Stuge

F/A-18C dogfight sparring session with SF_Razer and SF_Kapsu (30 mins with links to merges in description) The aircraft now put through its paces by Top Gun Champions :)

Proper carrier ops (including deadstick landing after flameout in the end).

You did it. This is probably the best flight model I have ever touched. It just oozes brilliance. Thank you.

I don’t need balance, i just want the (inferior) system to work as intended. I’ll make a video when i come back from abroad, traveling currently.

Yes. After the tactical display was removed the only indicator of target position was on the HUD. And this HUD indication was very flawed, I found myself locking up targets with radar, eos, vertical scan, you name it, only to have absolutely no idea where the target was in fact located! (Target indicator disappeared when target was located at edges of HUD)

Funny hype. Mig-29 deserves a proper flight model (and a small systems overhaul to fix the damage done by indiscriminately removing MFD/datalink functionality). Outside of that, I think Flaming Cliffs should stay as the relic it is. Especially since "clickable" isn't a guarantee of top quality anymore, either. What should be done instead is increase quality requirements of clickable modules. Gross negligence in basic things such as flightmodels, performance, fuel consumption, proper weapons functions etc etc should not be called "high fidelity". The examples are too numerous sadly. The number of working switches can not compensate for broken fundamental parts of a module. Ka-50, A-10C and P-51D really nailed it when it comes to top tier quality. After that the quality has been variable, early access or not.

Whatever you do.. please don't just remove the datalink like what happened to the Mig-29S (MFD only has HUD repeater). This approach causes "collateral damage" as there is no top-down radar view once a target has been locked which causes BIG problems in combat...

R77 is a very welcome and nice addition to the Flanker's arsenal. No it's not AIM-120C, but it's still a very good thing to have tactically, not only as a "killing" missile but as a deterrent. Firing an R77 at an enemy will force it to back off, at least for a moment. And the launching aircraft is free to defend instantly. Compared to the ER (launching aircraft cannot defend instantly without wasting the missile) and the ET (enemy can pop few flares and laugh while pushing through).

A "glass cannon" mod could be fun. One gentle touch from anything, even a 7.62, and BOOM VAPORIZED :)

Here’s another history setpiece.

Well that was fun!

Try a tailslide, or a knife edge flight. Observe aircraft behavior. Then compare to a PFM model, and you'll see the difference like night and day.

The Mig-29 we have in its current state could be viewed as Su-27's "lesser cousin". Superficially it is very similar, but its lesser capability is in the subtle inferiorities of its systems: -Only 6 missiles, out of which only 2 slots for ER/ET. -Will run out of fuel fast when afterburning -The radar is noticeably weaker ---> high altitude combat with long ranges causes BIG problems. -The IRST is also weaker -----> radar-off situational awareness is significantly lacking compared to the Su-27 which can get a good picture of nearby airspace even without using its radar. IRST vertical scan just doesn't pick everything up well enough. -No datalink/MFD (this was stripped in a patch!) This means no top-down radar view once you've locked on something... BIG problems in cranking and snaking maneuvers. -The Beryoza RWR lights are somehow hard to see in bright daylight (!!!) The Mig-29S has its strengths but they are few: -built-in ECM -you can load R-77 on every slot. Low-altitude duels against F-15s are perhaps safer with these actives since they force the bandit to break off. However, R-77 kill range is quite short, thus it is still outmatched by AIM-120 (especially C model) There is also the TWS2 for R-77 double shots, but you get to use that around 1/100 of engagements :) -Extremely fast when in clean configuration - running away is not a problem :) Maneuverability wise it can hold its own, but it's nothing extra special. The flight model is old school (no proper rigid body physics modeling here)

It’s the invisible Hawk site units that make blue bases uncaptureable! Ive talked about this for a while now, and it will be fixed.

The feeling is mutual, you terror of Eagles :)

Haha I never ever remember seeing DCS combat so brutal. Glad I landed that Mi-8 at Senaki :)))))

104th_Stuge - AV8B

This is a simple but brilliant idea in fact! I 100% endorse this!!

104th_Stuge F-15C

Would it be too much to hope to have some engagements in poor and extremely poor weather? A night engagement, a dense fog (~1 nm visibility) + high and thick clouds, and perhaps a combination of these? I would LOVE that!

104th_Stuge Finland 104th Phoenix Harrier

M61 super shotgun device, puts the Doom Slayer to shame :D

Agreed, I havent flown at all since the temperature effect got implemented. You'll have my thoughts/results by new year :)

Sorcery, i refuse to believe outright! But i'll test when I get home... that would also mean the published graphs are quite wrong..

I think this conversation is perhaps going too deep for the purpose of a "simple" guide. Suffice to say there are benefits to going slower (radius) and going faster (energy reserve) but this is a deeper BFM topic. Similarly, limiter off maneuvering has its place but is also outside of this topic.. Concerning raw sustained turn rate horizontally (without considering any other factors) i dont see a fundamental difference between 600 kmh and 800 kmh.