Tirak

Um... if you're blitzing him at Mach 2.5, all he needs to do is turn towards you and fire an AMRAAM. You'll never get into position for a heater shot, speed was a fantastic trick in an age before missiles, but now... well if you're coming at me at Mach 2.5 you're just increasing the closure rate for my missiles.

I'm inclined to think the F-5 we're getting will not be Mav capable, based purely by the fact that they emphasize unguided weapons when they talk about ground attack.

Funny joke, the "Last Gunfighter" had fewer gun kills than the Phantom. :music_whistling:

Satilites killed the SR-71, not the MiG-31.

F-14: 14,500lbs Tornado: 18,500lbs Jaguar: 10,000lbs Strike Eagle: 23,000lbs F-16: 17,000lbs AV-8B: 9,000lbs Typhoon: 16,000lbs F-4: 18,650lbs F-105: 14,000lbs F-18: 13,700lbs As you can see, most strikers don't carry anywhere near the F-111's payload. It shares more in common with dedicated bombers. Hell, that throw weight is more than the Avro Vulcan.

Um, the Tomcat can carry over 14,000lbs of weaponry, which isn't too shabby in the strike fighter role. You seem to want a bomber, not a striker.

So does the gunsight predict lead on target, or just shell ballistics?

Ho-229 will not lack for opponents. It'll suffer the same drawbacks of every other Generation 1 fighter, slow throttle response, poor acceleration and bad fuel economy. In addition, the 229 is a flying wing, which is incredibly difficult to fly. Without fly by wire systems, the workload on the pilot just to keep in the air is going to be difficult, and without good instrumentation, it'll be easy to toss yourself into a spin. A good pilot with a solid handle on how the aircraft functions will be dangerous, but there are a large number of late war props and other Gen 1 jets coming along that by the time the 229 actually takes to the skies of DCS, it will enter into a fairly fleshed out field and fit right in.

His theory didn't work then either. Zero vs Hellcat.

Well since you asked, I'm heavily against taking the name of an old squadron. Like i said before, their victories, are not your victories. I think the squadron would have far more meaning if its accomplishments and culture were formed by the members, and not by trying to fit into the box of what real pilots did during real conflict. If I were to join a DCS tomcat squadron, I'd probably steer clear of any group that deliberately named and modeled themselves after a real world squadron, because it would tell me their culture is focused on living up to the past, and not blazing their name on the future.

I think this is where DCS splits into two camps regarding what 'true to life' is, experience or history. I find that taking on the airs of a real squadron is like playing dress up. It's not your history, it's not your heritage. A fictitious squadron on the other hand? That's your legacy, you made the moments that you and your squadron mates talk about, you were involved in the inside jokes, and if your squadron does well enough, it's you your opponents talk about. It's sort of the same idea behind the people who demand absolute accuracy of theater and aircraft, vs those of us who prefer things to remain fluid. Let the tech be real, but the circumstances be fun. Anyway, my 2c.

You have misread their press releases. We are getting 2 different tomcat modules. One is a mid 80s F-14A, the other is a mid 90s F-14B. The A module will have the older TF-30s, and the B will be powered, like all Bs, by the F110.

One WWII aircraft was indicated months ago, i don't have the time right now to hunt it down though, so you can either take my word for it or hunt it down on your own. So unless it's a 262, komet, p80 or arado, it'll be a prop. The other was said to be "Modern", so most likely a jet. Toss in the other clues... well we've been over this... someone should update the OP with all the clues...

Ya know, I was thinking of the same joke when I saw the title, though I was just going to say North Africa. Bravo sir.

Um, no your point was factually false and so therefore crumbles. F-14Bs were modified in the mid 90s during the 'Bombcat' upgrade to be able to use the LANTIRN pod, so therefore it is a very real possibility that it will be part of the module. So aside from your incorrect information concerning which variants of the Tomcat could fit the LANTIRN pod, do you have any other reasons, or just pessimistic guesses?

Neither the Osprey nor the Bronco better fit, nor do either fit more numerous clues than the current frontrunners, please keep the discussion focused there. For example, an argument can be made for the wildcat as it matches the wwii clues, and it is only through a certain interpretation and outside information that the F4U edges it out.

This thread isn't a wish list, it's the speculation thread. That means that if you think a module will be that plane, you've got to have a reason to back it up, and not the 'oh well i want it" or "DCS Needs It" or the ever popular "IT'LL SELL SUPER DUPER WELL". Reasoned, intelligent arguments based on the clues. F4U Corsair Leatherneck indicating one of their modules is WWII Leatherneck indicating one of their upcoming modules will have a tie to the company name: "Leatherneck Simulations", Leatherneck being slang in the US for Marine. Cobra's Black Sheep Avatar, signifying VMA-214, who's WWII aircraft include the F4F Wildcat and the F4U Corsair. This last is an extrapolation, that the F4U is more likely than the F4F due to the fact that VEAO is coming out with an F4F, and that the F4U was featured in the Black Sheep television series, which was about VMA-214 The hastily removed picture on the ED facebook of a new F4U Corsair model. SAAB 37 Viggen Cobra's image of an RB-04 Anti Shipping Missile, only used on the Tunnan, Lansen and Viggen. Immediately after Cobra's previous avatar was discovered, he changed it to a Swedish Emblem. The introduction of new Swedish members to the team. Ground Mapping and Targeting Radar Complex missiles with Advanced Targeting Parameters New or unique methods of propulsion or force distribution, the Viggen being one of the few military fighter aircraft with a thrust reverser. the Tomcat lead up announcements indicating Cats and Ducks, Viggen can be translated as a kind of Tufted Duck. Please provide your more numerous, better fitting clues for other aircraft. This is the Speculation thread, not the wishlist thread.

The gun camera just sits in front of your HUD when you flip the switch. It was only ever used for training and it does nothing in game. I cringe everytime i see someone mount it because it blocks your already very limited view. If you mean the control boxes that get bolted to the top of the canopy, those are for controlling the jamming pod, which doesn't work, the gunpods, and the nuclear bomb.

High altitude is where the AMRAAM slingers want to fight, I'll stick to the weeds with my R-3Rs thank you very much.

On that note, the US Air Force and Army did a joint study on planes attacking helicopters. Turns out, helicopters are really dangerous to planes that go after them.

We're talking about the Phoenix, I don't know what the hell thread you're reading, but i suggest you either reread and pay attention this time, or post in the one you've obviously mistaken this one for.:doh:

A mid 90s F-14B would be carrying the AIM-54C (ECCM), which is designed specifically to counter electronic countermeasures. It's not around anymore because nothing else in the US arsenal fires it, and because the threat of soviet bombers attacking carrier groups with long range cruise missiles vanished. A server that keeps the Phoenix around will go like this: F-14 takes off and goes active on Radar. Everyone sees the F-14 and dives for the deck like they're MiG-21s at an Eagle convention, and doesn't go above terrain until the F-14 goes home. Anyone dumb enough to stay high, fly's along totally oblivious to the fact they've been locked and fired on, until their RWR screams at them that the Phoenix just went active at 8nm. 7.5 seconds later, he's in a million pieces scattered across the sky. Because at Mach 5, it takes 7.5 seconds to go 8 miles. Just how much separation do you think you're going to make in 7.5 seconds?