Skjold

1: Yes 2: No clue, so none. 3: AV-8B, c'mon VTOL is just plain cool! 4: Difficult question, the Harrier certainly brings some unique functionality but will mission designers utilise its VTOL capability to have it stationed closer to the front? I remember seeing old reports from Cold War exercises where that was the main strength of the platform, basicly operating from gras fields few miles behind the front line. TL;DR VTOL should be sufficent to make it utilitarian. 5: Not sure what you mean with this one., are you referring to the AV-8B+?

Beautiful.

Great job, these should really be in the base game!

Yep, MiG-23 and Su-22 are my top two most wanted aircraft.

Thanks for the update, JHMCS is great news!

+1 Recon systems would be amazing.

That is really fascinating, renhanxue. Thanks for the insight. Thanks, glad people enjoy them.

AFAIK full mobilisation of cold war reserves and national guard of the Swedish Army was planned for 2-4 weeks. You would also have the army spread out all over the country. You'd probably look at a force in the tens of thousands to greet the Russian marines. Depending where they land, this may or may not include heavy equipment.

Alright, thanks for the reply bubben.

Question for the devs, will the Viggen come with a countermeasure pod that doesn't take up one of its four main weapon pylons? I understand the BOY401 was at least used on the JA 37 but i'm not sure if it was ever used on the AJS.

MiG-23 MiG-25 MiG-27 MiG-31 Su-17/22 Su-24M

Thanks for the heads up! Seems liike a limiting system that could do with some improvements.

The Mirage missiles were recently bugged, not a product of the "beta" or "WIP" status but rather just this. ETA is fix next friday AFAIK.

It is a known bug that only one Magic II will fire at the moment. AFAIK the 1.5 patch to fix it will come next friday.

But but.. Mirage 2000 and MiG-21 both have access to AWACS which can function like a psuedo-GCI. Datalink is an advantage yes, but where is the complaints when the F-15C has a 10 year leap in missile technology? That is just fine apparantly. R-27ER/ET is 1986~ R-27R/T is 1983~ Super 530D is 1988~ AIM-7M is 1982~ AIM-120A is 1994~ AIM-120C is 1996~ Edit: Just to clarify, you won't see me in the Su-27 on Open Conflict.

Plane is fine the way it is, as the real F-5E-3 was IRL. Only capability that could improve it is the AGM-65 integration. "If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

Beautiful!

Good work, happy to see some progress for the Bo-105 again!

Great news about the Mistral and the multi-crew!

Thanks, just wish we had a single picture of the Viggen in DCS by now. Is that really too much to ask? :D

AIM-9P5 has way too high sensitivity to flares, it should be similar in countermeasure resistance to that of the AIM-9M. It is in fact 20 times more sensitive then the AIM-9M and on the same level as the AIM-9B. AIM-9P5 ccm_k0 = 10.0, -- Counter Countermeasures Probability Factor. Value = 0 - missile has absolutely resistance to countermeasures. Default = 1 (medium probability) --seeker sensivity params AIM-9M ccm_k0 = 0.5 Edit: Damage model is weird, you lose your right engine 100 % of the time when you take any damage at all. Always the right engine, never the left engine. It really needs improvement as it is frustrating to use this bird in an air to ground role at the moment.

Wrong post.

Since it is fairly tricky to change rocket ripple settings where you need to set them via the Ground Adjustment keyboard commands prior to engine startup it would be extremly useful to have a "preferred rocket ripple setting" in the Special tab. At the moment you need to make sure your planes engines are off, then press RALT + RShift + 1 or RALT + RSHIFT + 2 setting everytime. It is also not possible to set ripple quantity in a air start or a hot start, defaulting to the big salvo which might not be optimal for your chosen mission. I realise this is realistic, and do not want the system changed rather just made more user friendly. :thumbup:

This is what i read about it earlier.

Thanks for the clarification Hadji, what i meant was that the the only planned operators of the Mk III is naval. You are correct, they are planned to be used on the Braunschweig class amongst others in the German Navy.