachable NVGs which were folded up and down when you enabled/disabled them so it's not impossible. I really hope ED implements this in the Viper. Also, yes; the pilot model definately needs to be remade. It looks so plasticky at the moment. I also really hope they mimick the 6-DOF pilot animations that HB have in the Tomcat. The pilot movement looks so realistic in the kitty.

The RA-5C! It's been out of service for about 40 years, has photo recon, SLAR, ELINT; It even has flash pods for night photo missions. It was one of, if not the main reconnaissance platform of the vietnam war. Also I think it's the biggest/heaviest aircraft to ever operate from a carrier deck. It also retains all the bombing avionics from it's previous variants so it won't be a pacifist only module. And it's able to buddy-refuel other aircraft. So basically it's a carrier capable supersonic strategic/nuclear bomber/Recce/ELINT/Tanker aircraft in one single variant. I advise you to read about the A-5/RA-5C. Such a groundbreaking aircraft with so many interesting little quirks and lots of stories from pilots who flew her in vietnam.

I tried to join a server today and got this prompt window. What does it mean? Does it take screenshots from my perspective? Does it take screenshots from my Screenshots folder in saved games? :helpsmilie:

ATIS would be much appreciated! Also, the new carrier communications already include altimeter so it should only be a matter of time until it makes it way over to the land based ATC as well.

Yeah, I'd obviously like this feature for all aircraft in DCS but I figured the first step would be to implement it in an aircraft that's currently under development. Also, the Viper is my first love and I will always do what's best for her. :love:

Yeah, I completely agree. HeatBlur really did an amazing job with the animations. They're so smooth and with the pilot models being able to lean back/forth, left/right and even twisting the entire body when looking over the shoulder, it just feels so alive. Also, the F-14 pilot model looks so realistic. The F-18 pilot model looks like it's made out of plastic almost. No details in the mesh, no detailed textures, limited animations and wierd materials.

Guys, guys! You can't just throw around words like "LANTIRN", okay? The LANTIRN system consists of two different pods. The 421st TFS from 'Vipers in the Storm' had the AN/AAQ-13 Navigation Pod with terrain following radar and forward looking infrared. They did not have the AN/AAQ-14 Targeting Pod which were all given to the F-15E squadrons. In the book he even talks about the 421st using AGM-65D's as improvised targeting pods since they didn't have anything else. So henceforth I ask of you to differentiate between the AN/AAQ-13 Navigation Pod and the AN/AAQ-14 Targeting Pod when discussing these matters, for the sake of clarity, our shared bank of knowledge and the betterment of the human race.

Also, you should have to choose between either JHMCS or Night Vision Goggles. Having both at the same time simply isn't realistic. Razbam implemented a choice between NVG's or a sun visor for the Harrier. It was also represented visually as you could actually see externally who had NVG's with mounted and if they were on or folded up. Shouldn't be too hard to do the same for the F-16.

AFAIK the AI has a different damage model than player controlled aircraft. Unless they've fixed that your example isn't really comparable to those regarding PvP. I've been flying the F-14 non-stop since release and when I get hit by a missile I have a good 95% chance of my engines flaming out and loosing hydraulics. You can run every emergency procedure in the book; she will not start up again. The other 5% of the time are when missiles only manage to get a little bit of shrapnel stuck in your wing or something similar. This is more common for medium/long range missiles like the AIM-120 since they usually have lower energy at impact and therefore aren't that maneuverable. Missiles like the R-73 usually either lose track and miss completely or they hit you smack dab in the pâté factory. In my eyes the only issue is the lack of variation in the damage model for the F-14. Flame out and loss of hydraulics followed by the controls slowly freezing up is the only thing I've ever experienced in the F-14. Gets a bit stale after a while. Just want to end by saying that HeatBlur is the best dev in DCS by a long shot and I'm only nagging because I care! :D

Some other sim allowed the options of legs, legs & torso and full body. I think that will make everyone happy!

One thing that would be amazing for the F-16 (especially in VR) would be a physical kneeboard that's clickable. Since it would be inside the actual cockpit it won't obscure your view and you will never have to use your keyboard to use it, you only need a mouse, leap motion, oculus touch, captoglove, etc. Here's my concept: These colored boxes are just clickable zones that take you to different pages in the kneeboard. I think First Page, Last Page, Prev. page and Next Page are pretty self explanatory. The Quick Tabs in this example only have letters so you could have a simple .lua file (or something equivalent) that decides which letter goes to which page. So tab 'G' takes you to '022.png' or page number 22, whichever is easier to program. With this .lua it would be easy to integrate this new system into existing kneeboard makers for DCS making it quick and easy for players to use this new feature to the max. The 'First Page' button is great for creating your own index, so if you don't know which tab goes where by heart, just click 'First Page' button, check the index, then click the appropriate tab. Only two clicks to find what you're looking for. It would also allow for a huge number of kneeboard pages that would still be easy to navigate between. You don't have to spam the 'Next Page' key 100 times to find what you need, just press the appropriate tab. This makes stuff like emergency checklists easy to use right away when you need it. This would be an absolutely unique selling point for the F-16. Things that are required of ED for this to work: Create a 3D model of a kneeboard Create clickable areas on that physical kneeboard Use the same system that the current kneeboard for organizing and changing pages Add a .lua or similar for the Quick Tabs that defines which tab goes to which page. Result for users: No need for a keyboard when using the kneeboard in-game. Always accessible without obscuring the pilots view. Allows for the creation of an index. Easy to integrate with 3rd party kneeboard software It makes a larger amount of pages quicker to access. Only two clicks to find whatever you're looking for. Can still make use of 3rd party custom pages like the ones that come with the F-14. Immersion :thumbup: Also, if it's at all possible, it would be a dream come true to have one kneeboard on each leg with different pages. If this is unrealistic, just disregard. I can't tell anymore if I'm being genius or just delirious..... Please comment and let me know what you think about this idea or if you have any improvements to add. Thank you!

I understand that we won't get the specs needed to model US jammers exactly like their real world counterparts, but there is more than enough information freely available on the internet to enable you to model EW-systems that behave very, very close to how they would in real life. Things like the power output of different jamming systems would have to be estimated but the techniques they use can be closely replicated. And even though it wouldn't be 100% accurate, it would orders of magnitude better than what we have now.

Yes! For example, as far as I know, back in 2007 in the F-16s you had to choose between a JHMCS helmet or a regular one with support for night vision. As it is in the F-18 right now you can use night vision even though you have JHMCS which is not realistic AFAIK. That's just one example of something that's easy to do but increases realism and balancing.

Shhh! :D On a serious note though I'm just glad that the A-10C is getting some love.

Just some form of ECM aircraft: EF-111A, EA-6A/B, EA-18G, just anything! PS: KC-10 would be nice too..... :D

Make sure that you have Jester set the ARC-182 to AM instead of FM or vice versa.

I definitely noticed a decrease in thrust. That would also explain the decreased sustained turn rate mentioned above.

If they could give you the option for different kinds of detent styles akin to the special options in the Hornet, that'd make everyone happy. Especially me... :D

When you get close to 10nm it's best to use the WVR modes like boresight and vertical bore, and then do a sweep of the general vicinity of the BRA call. In the Hornet you have wide aquisition mode as well which is very good for scanning large areas when you don't know where the target is. And while your radar does all the work, try to find them visually simultaneously.

Fingers still crossed for a J35F2 or J35J!

Indeed, some people seem to believe that everything that has to do with "diversity", a black person or a woman is a part of some huge conspiratorial scheme against white people. It's not. In our community we have members who are men and women; white, black and everything inbetween. The same is seen in most modern air forces. I don't see the issue with DCS reflecting that same diversity. It's not an insurmountable task. Quite the opposite actually.