USARStarkey

Ill be happy with working missiles, and even more happy with AIM9X. That will be plenty overpowered enough lol

Not all of the F-15C's have the APG-63v3. I think only 18 have gotten it so far if memory serves. Hopefully many more will get it. Personally though, I saw damn the costs and cancel everything that isnt the F-35 and build more Raptors :) And I mean cancel everything that is a fighter. And Build more raptors. I am aware that the SM is re manufactured etc. The point is if you want upgrades on a Flanker, it has a different designation.

YOUR ALL WRONG. THIS IS THE BEST WW2 FIGHTER!

Which is a Different bloody plane. That is why it is called SM. The SM also has a variety other qualities that places it well ahead of the regular Su-27S. They are not the same plane. The point being made was that you wont find a "S" with a N001VEP for example, unless designated "SM" etc.

ok when.

I Challenge anyone willing to a 1v1 guns only dogfight in FC3. Pick any plane. Any time(that I can be there)

I certainly hope so, the 8nm definition of BVR is getting a bit old. It was mentioned earlier that ED doesn't want to fudge the numbers on the missiles and is looking for a more exact solution. I'm not a engineer, but since the actual guidance logic of the missiles is classified, and many of the missile aerodynamic properties probably are as well, I feel like even when ED finishes correcting the guidance as much as they can, and get the aero as close as there is info to do, wont we still be fudging numbers?

No. That is not correct. Like was stated earlier, the only modifications to the Radar have been reliability fixes done during the formative years/ inclusion of SNP. The Radar is otherwise unchanged. There are not equivalent upgrades to the N001 similar to APG-63v1, or V2, v3, etc, except when designated something other than N001. The N001 in a Flanker is just a N001, plane and simple. All Su-27S have the same radar set. It is not the same thing at all as the Flanker A comparison, and it would not matter if it was. If you want a better radar in a Su-27 Airframe, you have to go to a Su-30 or 35 etc.

That is what I mean, aside from reliability fixes, it is that same radar.

All Su-27S have a standard N001 Radar. There have not been any upgrades to the Radar in the original Su-27S. All radar upgrades to the Su-27 have taken the form of new aircraft designations, IE: Su-30, or Su-27SM.

German Engineering is massively over-hyped. Just look at the Panther, lots of armor, mobility and firepower. Yet, even the later models had operational rates of less than 50%. If it cant make it the fight, it may as well not exist. The allies had plenty of engineering marvels off their own in ww2. It is a nonsensical myth that the Nazi's had better tech than everyone else.

Yeah I dont disagree. Even without flares, if you have the E to do it.

Usually because I just dodged his first few shots, or his wingman was also shooting, or a mountain or something forced me to slow down etc. I get you, and I'm normally fast, but there are all sorts of ways you might be forced slow. Isnt the IR missile modeling pretty accurate though, could have sworn someone said on here it was some time ago.

I think it really depends. If they fire at you within 2nm and your not fast, you are trouble. You can still defeat it, but its not easy.

Are you talking about Radar missiles here? What is last second? Im only asking because I feel like head on against IR missiles the modeling is fairly accurate. I find that they are very hard to dodge but you can do it if you have enough E and make a very sharp turn in a high aspect situation since the missile doesn't have time to maneuver because of the closure rate. The R-73 is alot harder, but it can be done.

wait what is radar memory. I never saw that in the manual, is it like the ability to remember a target after it goes into the notch and therefore not lose it?

Ok I got ya. Thanks.

If they make a P-38L. I'll buy 3 copies.

Ok. So I am curious how accurate the games modeling of notching is. I am also interested in what counters would be applied in real life vs this game. I have noticed that in real life pilots/airforces seem to talk about/and place emphasis on High alitude and speed, yet in DCS everyone flys low. Why is this? I know this is partially due to the mountains making it highly difficult to require notched targets because they can change course behind a mountain. Over flat terrain, Its seems much easier to find a target that does a beaming maneuver. My current thoughts/tactics are as follows. 1. IRL, the radar differential speed tolerances might be more precise, or software might identify targets before they notch and continue to recognize that target after it notches? 2. Data links would mean that a flight to your 3 or 9 could maintain track of targets in the notch due them not being 90deg, and your radar/missile would feed off that. 3. Course changes to force targets out of the notch(this is what I currently do in game) when a target starts to beam, I start turning to keep tracking them be changing the engagement geometry to prevent them from getting perpendicular. Tip on this would be great if anyone knows the proper way to do this.

err. so the real missile cant do that right? wouldnt it track center mass?

I'm taking that as confirmation. lol.

Guys there isnt a both option because this is meant to be one or the other. Im not asking you like both, or if your going to fly both. Im asking which one you would prefer. Therefore, no both option.

Even if it did slow the modern ones I wouldnt care much. In my personal opinion all the WW2 sims out there dont have the flight models to make me happy. With DCS I'm finally getting what I've been waiting for.

Tell me which on your going to make your ride. I'm not looking to see that your going to fly the dora alot because it is new, but which plane you think you'll want to take into DCS combat.