Vampyre

An overall refresh of the UH-1H would be nice. I'd like to see more options for weapons mounts than the Australian Bushranger mounts we currently have with the ability to select the mounts separately. Having other separate individual options in the ME for WSPS, armor, the sugar scoop and other antenna fits would be nice to have as well. A bigger selection of US Army skins from several units and a "US Army Standard" skin that is actually standard dark OD green with US Army titles on the tail boom and without unit badges painted on it would also be nice. A bigger wish would be to be able to select a change to UH-1V configuration with its different cabin area, rescue hoist, and additional avionics for the medevac mission.

Vampyre

L118 cargo object already exists in DCS. It was included in DCS with the South Atlantic assets. More sling load assets would be nice. What would be nicer would be multiplayer synch up while carrying sling loads. My game had the load directly below me hanging steady. My brothers screen looked like this-

Reload times are dependent on the size of the missiles. Thes seem to work on a set timer where when a missile is fired, the timer starts and however long the reload takes as specified by ED, the individual missile will be replaced. Not sure how long a really, really long time is but some SAM's take over an hour to reload... Not sure about the reload time for the SA-6 but I think it is closer to 20 to 30 minutes. One way to negate the reload time would be to set up another one or two sites in different areas to practice on while the others are reloading. You could also use the CTLD script and create a radio mission item to trigger a repair of the system which will reload all of the launchers... It's a bit convoluted and will take some time to set up. That is another way to work around the reload problem you have I suppose.

Add a supply truck (Ural375D for red or M939 for blue) near the SAM site or place them on an airfield. The trucks will have a ring around them in the mission editor and anything within that circle will be supplied. Use multiple trucks if needed. EDIT- Also, The larger SAM's take longer to reload than others. Igla's and Stingers are almost instantaneous, but Patriot/SA-10/SA-5 take a long time to reload.

For the herpes enjoyers out there... ... and some clean healthy noses for the rest of us.

F-15A's From the 7th Bunyaps, 8th Black Sheep and 9th Iron Knights TFS, 49th TFW. 9th TFS Wing King 8th TFS 7th TFS

Yes, Heatblur know their audience. It was made for the masses who don't know or care about the history. That was one of my points and I appreciate the agreement on that part. I maintain that the advertising is false in regard to the F-4E as a Wild Weasel. I have said multiple times that the people who know (mainly the been there done that veterans) are pointing out the squadron discrepancy which is what my original post was partially in response to. On that we have to agree to disagree it seems. Being low knowledge, in this case, is not a bad thing per se, it just means there is much more to learn and I hope others will delve into the history more. Now, some here seem to be offended by my points like I am saying they themselves have to be or do something or I have somehow attacked them. I have never once said or done that. I point out discrepancies in the video and somehow that is distressing in some way. They are arguing points not made and overlooking/ignoring what was actually typed or in the worst case, putting their words into my mouth. Like I said before, tempest in a teacup. It means little in the grand scheme of things. Now, getting away from the videos accuracy issues and when we ignore the history and go with the modern usage of the call sign, The F-4E is far from being a "perfectly capable Weasel". The F-4E is a poor Weasel substitute as it is not capable of detecting, classifying, locating and attacking a site within seconds and Shrike is a poor performing ARM. I think that will become more obvious once it releases... especially with Skynet and similar scripts (or ED's SAM AI rework) which integrate the SAM networks making them much more potent than they are currently. Judging by the F-14, I have no doubt that Heatblur are doing an outstanding job on this module so much so that I preordered on day one. I look forward to using it not as a half measure Weasel, but as the third generation fighter bomber it is. Ah, an ad hominem. Thank you for confirming the solidity of my points by responding with, essentially, nothing.

It seems wikipedia has done you a disservice. Wild Weasel today is just a mission set with specially trained aircrew focusing on SAM Suppression. Wild Weasel was more than just a mission set in the 60's 70, and 80's and the usage of the term was more restricted. In the time of the F-4E in USAF service it was more hardware focused. Once the program became defunct somewhere in the early 90's the term was focused more on the mission. This is a mix of historical inaccuracy and modern terminology. The F-4E of the type depicted in the video was never a part of a Weasel hunter/killer team or ever to perform the mission due to the nature of the mission its squadron, the 20th FS, was performing at the time. If it is as you say "way way beyond anything within reason" then let me point this out- Was the 20th FS a Wild Weasel Squadron? No Was the DSCG F-4E a Wild Weasel platform? No Did the 20th perform the Weasel mission? No Is the video historically accurate? No Is the DSCG F-4E being advertised as a Wild Weasel? Yes So my conclusion is that the video was intended to build hype for the upcoming release and using the term Wild Weasel for an aircraft in a squadron that was not and had never been assigned the mission is false. It is advertising that is false. Again, I'm not saying it was intentional on the part of Heatblur. Whoever made the video probably doesn't know the history. The low knowledge gamers who don't know, don't care for the most part. Those who do, point out the discrepancy.

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/342619-first-in-last-out-f-4e-wild-weasel-trailer-and-manual-release/?do=findComment&comment=5377495

Except the fact that the 20th FS was a training squadron at George in the 1980's that never did the mission. That is what this tempest in a teacup is all about. Those who know better will point out the discrepancy and those who don't will say it's fine. The information I posted is a clarification for everyone to digest and at least have a clue to what the history is. It is all correct. The strongly held belief part is funny though. It's just history.

Read my original post again... particularly the part in the middle of the last paragraph.

The 52nd TFW at Spang was originally a single F-4G squadron and two F-4E DMAS squadrons. The USAFE experimented with combining both the F-4G and DMAS E's into three identical squadrons. It was an effort to try to expand the effectiveness of the Weasels in Europe without having to modify more airframes to F-4G Wild Weasel standard. They flew in what were called Hunter/Killer teams with either two or four ship formations with the Weasel as the hunter and the standard fighter bombers as the killers. The Weasel would locate and suppress and direct the fighter bombers to destroy what was left. It is interesting to note that the DMAS F-4E's were soon replaced by Block 25 F-16C's and then separated into separate squadrons once again.

It was purposeful to draw attention to the product by using the wild weasel call sign. I didn't say Heatblur was purposefully tricking anyone. The creator of the video might not know the history either and is just regurgitating bunk information because it sounds cool. That was your assumption. But you are correct in assuming it is false advertising. The truth is the truth no matter how one feels about it.

The 20th TFTS was the German Air Force training squadron for the F-4F at George AFB (37th and 35th TFW) and Holloman AFB (20th FS, 49th TFW). They used the F-4E until the mid 90's when they then switched to the F-4F for their training missions. Having the capability to shoot an ARM does not a Wild Weasel make. Project Wild Weasel was started by the USAF in the 1960's to combat the new threat of Soviet SAMs and involved the modification of existing airframes to be able to detect, locate and suppress enemy SAM sites with specialized sensors/weapons. These aircraft with the nature of the missions, and the specialized sensor fits required aircrew with specialized training to be able to hunt down and suppress enemy SAM operators. These aircraft were given designations within the Wild Weasel program: Wild Weasel I was a modified F-100F Super Sabre Wild Weasel II were modified F-4C's (Early and unsuccessful) Wild Weasel III were F-105 F/G Thunderchiefs Wild Weasel IV were better modified F-4C's and, under Wild Weasel IV B, a pair of F-4D's Wild Weasel V was the F-4G In the time period represented in the video, the USAF had the F-4G Wild Weasel V. A bog standard F-4E from a non-weasel squadron, particularly a foreign operator training squadron, would not have had the Wild Weasel call sign as neither the crews nor the aircraft were trained/optimized for the role respectively. With the retirement of the F-4G, there are no more actual Wild Weasel Aircraft in the USAF. The confusion encountered seems to come from the modern use of the Wild Weasel call sign by the USAF. The Wild Weasel callsign in today's USAF refers to specially trained crews flying modern multirole aircraft performing the same mission as the crews of old who flew actual Wild Weasel aircraft. In the case of this video, the use of the Wild Weasel moniker is but a marketing ploy. It is designed to sell a product to low knowledge gamers.

Should probably have posted that here- F-4E Manual Feedback Mega-Thread - DCS: F-4 Phantom - ED Forums

McDonnell F-4 Phantom: Spirit in the Skies: Jon Lake, David Donald: 9781880588314: Amazon.com: Books McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet: An insight into the design, construction and operation of the US Navy's supersonic, all-weather multi-role combat jet (Owners' Workshop Manual): Davies, Steve: 9781785210549: Amazon.com: Books Amazon.com: F/A-18 Hornet: A Navy Success Story: 9780071346962: Jenkins, Dennis R.: Books

I'd imagine it would be easier for them to do a MiG-23BN Flogger F/H as the Cuban Air Force operated the type. I'd like to see a MiG-27K Flogger J2 though if that is at all possible as well.

If you didn't notice 740643 Is a DMAS bird. You won't see it on the initial release but I'm willing to bet it will be in the release of the DMAS/ARN-101 F-4E. As for the 457th TFS, I'm pretty sure I saw a skin from that squadron in one of the recent videos.

Thanks, it's fixed now.

Interesting little tidbit there at the end of IFE's recently closed out "What would you like to fly" thread. So, not Italian or even European but was involved in a recent European conflict. I can't think of any Asian or South American types that fit the clues which means it's probably American. What is recent for European conflicts? Even though it was almost 30 years ago, Balkan Conflicts maybe? I doubt it is the Ukraine war or the Greece/Turkey clashes in the 70's. American- F-117, F-15C probably. Could be a transport like the C-141B Starlifter though I doubt it. Maybe a Helo like the CH-53E Super Sea Stallion or Maybe an AH-1W Super Cobra.

I remember this crash. I was the platoon commander for China Lakes Auxiliary Security Force at the time. We were tasked with responding to any aircraft/weapons incidents within 100 miles of NAWS China Lake to provide security to the areas/assets affected. It was early 2009 if I remember correctly. The jet crashed almost vertical and piled into a big crater. The pilot ejected out of envelope and ended up hitting the ground near the crater. The NAWS CO had us stand down after our initial surveillance of the area and we ended up having the Air Force take responsibility for the security of that one.

Not true. The point of stabilizing fins, particularly large stabilizing fins are to provide stabilization in flight. Weapons requiring spin stabilization typically are unguided and have small fins specifically for imparting the rotational force or, in the case of most gun and cannons, have no fins but require rifling in the barrel to spin the round as it is fired. Fins that create spin also impart drag which reduces range. Spin is undesirable for weapons like guided bombs. Spin is of particular importance for unguided rockets, most CBU's and smaller missiles like the RIM-116, many SACLOS radio command guided missiles and various dumb bombs. Pertaining to the GBU-24, the offset rear stabilizers are not there to promote spin, the pop out surfaces needed to be of a wider chord on this particular weapon to provide better flight dynamics for its intended low altitude release parameters. The Air Force found that the larger surfaces caused clearance issues on the aircraft it was intended to be used on so the fins were offset symmetrically to allow for the fitment of the wide chord stabilizers. This offset, and the resulting spin, has a negative effect on the range of the weapon but, fortunately, the proportionate guidance system used on the GBU-24 was capable of dampening the rotational forces once it had a laser to lock on to. Basically, the offset stabilizing fins were a compromise to make it work. For Snake Eye, they don't always spin the same way or sometimes even spin at all so I think that has more to do with manufacturing defects in the fin kits or irregularities in the bomb build up than with any spin stabilizing intent. I wouldn't expect that kind of randomness to be high on ED's priority list.

I think this should be in the map wish list part of the forum located here - https://forum.dcs.world/forum/339-dlc-map-wish-list/.