Danneskjold

So I finally build a new IR clip (home build), and am trying to get back into DCS. I load it up for the first time in a long time, and noticed all my old bindings were wiped. I tried to download a profile, but could not get it to work no matter what I did. This profile, specifically: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/1976797/ Basically the game wouldn't even recognize the .diff files. It only recognized .diff.lua files. And when I renamed it, nothing happened. When I tried to load up the .diff files, nothing happened either. Am I doing something wrong? Or is that profile just broken? -Dan

Can we create and sign a change.org petition to get you that stuff?

With the harrier getting the HARM (presumably), will that give you enough to be able to modify it into the Shrike for the A-4?

Still very excited for this plane! I can't wait to have fun on Carriers with it.

Historically the Mig-15 (no bis) could outclimb the F-86A and E, and could outperform the sabre at high altitudes (where most of the engagements at least started). However with the big boost in power, as well as the new 6-3 wing, the F-86F basically should outperform the Mig-15BIS in everything, except at higher altitudes where it matches it. Especially considering the extreme negative effects of the Mig-15 in transonic regions.

Keep up the good work. This plane is actually the top plane I'm looking forward to.

Here's another idea: If you get it up to release, and it's basically bug free, how about trying to get ED to include it as a base plane in the game? I.E. It's there for free next to the TF-51 and the SU-25, with full credit going to your team.

So then ask to access the SDK, even if you have to sign an NDA. I think you could demonstrate significant enough progress without having the SDK to show that you can be trusted with it without leaking it.

Well, you know that ED is working on it for the F-18, so why not ask them to release the missile ahead of time (even if no other plane has it), so that you can access the tech to make the Shrike?

Are you guys going to release the Shrike with it?

I wasn't saying that the F-4 was better, or equal. I should have been more clear. Just pointing out that the F-4 and F-14A are in fact a lot closer in some basic stats than people would otherwise think.

Don't confuse "Max Allowable" g-force with turning abilities. And given equal missile loadouts, the F-4 phantom had a pretty damn good power to weight ratio vs. the F-14A. 0.79 vs. 0.79. The F-4E does have better wingloading, plus got the new slats that eliminated the adverse yaw problem, so I don't know.

Not for the F4U-1D. Comparison for planes, F4U-4 tossed in for fun. Alt - F4U-1D - P-51D - 109K-4 - F4U-4 SL. - 366 MPH - 367 MPH - 375 MPH -389 MPH 10k - ~390 - 410 - 416 - 410 20k - 417 - 425 - 446 - 445 25k - 405 - 445 - 438 - 451 30k - 390 - 420 - 429 - 440 Instantaneous turning, yes. Sustained turning, no.

There were 6 different (main) versions of the Corsair in WW2. F4U-1 Birdcage, F4U-1, F4U-1A, F4U-1D, F4U-1C, F4U-4. There were 5 different (american) versions of the P-51 in WW2. There were 5 different versions of the P-47 in WW2. It's kind of like someone saying, "The charger is the greatest car ever made." Yeah... Which charger? This may seem like it goes without saying, but the European and Pacific Theaters were entirely different things. What worked against the Japanese wouldn't necessarily work against the Germans. The Japanese planes were relatively light, and relatively slow, and by the time they figured out the right way to do it, most of their good pilots were dead. The 109K-4 will be a superior dogfighter. The corsair would normally dive away if it got in trouble, but the K-4 had equal or better speed on the deck. A better equal match would likely be a BF-109G-6 / G-14. It's top speed is roughly equal to the P-51D on the deck, but higher than that, the P-51 is faster. As far as I am aware, all the F4U-1A's and on had at least Balance Tabs, which are slightly different than Spring Tabs. They started mounting Spring Tabs on F4U-1D's. The difference is that balance tabs automatically lever away, where Spring Tabs only lever away at high speeds. I.E. Both have good high speed maneuverability, but Spring Tabs have slightly better low-medium speed control authority. A corsair basically has the same power as the P-47 on the deck. The difference is that the P-47's heavy turbocharger keeps the same power it has on the deck all the way up to peak altitude at ~30,000 feet, while the Corsair loses 300 HP to it's peak altitude at 20k feet, and is down 800 HP at 30k feet. It's all about delivering HP at altitude.

Not even close. At sea level, the P-51D and the F4U-1D are about equal, ~366 MPH. At 20K feet the F4U-1D tops out at 417 MPH. The P-51D does 425. Then the mustang tops 440 MPH at 25k feet (where the corsair drops off). This is all with 1943 fuel on the 1943 P-51D. Things change with 150 octane fuel. The K-4 does 375 MPH @ SL, and 444 MPH @ 20k feet. The 190D-9 does 385 MPH @ SL, 440 MPH @ 18.5k feet, and 420 MPH @ 28.5K feet. That's not even counting climb speeds. The F4U-1D doesn't bring parity to the situation. The F4U-4 would: 389MPH @SL, 435MPH @ 20k feet, and 455 MPH @ 26K feet. Like I've said elsewhere (and gotten punished for it), I'm not buying into an unbalanced situation. When the F4U-1D gets fair opponents like earlier versions of the 190 or 109, or Japanese Planes, I'll buy it. Or we get the F4U-4. But not until then.

The F4U-5 was used a lot, not the F4U-1 / F4U-1D. Even though it's a gigantic jump up in performance from the -1D, no one will gladly sign up to be slaughtered by migs.

My own contribution in that I've actually done no work at all and plan to reap the rewards: [ame] [/ame]

So if I dig up 150 octane performance for the Spit LF 9, you'd build it? You should have said so, that stuff isn't too difficult to dig up.

I was replying to someone who replied to me, and trying to convince Eagle Dynamics that it's downright silly and ill conceived to introduce more 1943 performance in a 1945 team death match. The solution is simple, and will drive up sales. I don't know why you guys haven't already made that change, and are in fact making the same mistake again.

Other people may get their panties in a bunch over which block number the P-51D is, but it makes literally NO DIFFERENCE when it still has late 1943 performance. And that goes for the Spitfire LF Mark 9, too. I'll make this real simple. I have no desire, incentive, or impetus to buy a 1943 plane (not to mention TWO of them) when they are competing against 1945 planes. Introduce mid-1944 engine settings for either of them so they can at least begin to compete against the 1945 planes, then I'll open my wallet. Or introduce 1945 planes to fight against them. One or the other.

Another 1943 allied plane up against 1945 rivals? Pass.

What? Not even close. First, you'd be surprised at how accurately a well tuned single B-17 could drop its bombs. Second, they sent more than 1 B-17's because a single B-17 was dead meat against any single fighter plane any country put up of any type, (most any) speed, armament, and / or pilot skill level. The "Flying Fortress" was not a fortress at all. Not to mention that AAA claimed more than interceptors did. Area bombing with swarms of heavy bombers arose not out of inaccuracy, but of necessity for most to get through to accomplish the mission. Saying otherwise is just being ignorant of history and reality.

[ame]http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-14A_Tomcat_SAC_-_April_1977.pdf[/ame] F-14A SAC. [ame]http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-14D_Tomcat_SAC_-_July_1985_(Partially_Declas).pdf[/ame] F-14D SAC (partial). ~2400 feet ground run with no wind, 4 sparrows, and full fuel on the A, no wind, 4 sparrows + 4 Sidewinders, and full fuel on the D. ( SAVE THIS WEBSITE: http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/SAC.htm )

Personally I found the article extremely needless. #'s 1, 2, 3, and 4 are pretty much standard on every single jet out there. It's kind of like writing an article on how you are "Prohibited from crashing in the ground" when in your tomcat...

The wings were down. I tried it again, and it took off at another airfield. I'm beginning to think that one of the airfields had a bugged runway, or something. Now I just gotta remember which one it was.