Mike5560

Download Tacview and watch your flights post-mission. It provides all the data and then some of what real flying militaries use as a debriefing tool; which is where 90% of the learning happens. Watch what the enemy aircraft do when you launch missiles at them....especially with their difficulty at excellent....take away their missiles in the editor if you have to force a situation. Notice at what point the missiles run out of propellant and how much turning them reduces their speed.

I will definetely get into this. I have a gentex and would like to change the audio input is going to the ear speakers and flight sounds to the PC speakers.

Block 50 Viper. A true multirole fighter, and a western SEAD aircraft. Some articles to convince you all . http://defence.pk/threads/f-16-vs-f-18-a-navy-test-pilots-perspective.169261/ http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/how-to-win-in-a-dogfight-stories-from-a-pilot-who-flew-1682723379. I suppose an F-22 or Typhoon would be sexier, but either of the latter is unlikely to happen. Super Hornet is just too close to the Charlie Hornet, which is on the way.

Thanks guys. It ended up that I needed more aggressive curves. It hadn't occurred to me that more aggressive curves would prevent the 2/3 reflectors merging together and confusing the sensor.

I have trouble being able to look directly up and or to the high 6 o'clock with TrackIR....especially in dogfights. Seeing aircraft is difficult as it is, and I often lose them when in a turning fight. Anyone have any tips? I have the hat clip. Does the track clip pro work a lot better? I'm considering it, only thing is I don't like wearing a headset all of the time.

I found that I have to do some thorough pre-mission planning for navigating this little beast. Here's some navigation sheets I made for myself and figured they may be of use to you all as well. MiG 21 Navsheet - Sheet1.pdf

IR frequency band is a broad sprectrum of wavelengths which includes both the "IR pointer" which can be seen on NVGs but not on the TGP at ~800 nanometers, as well as the designator wavelength at 1064 nanometers, which can only be seen by the TGP on LSS or a laser munition itself. The term "thermal" can be misleading as the IR spectrum include a vast swath of wavelengths with different properties, but it is within the IR spectrum.

Make a simple mission with zero wind, and practice on that. Its not hard at all to destroy tanks with a single mk-82. Is it realistic? No, but you will gain confidence and repitition with your technique. Winds affect the bombs quite a bit. CCIP dives of 30 degrees or more will give you the best accuracy. Once you get the hang of it, you may want to progress to winds.

I think a big part of why the SU-27 is so maneuverable, aside from its relaxed stability is the flight controls give you enough rope to hang yourself with. If you want to crank the stick at 350 km/h (only 188 kts), the elevators will respond. Which I think is why the F-16 is known for its limited performance at low speeds. Even the great turning, relaxed stability, FBW jet has this problem because it has an AoA limiter at low speeds...presumably to prevent a single engined flameout frisbee.

For the SU-25T and the Georgian oil war campaign: Just my input, but due to the common MANPADS and AAA, I almost exculsively carry 16 vikhrs and jammer pods. Rockets and bombs and guns are fun but will get you shot down easily, not to mention rockets and bombs wont kill as many vehicles as a full load of vikhrs anyway. The frog burns gas quick, especially with weight and drag from 1000s of kg of ordnance. Adding 2 fuel tanks in order to have the gas to carry the weight doesnt add much to loiter time due to drag, and really slows down your performance. There's a small handful of missions where it's worthwhile to carry an ELINT pod and kh-25MPUs for SEAD. There's lots of techniques for frog flying. At a minimum study the map carefully in the mission planner. Which waypoints are your targets at? Many times the briefing will say destroy targets at WP5 when in reality your targets are at WP4 and WP5 is for egress. I fly at 2500m or higher above friendly airspace. I will pull up my target waypoint, and, giving myself plenty of distance, line up the bird so my heading is on the yellow arrow on the HSI (compass), and begin scanning with the shkval. There gets to a point where the shkval cursor is able to snap onto vehicles. At this time you can radio your wingman to attack your target, but have the comm menu tree prepped. With vikhrs, you want to stay high and slow, and dip down and line up the shot just as your gettting within launch parameters. You can gently pull the nose back up while the missile's in flight to keep some altitude, not aggressively, though. And of course, don't overfly the target. Use the IR jammers and ECM.

CCRP, when dropped level, is not nearly as accurate as a CCIP diving attack as there is more hang time for the munition to be affected by winds. CCIP gives you point and shoot ability. If you want to stop a convoy with CBU-97s CCRP it is very difficult to update the SPI to an accurate impact point, even if you want to mitigate the time of fall by diving. With CCIP I can look at the speed the convoy is moving, look at my pipper and accurately adjust just a few seconds prior to release. OP, have you tried the CBU-97s without adjusting the settings? I have no issues seeing the PIBL and I always use a HOF of 700.

IMO there really is no standard loadout, you want to tailor it as best as possible to, in the military, what we call METT-TC. (Mission, Enemy, Terrain, Troops, Time and Collateral concerns) Though if I were given a CAS mission where I patrol around and await for taskings I'd probably go with: ALQ-184 AIM-9s as necessary 1x EO, 1x IR Maverick (why leave without them?) 2x GBU-12 (precise, all purpose and moving tgt capable) 2x GBU-38 (Launch & leave, all weather) 1 pod of HE rockets Gun loadout dependent on the mission but I typically use CM for DCS. If it's night Ill sub the rockets with LUU-2s or M257s, and go with 2x D Mavericks. If I were playing MP I'd sub the HE rockets for WP. On that note, mk-82s are more fun than PGMs! Unless you know your targets are in somewhat mountainous terrain, it's damn tough to hit things on or near hills. I will load CBUs on a case by case basis. Usually only when I know I'm attacking a convoy. IMO, a 1000lb single racked muniton isn't worth it unless you're likely to encounter close, bunched up vehicles.

You can always TMS right to create mark points A-Y with TGP SOI with whatever it's looking at. Also, if your TGP is making your SPI, you can also use the TAD cursor and highlight your wedding cake, and TMS right. Z markpoint is where you last made an attack.

With big non-tapered wings and huge stabilizers I think it's easy to fly. Trimming is personal preference, I usually only toy with aileron trim based on whats on the hardpoints, unless I'm formation flying or air refueling. With all the capabilities the avionics bring, they take a lot of training to master.

+1 I had the same issue. Flew right over their position and called on the radio with no response. Scanned around the area for a while and I thought the enemy targets were taken out or a faulty trigger. Went ahead and RTB'd only to find out I have to do it again. I love the campaign though. The voice-overs, the unique challenges it presents like flying through mountainous contested airspace with a low ceiling, being directed to targets in many different ways, and realistic inter-flight chit chat. beautifully done.

I say it's situation dependent, and leave it at that.

Do you have Tacview? if not, it's a great tool to help figure out what happened on a mission. Yes you can always watch the replay on DCS, but who wants to wait, even with time compression. Tacview is here: http://tacview.strasoftware.com/ Try looking at the threat evasion Tacview example files on the 476th page here: http://www.476vfightergroup.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=313 Some of the examples might be a little unrealistic, in the sense that the pilot keeps flying toward the threat. I sense the purpose of the demos is not to say "this is what you should do" but rather display vulnerabilities in different SAM systems.

Hammerfall 3 was a great mission! From one of the earlier Hammerfall missions I smashed into a mountain coming below the clouds, so I'm now much more methodical about transiting through them. From the angles I was using, there's a very narrow corridor to shoot a maverick at that SA-9. My method was to create a markpoint on it as soon as have it in the TGP, then racetrack through the terrain (trying not to stall into the mountains) and slew the mav right on the markpoint next time around.

IMO most importantly if your average FPS is 50 or more than the greatest concern is what is the lowest FPS you can encounter during gameplay? Try flying low altitude over a city with both TGP and maverick MFCD pages shown. See how CBU explosions slow your rates and mirrors as well.

It's not unrealistic to have SP/MP missions with mig-21s fighting against each other, just sayin.

Though I previously had a decent performing laptop, DCS is the reason I switched from consoles to building a gaming PC.

I don't argue there is truth to this, and possibly more so in an insurgency where ADA exists in a non-linear fight. In a conflict with friendly/enemy lines there are established IPs to keep aircraft relatively safe from SA fires. Providing immediate and uninterrupted CAS in this situation may be almost impossible, for any aircraft. Flying low altitude or higher is largely situation dependent. This thread is not about who can or can't do CAS, it's about a replacement for the A-10. Just because an MQ-9 or an A-29 can do CAS, doesn't quite mean they are viable replacements. I never said anyone should be able to ID troops with their eyes. If they could, why would it lead to fratricide? What makes seeing people so much more prone to fratricide vs vehicles? True, even a TGP would be hard pressed to see through a dense canopy. If friendlies and enemies are close up, like fixed-bayonets style, then CAS will be of little or no help. Indeed. Until the deck is 2000ft overcast. Perhaps I should've further clarified my comment and said "Having the flexibility of going low and slow will always have a CAS advantage" A WP mark with a quick correction from the JTAC for the wingman to hit, get in, get out may be the best solution. I used the word suppression, which doesn't mean non-lethal....it's the highest probability outcome of 20mm-25mm guns based on wider air-air designed dispersion, smaller HEI punch and a longer min-strafe distance (compounding dispersion) based on the speed of the aircraft carrying an M-61 vs a GAU-8. Of course, 30mm loaded with the wrong ammo type for the target may be only good for suppression as well. Wish I knew the full story. Sounds like the pilot tricked the system to a ballistic only release. I doubt the friendly troops were within 100m of the target, unless they were shielded by some strong walls. AFAIK, 5000ft deck is fairly workable for F-16s, especially with visual IR marks vice using a TGP.

As the current US military's inventory stands right now, the best platforms for delivering CAS/CCA/ Armed overwatch (Attack helicopters, gunships and A-10s) are inherently more vulnerable to air defenses than multi-role fighters. Precision is important, and any platform capable of CAS can do precision. Ideally, a CAS platform should: -Be able to constantly observe a large area around the battlefield with yet enough fidelity to ID personnel, vehicles, smoke, tracers and vehicles yet be able to rapidly determine whether or not people are armed. -Deliver not only mk-82 class bombs and PGMs but also engage with many small explosive weapons over an area large enough to attack an enemy formation within 100 meters of friendlies. The shorter the weapons' time of flight, the better. -Be able to engage moving targets. -Multi-spectral capability: Night vision, FLIR, low light TV and CCD (color CCD even better). Low and slow will always have a CAS advantage until targeting pods can: -Have color CCD, and see through clouds.......IDK, magic? -Provide an extremely simple ease of use. A pilot with 100 flight hours on a jet can fly an orbit and monitor a large area and quickly reference points of interest without masking. SDBs can somewhat saturate an area target close to friendlies as they have a smaller frag footprint than mk-82 class bombs and are typically carried in higher quantities. However, they have a long time of flight compared to guns and rockets and might not have moving target capability. Hellfires and other LGWs can hit moving targets and can potentially have small frag footprints, but are not all weather capable and are limited to the number of different coded lasers.....hence, they cannot saturate an area target very well. Cannons smaller than 30mm are good for suppression, and that's about it. So......it's hard to replace the capabilities of the A-10, and fly fast, high and relatively safe from air defenses. A lot of things brief well to less than knowledgeable military procurers, generals and investors....but the technology is not quite there yet. until then, there will be compromises we can all argue about.

Great read, I foresee this being linked in some of the forum's air-air aircraft threads. Interesting to hear his take on the F-35, with his extensive background of actual flying experience.

They should just put them back into production with upgraded engine and avionics and call it good.