Schmidtfire

I read this in the NVG thread: ”Mirage 2000C RDI S5-2C. NVG in operational use since at least 2015 when EC 2/5 put emphasis on AG which was previously secondary. Cockpit has been adapted accordingly.” Im a bit curious about the EC 2/5 AG focus. What type of loadouts and munitions is generally used? (on the M2000C variant we have in DCS) If LGB are commonly used, have they added some other equipment IRL like a pod or a laser spot tracker?

Awesome scene from "The Brink" :)

Infantry JTAC units would also be a great addition.

One solution would be to make AIM-7MH loft by default but not the AIM-7M. Or make it a keybinding, but I don't think ED has a lot of time over to put into FC3. Better yet. If a general data cartridge would be implemented for all FC3 aircrafts (with nav waypoints entry, default RWR volume and such) a loft vs non-loft AIM-7 setting would be nice. :)

Some stuff I found while goofing around in the 2.5.5 OpenBeta. First IR missiles: RB-74 is no longer smokeless and fly more like RB-24J (but being full aspect). RB-24J fly like RB-74 and are smokeless (still rear aspect) Kind of strange as It did not used to be that way in the Viggen module :huh: Rb-05 No smoke att all. Just a flare. In this video (aswell as some others on yt) there's a smoketrail until rocket motor burns out. This is minor stuff, but are worth looking into for a more accurate representation :)

It still kind of funny how the white Rb75's turns into american mavericks upon launch. Try shooting and watch the mav in external view :megalol:

+1 :)

As you write, these missiles are not fielded. Probably built in a very limited numbers. The point is that these development versions, mockups, whatever - has been shown at MAKS to attract buyers. Just like a bunch of Su-25TM stuff that never went past papier-maché dummies and drawings. But I think it is reasonable that at some stage there has been development and tests of newer seekerheads and updates. Seems very thin to show up at MAKS with the new missiles as a "concept only". I wouldn't be surpirsed if some of these halted developments / programmes or whatever got some renewed interest and was tested in Syria.

@GGTharos you might have forgotten this discussion (from 2006) ;) https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=13220&page=2 SwingKid has an interesting post with pictures: "It seems that the version with passive seeker 9B-1032E was shown for the first time at MAKS 2005: I read somewhere that in addition to anti-ECCM role, it IS also supposed to be targetted against enemy fighter radars (to force them to shut down), just like an ARM against a SAM site." -SK Also some general info on the first page of that thread: The R-27P and -EP missile - P for passivnaya (passive) - are equipped with a PRGS-27 (or 9B-1032) seeker developed by CKBA. This operates at centimetric wavelengths, and guides the round to the radar of enemy fighter aircraft. The missile is intended for use against enemy fighters at long range, when the launch aircraft may still be beyond the maximum range of the target's radar. Since the weapon uses passive homing, it will give the target no warning that a launch has been made. Vympel offers two versions of the missile: the standard R-27P with a maximum range of 72km and the 'energetic' version R-27EP with a bigger rocket motor which gives a maximum range of 110km. This maintains the dual-standard policy set by the original active-radar and infrared-guided versions, which were fielded in medium (R-27R and -27T) and long-range (R-27ER and -27ET) variants respectively. The R-27P and -27EP retain the basic configuration of the earlier members of the AA-10 'Alamo' series, including the novel trapezoidal 'butterfly' control surfaces. The homing head is capable of detecting a target from a range of more than 200km, but the R-27EP cannot carry out an interception at such distances. The flight time would exceed the operating duration of the missile's onboard power supply. Vympel is working on ways of increasing the operating time of the power supply in order to allow R-27EP engagements at up to 200km.

This is just my theory, but R-77-1 might be more difficult to integrate, it's probably more expensive and if you don't have an upgraded radar you might not get all the benefits of going with such advanced missile. I don't suggest that a modified R-27 is better than R-77-1. It is a life extension. Look, recently the Polish Air Force placed an order for a number of R-27's to use with their remaining MiG-29's. They simply cannot carry the R-77/RVV. There are a lot of other export customers who would want more punch or versatility without making a major upgrade to the aircraft inventory. Technicians and crew are also familiar with the missile. It is a cheaper alternative. And the russians has been known for mixing and matching and trying different combination of seekerhead/warheads/missile bodies for years. So it is in their blood =) As for naming. If these are development versions they might not even be official yet. Again, this is just me thinking loud :)

I have to agree with GGTharos on this one, evidence vise. However, they might test new R-27 versions in Syria. Why do that? My reasoning is simple. They probably have a gazillion old R-27's that can be modified. Export customers also have these laying around. It would probably be easier to interface with older aircraft that already carry the R-27. Since several seekerheads and bodies already exists on the R-27 family I don't see why they would not keep modifying them. Export customers still order factory fresh R-27's. Finally It would also be a viable choice and upgrade for russian fighters that cannot carry R-77-1 as it is probably cheaper to integrate. So I wouldn't rule out that development versions of R-27 are being tested (along with a sleeve of other new weapons) in Syria.

What do you guys make of the LOFT profile? Looks like AIM-7 is lofting very steep and aggressive.

It’s been 6 years. I don’t think it is around the corner. But Mi-24P should come with multicrew so that is pretty good news :)

If you have access to the classic CH Flightstick you can ”trim” by using the wheels on the base. It trims the joystick hardware independent of any control bindings in game. Perfect for modules that lack certain trim controls like WWII german aircrafts and should work well with the I-16 too.

Hope that this issue finally can be pinpointed and resolved. I have pretty much left the F-14B parked as I don’t want to worry about getting CTD during a SP mission or in multiplayer.

+1 Same issue for me. Gunsight dissappears.

Hope they fix the broken AIM-7. It lofts a lot, everytime, no matter what setting.

I think it will be ok. Remember, a lot of the info on Aim-120, 9X, RWR etc are classified. There will always be some guesswork on all modern DCS fighters. You take what is public knowledge, what SME’s can tell you, maybe even run simulation to get a good approximation of the real thing. A plausible representation. Im confident that Deka will try to get it as close as possible for a consumer simulation :)

+1 P-51D engine is extremely sensitive. Is it like this in real life? I never fly P-51D in DCS because of this. Such a shame since it is a cool aircraft and ED did great job on the flight model :cry:

Great update! Also sound of wind has been increased, very immersive in a dive :)

Did they also correct the scale or are the new trees still double sized?

"You know, I have one simple request. And that is to have sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads!”

Great news uboats! Im sure this module will do really well. Looking forward to more videos and news :)

This is some great news! :) @Wags, any thoughts on making DLC additions for more modules? Like the F-5E, A-10C, Mi8, Huey etc. They have been produced in so many variants and modifications, it would be nice to be able to buy more content and functionality for our favourite birds. Or simply add more variants. Like F-5B, A-10A etc

+1