Schmidtfire

I agree, but this is with perfect timing of the launch 100% of the time, no matter skill level. We cannot have it like that. Why should I waste a missile at 30nm when Im totally sure that the bandit will "see" my missile coming of the rail and start to defeat it? Within a certain range and with me cranking after launch, I totally buy a defensive move in anticipation. So I agree that AI should not sit completely defenseless. Ideally, skill level and aircraft type would come more into play. Some older aircraft like the MIG-23 MLA and MIG-21 wouldn't have the SA to notice a post launch maneuver and and I doubt that the SPO-10 would be very helpful aginst the AIM-54 or AIM-120 until final phase of flight.

I guess it's difficult going by anything but the brochure. Everything else is just guesswork if we cannot get other data somehow. One interesting aspect. Has Deka stated if it is a KLJ-7V1 or V2? Just asking because there are some Block II features on the DCS: JF-17 KLJ-7V1 is Pulse Doppler, mechanically steered Array Radar & is equiped on first batch of 50 JF-17 Block 1. Its a Multimode Fire Control Radar (FCR) which operates at X-Band i.e (7GHz-11GHz). In A-A look up mode it have range of ~105KM for 5m^2 target & ~85KM for 3m^2 & 150KM for Sea-Surface threats. KLJ-7V2 is a modified version of KLJ-7 V1 having more power & hence providing more range. It is equiped on 60 JF-17 Block 2s. KLJ-7V2 can detect 40 targets, can track 12 & engange 2 simultaneously & provides A-A mode for 3m^2 targets, ~150KM for 5m^2 & 200KM for sea targets.

Yeah, I was a bit baffled by the shot range. The advantage of having a longer stick. Maybe trying to force them defensive early? Very low pk, but they did break and run. Also, several Su-30MKI and F-16 casualties would have been a very serious incident... "First look, first shot"

This article might not be correct. But according to one PAF pilot, JF-17 was getting a radar lock-on Su-30MKI at more than 100km-ranges. So it seems like it would match the KLJ-7 documentation. https://eurasiantimes.com/powerful-jets-with-one-weakness-pakistani-jf-17-pilot-recalls-clash-with-indian-su-30mkis/ The F-16's launched AIM-120 at roughly 100km (54nm). This proved to be advantageous because the max range of R-77 is less than 80km. If this article is correct it looks like both F-16/JF-17 radars should have no issues with detection and lock-on at 100km.

This really needs to be resolved. it's almost impossible to make long range BVR shots against the AI. At launch the AI will make a split-s pumping chaff (chaff = missile kryptonite in DCS). Obviously ED has many things under development, but this should be top priority. Not making the WWII AI do water ditching/landings. It's a cool feature, but AI behaviour that deeply affects gameplay mechanics and use of modules should be prioritized first.

And the F-15 radar is also underperforming. It's discussed in the FC3 section on the forums. Problem is that we are comparing against other modules that are not verified as having correct radar performance. We have to look at each radar first and make sure that the data is correct. My guess is that it is a sort of a global DCS issue. The MiG-29 recently had it's radar adjusted and I think it is just the tip of the iceberg. Changes are coming.

What "downgrade"? I have not heard of this... is it really something official? The F/A-18C radar needs to perform realisticly, so I think they will tweak it as they are finishing up the module. I don't think ED has deliberatley made it worse, but it has had a bunch of performance issues not only with range but with tws, lock and acm modes aswell... It should perform a lot better than the F-16C radar.

The C-101 is a fine and detailed module. But don't expect to get any type of speed out of this jet. Saw it in a demo a few years ago (think it was Patrulla Àugila). It sounded like a vacuum cleaner. Like watching birds flying against a high wind. The demo was impressive precision wise, but oh lord, it was a collective yawn when they did go around Nothing against the module, just how It felt watching the thing IRL.

Now, this probably won't matter since ED has no tactical nukes planned... But I don't get how you could not want the B61? A real (not hypothetical) loadout for the F-15E. An awesome weapon by itself. Why would you be against having more content? Makes no sense not wanting all the bells and whistles. Ability to make very special strike missions in both SP and MP. - Hey kid, do you want the AIM-120D Amraam? - Ehh... no. Cause players will do mean things with it online

Ok, thx for the info. First I thought that the loft function of AIM-7 would be great, but it is actually not good at all in most situations.

So for the time being the MH is the most realiable version? On the Hornet you change between LOFT/NORM, how can I select this in the F-14B? Does it depend on aircraft pitch?

Have you ever seen the average loadout that people fly with on big multiplayer servers? Looks more like flying hedgehogs with very litte care for realism. Little to no communication with active missiles regulary going right into the furball, IFF optional - "let god sort em' out" . Airfields looks like a circus with wrecked planes everywhere. Carriers Ops even worse. Everyone doing their own thing, with close to zero regards for flying as a team. My point is, tactical nukes won't change much. Many servers would restict usage and it will still be as many clowns and trolls as usual. DCS draws many different type of players and I think the more hardcore/realistic servers can handle the B61 fine.

It is a great jet for a very particular type of mission - one pass, haul ass. A positive is that the module is very Mission oriented. You make a plan and stick to it! Following the waypoints one by one... the excitement when you see the target waypoint coming up, knowing there is only 1 chance (or 2 in some cases) to get it right. Very rewarding to follow through and get back to base (or roadbase) according to plan. I guess that is also a negative for some players who rather want to loiter around as they wish and "plinking" vehicles of opportunity.

I really hope Eagle Dynamics get going on that full fidelity MiG-29A...

Great video! One F-5E trick I have invented: FLARE JETTISON Bind the "Flare Jettison Switch" to a button and make sure that the protective cover is up. It's a great "panic tool" that will defeat most IR missiles. Also good for surviving the merge against bandit with all aspect IR like R60M, R73, 9L/M etc. Standard load of 15 flares or maximum load with 0 chaff is up to you. Yes, you will loose all flares really fast in one go. But it is worth it in many situations!

I would really like to see this in DCS.

For realism you should only take 2 HARMs. That is a fact. 4 HARM's ain't used on the Viper IRL, but might be technically possible. So there you go. Experimental loadout avalible aswell. It would be nice with an option to restrict all loadouts serverside. "Force Real Loadouts" or something like that. Players would then only be able to select verified loadouts that are used IRL, not what is technically possible. I understand that it is fun to fly with 12 GBU's on the Harrier or 8 JSOW's on the Hornet, but it's not for every server.

Well, one good thing that will come with the Apache is improved FLIR rendering in DCS. From a business and technology standpoint I understand why ED prioritize Apache over updated Ka-50. It might slip away even further as MIG-29 is in the pipe and there is always a WWII module being worked on. But thats ok, a full fidelity Fulcrum ain't too shabby...

How would you know that? I mean the missile comes slamming down at high Mach, so antenna placement is also a factor. SPO-15 had difficulties with ownship radar interference aswell. Not saying you are wrong, but from what I have read and heard, both SPO-10/15 had issues. Would they give pilot enough and correct warning to take evasive action in the case of AIM-54 going active? The story about the AWG-9 overpowering the SPO might actually be lore, but there are stories about STT lock overwhelming multiple antennas at the same time.

Also to note is that many of the kills was against Soviet aircraft. A MiG-29 pilot on the RU forums has stated that the SPO-15 version he used was unreliable and could not detect launches except Nike Hercules air defence missiles. It was also generally quite unrealiable as far as giving good information. The older SPO-10 was even worse. Both most likely went totally bonkers in the presence of the strong AWG-9 radar.

I agree that it is also a DCS issue, my point is that it CAN be mitigated and suppressed by careful artwork. Texture detailing has to be tuned to the DCS graphics engine to lessen the effect as much as possible. Why accentuate thin 3D-model lines by putting wear and tear texturing along the edges? The "lived in" Tomcat cockpit looks great, my only suggestion is to dampen or remove some texture detail around edges. If we had access to a "factory fresh" cockpit mod for F-14, it would be interesting to see the difference. Im pretty sure it would be a major improvement as far as removing shimmering and flicker.

My conclusion is that artwork tweaks might mitigate this issue. It's the really fine hand painted texture work around thin edges that starts to shimmer/flicker a lot when engines are running and cockpit is shaking. Again, this is most prominent in the F-14 and to some degree in the AJS-37 and C-101.

Textures set to High. MSAA has a really big impact on performance in DCS. It has to do with Deferred shading and cannot be compared to running MSAA in other games. ED in many cases recommends that it be turned off completely. Im pretty sure you have shimmering on your end aswell, you are just not noticing it for some reason. It's very visible in videos. Look at all the thin lines shimmering and flickering around the cockpit:

Ok, I think we need more realiable info. Max Range I have seen stated is 459. Wiki states "425 km (264 mi, 229 nmi) hi-lo-hi at Mach 0.75/0.88 with 14 × 250 kg (551 lb) bombs." I guess we will find out eventually. But I expect the F1 to be thirsty, like most other interceptors and fighters designed during the 1960's. F-16 on internal fuel won't get you very far in combat. So that's another factor. I can fly across Caucasus map in the MiG-21bis, high and straight ferry flight without loadout. But flying sorties and still get back home without running dry is another feat.

Depending on the profile you fly, I have read that the F1 has a range of 375-459 miles. It should be comparable to the MiG-21bis and maybe even a bit shorter. Edit. F1 should be pretty similar to MiG-21bis at higher altitudes. MiG-21bis carries a lot less fuel internally, but it seems that they are comparable in range. It's quite late here, so my calculations might be off