MiG21bisFishbedL

To be the stick in the mud, but how would we execute that? DCS' lacks ranking, things to award, etc. This almost seems like it'd be something the community or communities within DCS would have to push. Which, frankly, I think would work. If done right, of course. The typical youtube click farming how-to crafters would not be a good fit for that.

Whoosh.

I'm tempted to fly out and get pictures of the section in Topeka.

I had flashbacks to the overly bloated adminmods on any Half-Life game server.

Oh, so like the MiG-19S they kept saying we'd get? Or the A/V-8B manual?

Well, then maybe they should consider changes.

That's what we're all hoping for. I'm very skeptical of RB and their intentions, but frankly? I've had a lot of fun in the MiG-19P and Mirage 2000. I want to see them in the DCS ecosystem. If and when the Mudhen returns? If major changes have happened at RB to improve their output, responses, and what not? I'll happily buy it.

I kind of wished that you didn't. That's so damn bizarre! I'm curious to know what was causing that.

Same, I'm seeing higher temps, as well. I also have a throttle limit set in my bios at about ~95C or so. I'm not too concerned, but I would like it to be looked at for sure.

Just watch any DCS youtube recommends you get; you'll get a neverending flood of crap with INTERMITTENT all CAPS to EMPHASIZE a FALLACIOUS POINT!? complete with someone with a dorky expression in the thumbnail.

Or a leg!

Considering that 30% goes into the support of Steamworks (which picked up the slack for many games when Gamespy went down years ago, free of charge), development of the software that makes it infinitely superior to any comparable service, expansion of features, the advent of new tech both in terms of software AND hardware, as well as excellent customer support and protections, and many other features? No. No, it is not 'scummy.' Not by a long shot. The only reason it became a talking point is because Tim Sweeney, noted scumbag, planted that line in an effort to gather support for Epic's own vastly inferior platform at a time when it was even more barebones than it is today. This is perfectly demonstrable when you compare the fates of the 1998 releases of Half-Life and Unreal. You can still purchase Half-Life without issue. It saw a switch from World Opponents Network to Steamworks fully in the mid 00's, has been updated to function with modern monitors, and STILL receives software updates from time to time to fix issues. Unreal has to be acquired through a fan site now as Epic has delisted them from sale. Any updates have to come from enthusiasts taking their time out from their days to develop them. EVERYTHING has to be done by the community. I guess it's cool Epic gave oldUnreal the blessing to distribute the ISOs, though?

A Pre-IOC Panther would be disastrous. If we're expecting a production F-35 and we get something like AF-01? That's like asking for a ribeye and then getting eye of round. Yeah, it's identifiable as a steak, but is it the steak you wanted?

If that were the case, one party would've just frolicked off by now. We would have seen otherwise. This situation benefits neither party in its current state. But, updates will not be forthcoming as there isn't a decent legal counsel out there who isn't going to tell anyone directly involved to keep quiet. It's satisfying to us to assume negligence or malice, but it isn't necessarily correct.

I hear you out and, frankly, good taste. If we had the recon versions, that'd lengthen the window of time even further. I wrote something about it not too long ago that put it all the way into the 80s for EU operators. That'd be awesome. But.. hear me out: https://www.fairchild.af.mil/News/Features/Display/Article/763107/the-lost-mission-fairchilds-bombers-and-the-ficon-project/ Yeah. For max insanity.

It should still work for sometime to come, but like with Windows 7? The end will arrive. That said, by the time it does? We're looking at 2-3 years minimum. There's a good chance you'll be seeking a new system out, anyways.

Costs are a big part of it. When fighting an insurgency, which is the mission Skyraider II is intended to, the game is cost effectiveness. Why waste oceans of fuel and a Maverick to hit an insurgent compound when you can sip fuel and do the same job with a well placed APKWS? This is for an environment without almost any ground to air threats. It also uses the P&W PT-6A, which everyone and their mother operates. In addition, it enjoys a huge level of part commonality with a sizable fleet of aircraft that's already been operating since the 1990s. Another reason is that Air Tractors can operate from any strip. I've flown civvie Air Tractors and they're as rugged as it gets. They're also responsive and fun to fly. And one more huge benefit is the loiter time. It's up there at near 8+ hours or so. So basically, this is what you want on call if you're a SEAL team infiltrating an area hostile non-state actors are holding. This is not something you want to blunt a Russian push into Germany with, but something you're going to cover special forces extracting with a VIP.

The US ANG Vipers in question were the F-16A Blk. 15 designated "ADF" That part of the program changed relatively quickly. Even before the first As and Bs entered IOC, a lot of those working on the program noted that the aircraft would benefit greatly from the BVR capability. Soon after the F-16 first started arriving at units, it became clear it needed that capability. So much so that you can basically assume that any Block 10 and onward are AMRAAM capable owing to their strengthened wing construction. The F-16 was one of three airframes the AMRAAM was tested on, even. It just didn't achieve IOC on the Viper until January of '92. In fact, the AIM-120 didn't even achieve its first IOC until September of '91 on the F-15. This has more to do with the AMRAAM, though, as it encountered delays throughout the 80s. I imagine the reason only a few Vipers got Sparrows was because this fighter was supposed to be the combat backbone of TAC; It probably seemed like large waste of time, money, and resources to mount the downright ancient Sparrows on their new tactical fighter when the AMRAAM was lighter, superior, and was not too far away.

See you in 10 years, Mudhen fans!

Who will work on them? Those are several modules that need teams and ED is working on several modules with more in the pipe. That just leaves them with a possible deficit in resources, the need to hire more staff, or lengthens the update cycles of ALL modules which is something they're often criticized for. And, would it even provide worth? F-15E, sure, but what about ones like the MiG-19? It's not so easy as just buying them.

It's pretty clear why ED has not done the Su-25 yet. This is because they have outright said why. They require publicly and legally available resources. If they can't get those, then it's no bueno. Those resources probably exist for the Su-25, realistically, but they need to find the correct entities to provide them. Then, it's a matter of the allocations of resources. In all, we will get one eventually, I reckon. Also, offtopic, so that's the last I'll comment on it.

THIS POST SPONSORED BY... THE SHADOW GOVERNMENT.

Pucker factor of ten.

Insta-buy for me.

And, we'll just ignore any side effects. Which are embarrassment for all three of those. In ascending severity! If someone rides a Segway in public.. I.. they are a more confident individual than I.