mattebubben

Need to take into account that this radar was developed in 1960s. So as already stated it is not able to detect single vehicles (but formations of vehicles might show up). + As also stated the 104th is not the best server for the Viggen due to the way its air-ground missions are tailored for Cas mission in areas well away from the frontline with a low Sam threat (with only short/medium range sams) rather then strike / deep strike missions against more defended targets at or behind enemy lines.. (Which is what the Viggen is best suited for in addition to its anti-ship role).

Im not upset about this module being made. Though i feel like the week of hyping it up was probably a mistake might have been better to just announce it without using Hints to build up hype / expectations as that was bound to leave some people angry and disappointed. I probably wont get this module as this type of aircraft is not what i play DCS for but good luck with sales i wish you all the best as the More 3rd party devs we have creating stuff the better it is for us all (even if we might not agree with all of their choices when it comes to modules)

Viggen is still in early access. Where as the F-5 and the M2KC are both fully released. Modules dont reach Steam untill they leave the early access stage.

23, my first two sims were Microsoft CFS1 and Janes F-15 that i played on my fathers computer when i was only 5-6 years old. So they got to me at a young age ^.^

Most aircraft did not have MLWS as its a more recent system. And that is the main reason why the A-10C has it but not the AV-8B. The Original A-10A does not have it so the A-10 platform only got it through the A-10C upgrade. (With the first A-10C's entering service in 2007). Where as the AV-8B NA entered service in 1991 so at the time there were most likely no good MLWS systems available. The AV-8B is also a harder target due to its higher speed etc so it can more easily dodge or stay out of range of IR sams. So the AV-8B NA had no MLWS system when it was designed because there were no suitable system available and it if it has none today that most likely means they have decided that the need is not great enough to justify the cost of upgrading the aircraft with such systems. In DCS terms i dont think the lack of a MLWS system will be a big problem (except for pilots who have grown to rely on it to much).

And this is flying clean? (no Weapons or External tank?)

In Sweden the Scarves stay on ^.^

Yea sadly we can no longer see a Viggen being Pushed to its limits. Which is understandable considering there is only a single AJS 37 flying (a SK 37 which is the Two seater has also been refurbished to flying condition recently but is not flying at airshows yet not sure if they are waiting for papers or if they simply intend to only fly 1 of the Viggens at a time keeping the other as a reserve). Im just happy we can still see and hear Viggens at all =).

Visual models it the smallest difficulty with making a Gr.5 (or any of the British harrier IIs) Some of the avionics would also have to be changed and that would require alot more work and is where the "problem" lies.

In before they do make a Tornado and it's the ADV xD.

The Iranian Tomcat should be limited to all Rear aspect missiles. As i very much doubt any Aim-9L's had been delivered to Iran before the revolution (as that was around the same Time when the Aim-9L started to enter service in the US forces). And also im not sure if its true that the F-14A we are getting cant use the Rear aspect heaters. Sure it would have all aspect missiles by this point but i dont think that means they removed its capacity to carry the older missiles (Which would still be in inventory in large numbers for years to come so they migh as well be used up). Since for example the F-15C we have in DCS can still carry the older rear aspect Aim-9s despite the F-15C entering service after the Aim-9L all aspect missile was already available. So while in the 80s and 90s the All aspect Aim-9 would for sure be their standard IR missile its still very likely there were some rear aspect missiles in use atleast for the 1980s.

And do you also set it to use the manual frequency by pressing the - button down on the Radio panel? If yes then it should work just fine =P.

The Viggen has an Armaments panel oustide of the aircraft that is set to the correct position for each loadout as a part of the arming procedure. (Here is an example of those pages of the manual concerning that armaments panel) http://imgur.com/a/xrc6o . So for weapons to work in the Viggen you need both the outside weapons selector to be in the correct position (to tell the aircraft what weapons are on the pylons) and the in cockpit selector to be in the correct position (To select the weapon/mode of release) And we need to consider again that the Attack Viggen is designed primarily for 1 pass type attacks so multiple weapon types are not that optimal since that would require atleast 2 passes on the target. If there had been export customers its possible their aircraft would have been configured differently but for the Swedish airforce the mixing of loadouts was not really needed so its not something the aircraft is set up for. (Except for the already mentioned Guided missile / Gunpod combo)

You generally cant mix air-ground weapons. there are only 2 exceptions. RB 05 + Gunpods work. And RB 75 + Gunpods work. but those are the only air-ground mixes that are valid. (This is as it should be) all loadouts are ofc allowed together with air-air missiles but those 2 are the only valid air-ground mixes. When you load a invalid loadout one of the weapon types in question wont work.

Well they said a while ago that they put it on hold waiting for the Air-Ground radar from ED (That will come with the F/A-18C). Similarly to some of their other projects that require Air-Ground Functionality.

Though the Mirage III variant they have said they are doing is the Mirage IIICJ so it earlier variant and lacks allot of the systems and capabilities that a Mirage IIIE has.

One of the big things that make the IFVs like the BMP-2 so dangerous is that its not as obvious that they are shooting at you. When a Shilka or other SPAAGs are shooting at you its very easy to detect due to the massive amount of very bright tracers as well as radar warning. Were as the BMP-2 (and other IFVs) have not as bright tracers and also fewer rounds fired so its much harder to see incomming rounds so often you dont know they are shooting until its to late. So its possible one think they hit on their first shot just because one did not see the first ones. But in general i agree that IFVs and the Bmp-2 especially are much to effective against Aircraft. In the Viggen im more afraid of BMP-2s when flying at low altitudes (below 1000 meters) then i am shilkas. And i feel like them hitting something traveling at mach 0.7-0.9 (and is not flying directly towards them) should be an extremely rare occurance rather then a common outcome.

nice =) looking foward to finally having White RB 75s. Im guessing proper RB24J models are also in the works?.

Short answer No (as Winter states) Longer answer see Page 38 were the same question was asked and answered =).

Thats not what im talking about. There are just no External fuel tanks in the Inventory at Sochi. On other missions there is no problem. But on that mission with the start at sochi there are no Fuel tanks to mount on the aircraft. And thanks ^^ we were pretty lucky with the timing catching two of you that had just landed.

No it was not something unique to the JA 37. Especially if you look at the Photo on page one of the Viggen with the folded Fin you can see that its not a JA 37. Its a SH/AJSH 37 (Which is based on the AJ with only minor differances when it comes to radar and the ability to carry Camera pods as well as some cockpit changes etc but overall airframe should be more or less identical to my knowledge)

Im assuming that this is either a bug or a mistake. In the Battle for Maykop mission there are no Viggen external fuel tanks available at Sochi. This is especially painful considering all AJS 37s start at Sochi and Maykop is some distance away, and while its perfectly able to get there and back it forces the pilot to very much minimize afterburner usage as well as reducing the loiter time by a significant margin (which is not a huge problem in the air-ground role though).

Same problem here. HE Rockets work AP do not. and if you carry a mix of HE and AP the AP rockets will remain in the pod as the HE rockets are launched. Have not had this problem before this last patch so it seems to be a recent problem.

Sadly fixing the BK 90 is something that is not just up to Heatblur. They would need ED assistance to model it properly. What we have ATM is just what Heatblur can do without significant ED assistance. But i really hope ED will assist them in properly implementing the BK 90 to where it works as it should in both SP and MP. Since the BK 90 which should be the most capable air-ground weapon of the Viggen (and one of the most Capable weapons in the game) is currently not all that useful (In MP especially, the BK 90 with mixed submunitions works well enough in SP and is very effective though it does not work in a completely realistic manner but the way it works in MP is not very effective especially when it comes to targeting vehicles)

https://belsimtek.com/news/1785/ So Belsimtek officially has a F-4E in Development.