Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Recent Profile Visitors

10399 profile views
  1. So I just ran a number of tests flying the F-16 against the viggen AI in different scenarios and made the following observations. The AI viggen leaves the F-16 (and every other module) standing still in terms of acceleration in all flight regimes (slow subsonic to supersonic) at both low and high altitudes. Considering it weighs 36,242 lb Vs the Vipers 26,500 lb and makes 28,000 lb of thrust Vs 29,500 lb for the Viper, the performance seems way off. It behaves like it has 10,000lb more thrust and also doesn't bleed much energy while turning, which results in sustained turn rates approaching the F-16's. I will run some more tests this evening and try to post a track but has anyone else experienced this?
  2. Thanks for that explanation Frederf. Maybe the behaviour is correct then but the brightness for certain times of day in DCS is just too low which results in having to manually set it for lots of different pages.
  3. Are you sure this is correct behaviour as is? I'm sure we shouldn't have to change the brightness setting for each MFD page individually. It's very unintuitive and time consuming to set the jet up and when entering A/G or A/A master modes the brightness changes.
  4. I've realised this only happens when using external fuel tanks on AI aircraft. Without bags they refuel as normal, with external tanks they stay connected forever.
  5. Any way to disable this? I get a bright halo appearing in my peripheral vision as I move my head around as if the masked area is coming into view marginally before the screen refreshes. It looked much better before.
  6. Hi, I've been using the brilliant F-105 mod for an F-5E mission I'm making but haven't had any luck in getting the F-105G model to work as an AI SEAD flight. If I set the aircraft role to SEAD it just defaults to the Viggen instead. Any idea how this could be rectified?
  7. I set up a test last night with 2 launchers and all the extra tracking units in a group and the battery only fired a single missile at a time. Another wasn't launched until the first had impacted terrain or the target aircraft, which made it a very ineffective system. Is this correct behaviour?
  8. Ahaha "Most of the time we did what's called closer sport" @1:50 That's what I'm calling CAS from now on.
  9. Yeah, I noticed this the other day. Minor issue but still annoying. Should be an easy fix though.
  10. The F/A-18C is actually quite a simple aircraft to operate in its current state. A lot of the more advanced weapons and avionics aren't modeled yet and the cockpit is very logically laid out and easy to transition to from the F-5E, being a more advanced evolution of the lightweight fighter concept. It's got an expanding range of capabilities as well as the whole carrier component and would be the logical next step for you. Something like the MiG-21, while of a similar era and capability to the F-5E, would be more difficult in my opinion due to the difference between western and eastern aircraft design philosophy. The Viggen is also a very different aircraft to operate in terms of its avionics and mission capabilities. Don't be put off by all the displays of the newer aircraft. They're actually simpler and easier to fly in a lot of ways.
  11. Do yourself favour and pick up a threadripper 2950X. 16 cores instead of 10 and if you get the upgrade itch again in a couple of years you probably won't have to buy a new motherboard. I'm planning on replacing my Ryzen 1700 with Zen 3 when it lands in 2020. Skylake X is over a year old now already and not great in terms of single core clock speeds.
  12. Well I've taken hits without damaging avionics and been leaking fuel like crazy a couple of times in DCS lately.
  13. I had the exact same thing happen to me twice on the same mission. Taking any ground fire seems to result in a rapid loss of fuel. Not sure if it's a bit overdone or not... If they're self sealing like Dooley says it might be worth looking into.
  14. I'm gonna wait and see what 7nm brings. My RX480 8GB cost me £180. I'd rather play in VR with low settings for a while and save some money to put towards second gen VR and a much faster card for less than the price of these. The 14nm RX480 was faster than the 20nm GTX 970 on release. By that logic, a mainstream 7nm Polaris replacement might give you around RTX 2070 performance for £250/$300.
  • Create New...