Schmidtfire

Harrier is pretty bad at the moment. Probably the most bugged, unfinished and inaccurate module in DCS echo system. I have all modules and it does not hold up. Hopefully Razbam will give it the attention it needs. You can still have fun with it, but for me the simulation and systems are sub-par. Again, hopefully it won’t stay that way.

I wonder if the Hunter drone is real or if it's some kind of ploy? The new markings on the Su-57 tailfins are over the top obvious and the pictures of the drone are all taken while it's being towed or static on ground. Also seems a bit strange how these photos were taken and leaked. Might be real but I am not convinced yet.

Hoping for a release tomorrow :) Will be interesting to see at what price-point aswell...

Testing the pod against F/A-18 is not a good idea since ECM is not simulated in that aircraft yet.

05:20 F-6 / MiG-19 fire sidewinder AIM-9P Really cool to see it fly together with more modern aircraft such as F-16.

They are already going to make MiG-19S. Add and align two missile pylons and sidewinders. Profit. At least no extensive coding is needed and you get an airframe that optionally will cover everything from Nam up to conflicts in the 1980’s. Maybe beyond :) Offering a very complete MiG-19 experience. It is just a wish/suggestion. But I think a lot of players would enjoy it. Fits good togheter with upcoming Pakistani JF-17 module. Not to mention flying Egypt AF on the Syria map.

That is why It would be a great option. Since the focus is MiG-19P fidelity, stretching a bit on the 19S version with IRL "field mod" options like this would make the entire module package very attractive and usable over different conflicts and eras :) LGB's and TGP has to my knowledge never been mounted on MiG-19 (or J-6 wich name you perfer), but american sidewinders has. Both by Pakistan and Egypt. It is a very reasonable and plausible option. And cool. East tech meets West tech. You want to fly CCCP "vanilla" like the original, just don't mount the sidewinders or pylons. Everyone win.

Really cool picture. Pakistani MiG-19S launching american sidewinder! :) Model of sidewinder unknown but looks like a 9J or 9P. Please Razbam, this would be such a great option for 70's/80's conflicts

Why would it be removed?

Wow! Looks great! :thumbup:

Im pretty sure both P and S variants has the SPO-1 "Sirena 2" RWR...

You can still mod/attach the missiles to another airframe and have a go ;) I have tried all the new PL heaters on the F-5E and also the active radar missile on the Su-27. Quite fun actually!

Correct. But R-3S is still a very formidable weapon in DCS, I get the feeling that it's seeker and guidance is too good for early 1960's. Compared to later gen like R-13M and R-13M1 it should be more crude. Anyways, difficult to judge without more data and such.

As a sidenote. Air-Air rockets scored a few victories over Vietnam. Vietnamese used UB-16 pods with S-5 rockets. When the R-3 was introduced some pilots were skeptical about it and still used the UB-16 pods. Do we get S-5 rockets with different warheads? Or are they all HE?

Im not entirely sure but I think it was brought up. It is more of a "Launch Authorized" sound on MiG21bis and not seeker head itself. I think the MiG29 IRL also has a launch tone for R-27 semi active missiles.

That is correct. from what I have noted, GAR-8 in DCS does not pull high G off the rails. At launch it will also take a short time until it start to turn/correct it’s heading. It is also less sensitive to heat. R-3S behaves more like the Aim-9P in comparison (wich can be compared to R-13M1) quite smooth tracking of target and maintains lock much better. I wouldn't be surprised if the R-3S should be closer to the GAR-8 performance. And current R-3R is quite correct due to different guidance. But without more data it is just speculation. It’s hard to figure wich one is the most realistic. But I think BST did a good job on the GAR-8. Another missile we can compare R-3S to would be Viggen’s Rb-24. It is supposed to be a license produced Aim-9B but from what I remember it is sort of a mix between R-3S/GAR-8 performance in DCS.

One thing I have noted R-3S leads/follows the target way better than the Aim-9B/Gar-8 in DCS. If that is true IRL I don't know. It is also a bit easier to achieve lock with. Don't know about the sinous movement at altitudes, but I think it was more common on older gen missiles. Bonus. Here is a live launch of R-3R If the host is translated correctly, he says that R-3R has longer range than R-3S. Some other sources states that the R-3R also has longer range than R-3S, but I don't know if this is true or not. But I guess that the best place for this kind of questions are on the russian side of these forums as they often have more intel on the soviet missile family.

Would be cool if they manage to implement the characteristic sidewinder "snake movement" seen in this video. Thats why they call it a sidewinder :)

Great update!

Vietnam map for me! Also a bush-war type map in Africa would be nice. Plenty of opportunity for both east and west aircraft.

I agree, they perform really well.

From what I know BST had crazy good access to a MiG-15bis. Also it is a classic icon and probably an aircraft close to heart for many Eastern Europeans. It is clearly a labour of love and the finest details, like blown lamps by the UV Rheostat. I have heard some rumors that they might sort of revisit the MiG-15bis module and develop it further to a MiG-17... I did not know about the m65 1000 lb bombs or the other missing variants. Maybe even some Matra 68mm rocket pods? I agree that they could have given more info about the aircraft that the module is based on. Besides I love behind the scenes stuff, It would be really neat to get some history behind it. Was it modified in field? Did it see any service? Did it see any combat? Where was it stationed? etc. Is it possible that it was a testbed of some sorts and therefore never got the F40 wing but all the other goodies?

FYI. I did several posts with pictures on that windscreen issue. Probably a thread or two aswell. To my knowledge this Franken Sabre is based on a real life airframe? Maybe a bit obscure and uncommon... If you say it is a total fantasy aircraft, that has 0% chance of being real - like a modded airframe in a warehouse somewhere, then I understand your frustration. For me it is plausible. Maybe if BST had this info during development, they would have made different choices and sprung towards something a bit more common. Still BST (now ED) will probably not touch the Sabre again. It’s been released for some time now. That windshield thing took years to fix. Gunsight / guns are still a bit whacky and where is my tactical nuke for the labs system?

All I was trying to convey is no matter how seriously we take this "sim". There will always be compromises. Sometimes it is accuracy of the module itself, sometimes it's the map, objects, AI...

In that case you probably should not be flying F-86F over Caucasus at all... I do understand that you want more variants, but It is kind of pointless unless you have a historical map complete with AI and objects. Why Belsimtek choose this "Franken Sabre", we don't know. But they did and simulated that version to thier fullest ability. Aircrafts around the world are modified. I say it will still fall under plausible, even if it is a rare version. The "make believe" of putting that module into an interesting context either fictional or simulated is up to us. Look at it this way. DCS is our sandbox and we have different toys. Right now they are a F-86F and a MiG-15bis. If we want to play a 1950/60/70 scenario we have to use those assets and mix and match payload and liveries to make something that we feel are close enough. Same with every module released, as there are always some asset missing for a correct historical representation of a given scenario or conflict. Id' love another version (like the CAC one), but Im quite sure it won't happen. At least not soon anyways.