Skjold

AFAIK, gunpods even though coming out of the factory were often left behind in bases in late -44 and -45 because of the new prevelence of long range fighter escorts such as a the P-51D Mustang and that was a decision made on the highest level in the Luftwaffe after disasterous results against Mustangs during -44. Field modifications did happen of course but i am not sure how prelevant they were, there is often many conflicting sources about that. In any case, both the german WW2 planes in DCS do need their 2 cm gunpods for the ground attack role something the 109's rarely did during the K-4 service life due to the simple fact of life that the 109's that weren't blown up were needed against Lancasters and Flying Fortresses and their Mustang escorts.

my video is 100 % DCS :thumbup:

"It was unpopular amongst the pilots" shouldn't dictate what an module comes with. With that logic the GAR-8 (AIM-9B) on the F-86 shouldn't be in as an example. Pilots don't dictate operational strategy. In an alternative history situation where the war diverted historically and the Germans largely won back superiority of the skies and many of its 109's reverted back to ground attack, the gunpods would have been extensively used or if for example the allies weren't able to design long range interceptors to protect their bombers they would have also been used extensively. Now these examples aren't likely, but it is basicly just to show that they weren't used because of the goings of the war and would have been used if the war had turned out different. I did not know about the cluster bombs! Thanks for the information.

My entry "On the Prowl". :thumbup:

Not to bash your performance or anything but a lot of the simulators in museums etc use an extremly simple flight model that wouldn't represent the difficulty of landing it properly.

Mirage F1 is a cool plane, keen to see this develop.

Thanks for the reply Racoon! Good to know that the WW2 birds aren't forgotten.

I did say the majority of the weapon systems, but yes you are correct that some weapons are missing for various reasons on almost all modules. My intention is not to start an argument here, but gunpods and Werfer-Granate 21 were primarily used against bomber formations on interception missions. Correct me if i am wrong as you seem to be knowledgable about the 109 platform. The lack of air-to-air rockets also objectively reduces the combat efficency of the aircraft since their purpose was to be able to engage bomber formations out of range from their defensive .50 cals which the 30 mm Mk 108 simply is not capable of doing. I fully understand that ED has a lot on their plate and if it will get added in the future i have no objections and i've said my peace now. :thumbup:

Thanks for the update.

They are likely set to invulnerable in the mission editor for testing purposes.

I disagree. This is Digital Combat Simulator, so therefor taking away the majority of non internal weapons and calling it a release shouldn't be acceptable. Imagine if the F-5 was released without its Mk. 82's or rocket pods? Imagine if the A-10 was released without its AGM-65's or GBU's? Imagine if the MiG-21 was released without its S-24's and rocket pods? Just like on the 109, this would remove a large part of its combat effectiveness and with no other module have we seen a transition from beta to full release with the majority of weapon systems missing.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2872511&postcount=3052 - Removed MAGIC seek tone, need to add MAGIC TIR tone - Updated MAGIC lock tone It is working as intended.

While i appreciate the heads up i was hoping for an official skin so we have a neat OPFOR skin available for MP. :thumbup:

My bad then, misunderstood you.

ED is Russian and BelsimTek is Belarussian. What?

I agree, Egypt would be the main missing operator livery wise together with India. This is the skin in question

Cool, will for sure enter.

Awesome news Polychop!

I am personally rather dissapointed over the release, i would have expected wing gunpods to be added to the K-4 as well as rockets. There is both keybinds and cockpit functionality for selecting and firing rockets as well as turning gun pods on/off. Now i deeply regret buying this plane.

That first Book does the same mistake most sources do, just becouse the radar is capable to guide them on the F/A-18A platform people automatically assume they were integrated on the AV-8B+

@Tirak could you name any of these sources that claim that the AV-8B+ uses AGM-84 or AGM-88 operationaly? Or find a picture of a Harrier carrying either? You are correct that the baseline Night Attack cannot lase targets with its onboard FLIR camera, but "a FLIR sensor" was referring to the Litening pod. I really should have made that clear in my OP.

Thanks guy for spotting that typo, i edited my OP

No harriers to be knowledge has ever carried the AGM-84 or AGM-88 operationally. The radar is the same as the F/A-18A on the AV-8B+ and supports AGM-84's but i never seen a single picture or manual etc that supports the claim that they are used on the AV-8B+ platform. The AV-8B Night Attack carries no radar but can carry the LITENING pod with laser guidance to support laser guided AGM-65's, LGB's & i also think the AGM-122 Sidearm ARM missile was carried on the earlier AV-8B variants, but not 100 % sure on that one. You also of course will have an assortment of unguided munitions available to you. In terms of Air to Air ordnance you're stuck with AIM-9's only for the AV-8B NA while the AV-8B+ is AIM-120 capable. Edit: Fixed typo regarding Hornet verison Edit2: Clarified FLIR

You must be a regular at Krigsarkivet* or wherever you get these documents from :) Keep up the good work renhanxue!

Running 1080p and in 2.0 i get a extremly solid FPS even over the most dense areas of Las Vegas with a 1070.