MiG21bisFishbedL

The aliens are why. The aliens are involved and that's the truth. It's why they can't tell us. Source: It came to me in a dream.

My initial findings are kind of mixed. I'm not seeing much difference, if any, at all. But, just initial. I'll keep testing.

You can pretty quickly ascertain the value of a presentation by asking yourself if it's meant to please shareholders or end-users. So far, it's always the former. If AI were so game changing, it wouldn't be getting integrated into software before asking an end-user base. Dotcom all over again.

It's hard to take a post seriously when the OP doesn't actually put in the effort to write it themselves.

In that case, it's just a search engine that gives you the answer in manner that we like to associate with intelligence. Still, at least it was useful to you.

I totally missed that, thanks for pointing it out.

Just drop everything and start a new project all together, Gawwwwwwd.

Good to know, that's a damn ocean of fuel and an excellent point, going to add that as an addendum.

So, I spent about an hour flying the 3 official COIN/Trainer aircraft in a simple mission. I was using WWII Marianas, flying out of Agana, and 5 Urals as targets. I like this map for this purpose due to the nature of its runways: Short. I decided to rate them based on aspects I deem important to COIN ops in DCS. Those aspects are take off distance, speed, weapon options, and payload size. All 3 enjoy adequate to superb handling characteristics. The MB-339A, in my opinion, is the best in class barring one limitation I'll get to in the conclusion. On take off, it uses up plenty of the runway, but it takes off within Agana's distance pretty comfortable at full fuel and loaded for combat. Lift the nose at 110KIAS and it'll lift soon after depending on payload. It's pretty quick to accelerate and I can yank pretty hard on the stick while it stays stable. The pair of DEFAs will make very short work of most anything an insurgency would be able to field. It also has the option to take machine guns to keep your load light and I really love that option for when I'm taking up Mk.82s. It also has cluster bombs like the Belouga and the BL-755. Ontop of that, it has denial weapons in the form of concrete penetrating bombs and Durandals. It does have its quirks, most notable its performance in the rain. It does not like taxing and taking off in the rain, so you need to keep the engine relight button depressed until rotation is achieved. The silver medal goes to the L-39ZA. On take off, it's the strongest performer. Even at full fuel and combat load, take off is a non-concern. Lift the nose off the ground at 90kts, then the good stuff happens at 110-120kts depending on weight. The real weakness is its limited payload aloft. It doesn't have that much variety and only two hardpoints on each wing, four total. That said, the PK-3 feels near bottomless with the ammo, so it's a stand out tool in your set. Its integrated Gsh-23L is really nice for dealing with even light armor. In addition to weapons like rockets and bombs, it can carry flares for lighting areas at night as well as the defensive punch of the R-3S and R-60. Handling wise, it does tend like to drop a wing outside of uncoordinated turns, but it's pretty tame. It's not as stable as the 339, but it's forgiving and quick to correct. It does feel underpowered aloft, especially with a combat load. Be sure to watch those EGTs, the Ivchenko does have limits. You can't just leave it on max thrust. Max continuous is 103%. Bronze goes to the C-101CC. If the L-39 felt underpowered, then the C-101CC must feel like it's pedal powered. Taking off out of Agana with the C-101CC loaded up just isn't possible. You're looking at a take off roll of nearly 3,000 feet/900+ meters. You're going to have to play with fuel and payload to have any hope. 85% of MTOW will get you shaving the tree tops, but you'll be off. That's 2 pairs of LAU-68s and a centerline gunpod @ 60% total fuel. Anymore? Well, I managed to rip a flap off on the treetops. So, the C-101 will operate more comfortably from a longer strip. Once you get the C-101CC up to altitude, it retains speed pretty well and its handling is solid. The real thing the C-101 has going for it is its selection of arms. Two centerline gunpods with your choice of cannon or machinegun, cluster munitions, nape, rockets, and the added bonuses of the Magic II and AIM-9. It even has the Sea Eagle, that's insane. If you can work around the take off performance, the C-101 could be a great ride. Now, even though I think the MB-339A is the best performer, I have to admit it currently has a limitation. It has the best performance in the air and widest variety of arms, but it totally lacks any air to air missiles (FOR NOW, it'll be getting the AIM-9 in a future update.) Now, you're not looking to take these into the dogfight arena, but the fastest growing concern for militaries around the world are drones. What makes them such a concern is their disposability and their accessibility. This is a role that could easily fall into the wheelhouse of a light attack aircraft. Depending on how well funded or how badly an insurgency has a case of sticky fingers, you may see them using drones for various reasons. This is a task made more difficult for the MB-339A since it lacks any kind of missilery. It's going to hurt your options in the L-39ZA, but it'll barely be felt in the C-101CC. So, things to consider for those looking to buy one of these. Don't take this as some strict 'meta' since limitations make a scenario so much more compelling. The C-101CC may be limited to where it can operate from and be effective, but that's also a lot of fun. You now have to think about what you should do: A longer ingress with better weapons or a shorter ingress with a limited payload? As for the OV-10 and A-4E-C? They're free, try them. Addendum from @Daemoc: The C-101 can carry a ludicrous amount of fuel internally. One of it's major design considerations was range. I think this is the most overlooked aspect of this aircraft. For a quick strike mission, 50% fuel is still way too much. IIRC, one of the first missions I did in the C-101 was over two hours and was done on 50% fuel. This was all low level. This cannot be stressed enough. Fuel has to be a major consideration on that aircraft every mission. Don't look at the percentages, calculate the fuel weight. In this case, I'll then move the C-101 into second place behind the MB-339. Basically, when you hear people absolutely howl about how the Culopollo is under appreciated, they aren't lying at all. I'm going to be spending a lot more time with it. I think I still prefer the 339's handling, but there's no denying that endurance performance from the C-101. Actually, were I the decision maker for an actual air force and I had to choose between the 339 and the C-101 in this light attack role? I think the C-101 would win me over because loiter time is an important metric for a COIN aircraft.

I've yet to see it and now I will notice it and it will drive me up the walls, thanks!

It's a double-edged sword. Being slow means you don't get on station as fast and you can't reposition as quickly nor can you effectively evade an IR SAM, but it also means you can launch from further out with more confidence and stay out of the reach of ground fire better. And, landing on unprepared strips is done with more confidence. I've done quite a bit light attack stuff in the 39ZA and I've been able to pretty consistently dodge Iglas and Strelas with it, not even needing flares. Having even a little speed you can get from a split-S is pretty nice to have. Having that and also knowing how to terrain-mask can make the lack of countermeasures seem less acute. I'd still take them if I could, of course. This is where something like the OH-58D really comes into its own; using its MMS, it can observe and track a target before using a guided rocket or missile to slap any threats without them ever knowing you were there. So, being slow can be a con in places, but you can definitely offset it with other aspects.

I think I had the benefit of watching that happen, in real time. I remember loving Half Life 1 mods. It seemed like every 2-3 months, there was a new total conversion mod that would drop and it was awesome. When Half-Life 2 dropped, not as many were available. I kept playing lots of HL1 mods, but very little came to HL2 in that time period. I imagine the complexities in art have only grown exponentially and it's why we see games like DUSK and Amid Evil do so damn well. And, now increase the coding complexities tenfold and you have a flight sim!

I really should, I just put it off. I even like COIN fliers.

Honestly? If you want an actual huge improvement to the DCS COIN experience? The Dynamic Campaign Generator. Counter-insurgencies are very much a unification of military and political elements. They need function in conjunction with one another to prove successful. They must not just defeat insurgents, but also demonstrate to a population that the insurgents do not have their best interests at heart and are rogue elements while also assuring this population that the current government is a much better option and deserves their support. That way, a mission would emphasize a need for restraint, a need for accuracy, and decision making on the fly. Is that convoy of 3 trucks supposed to be there? They have white covers, could they be a bunch of aid workers from the UN, an NGO, or even just locals? Or is this something else? Basically, the A-10C II and the OH-58D would be absolutely come into their own.

I really need to play with the C-101CC more in CAS/COIN operations. The 339's performance is upfront and pretty stellar in that kind of mission and I've spent enough time with the L-39 to come to grips with its requirements, too. @Supernova-III Will you include the A-7 Corsair when that drops? That was, at least according to the US Navy, a 'light attack' platform.