Kev2go

To clarify newer model of A10C IRL doesn't get Link 16. Its just that SADL can via gateway transmit information between these two systems. This has been added, as If there is an AWACS that hosts said gateway A10C can see F18 or F16 as unknown frendlies, but not air threats that those aircraft or awacs have detected. OR for that matter ground assets like patriot missile or other ground based radar C2 assets that are compatible with SADL But the issue simply that SADL functionality was bare bones in our current A10C iteration. the basic A10C Dash 1 manual has 8 pages worth on various SADL symbols.

It seems ED will being making some concession such of allowing LAu88's and multiple mavericks due to the incessant whining of the community. wags said it was put back on the "planned" list of features. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3920366&postcount=21 Also IRRC the JSOW was put back in the planned list as well.

Weve been over this before in another thread. You know this already. Stop spreading inaccuracies. Hell even the sources you posted yourself few paes earlier if youve bothered to read say otherwise. In 2012 APKWS was not in use on Hornets. The USMC at that point in time in 2012 were only evaluating it on helicopters like the Ah1W/Z and the Uh1Y and not yet on fixed wing platforms. It is not until 2018 that the first USMC squadron adopts it for thier Hornets. https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2018/04/18/marines-boost-lethality-of-hornets-with-high-precision-kill-munitions/ https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4274658&postcount=24 And not any AH64 Apache or any Ah1 Cobra will get APKWS. ONly The AH64E guardians and late life AH64D longbows would use APKWS and the only cobras that had used APKWS was circa 2012 Ah1W Super Cobra, or Ah1Z vipers. An AH1F or an AH64A would not be getting AKPWS. These are long retired from US army use.

IT was still an F/A18C, just an earlier lot with circa 90s avionics ( no HMD, older MPCD display, earlier ale39 CM suite among the main ones) That being said when the Hornet project was started it was a number of years earlier ( I think like 2013 or 2014 ?.) , just like with the initial F16C project and its WIP screenshots floating about it was still a block 50, but pre CCIP modernization for the 2000s . They basically restarted those respective projects and were able to do more recent variations with more up to date information, probably in part due to popular demand of the playerbase wanting more up to date features.

ikr it would be better to ideally add an aircraft that isn't already in FC3, and also one that is actually more comparable capabilities of the F16C or F/A18C etc, but sadly those are the type of Russian aircraft that probably won't get added to being too modern.

and id be happier with an AH1W over an A model Apache More diverse loadout ( Tow's , aim9's and agm122 sidearm) . Longer service time, and more survivable at least if going for 2003 and later version due to integration AN/AAR47 MWS.

Maybe because its not unreasonable aught to at desire at least one modern blueforce attack helicopter. There are enough helicopters out right now including ones wip or down the pipeline to cater to those who like old school helos not much.

Im hoping to hear more news of A10C II's with regards to SADL and TAD function since with the current DCS A10C a vast amount was missing that the SADL we have right now is a barebones system. TAD page should show SAM threat circles like you have on the F16 and F18 in thier respective HSD and SA pages. In the A10C these Sam threat circles originate either from preplanned information via data cartridge, memory, AN/ALQ 213, or via information updated via datalink along with thier unique symbols. With the A10C there is also a subsection page called " threat table" that lists known threats. SADL functionality and symbols should be expanded so its not just barebones where all you see are friendly flights or other A10's SPI's. THe SADL is capable of showing, unknown and verified air threats like we see in link 16 equipped aircraft with radars that have detected and passed on the information through the network, as well as ground threats. Also im wondering if will we have a COMM page accessible via MFD on this specific A10C? It shows AN/ARC210 preset channels

TBH i dont consider lack of OBOGS a deal breaker. This is just a sim an not RL. Hypoxia in DCS seems to only be a noticable issue when flying with no oxygen at high altitudes , and i don't recall ever flying such a long mission in the A10C that my oxygen tank ran out before RTB

some comments haven't aged very well have they https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4439112&postcount=264

we will see. Maybe if the F16C blk 50 module gets Sniper ATP it could be ported over to the A10C.

i mean it was official that we were getting an A10C v2.0. It was announced quite some time ago. What is official is a showcasing of the exact weapns and certain features that will come with out. That being said im not surprised. In a podcast that was focused on the P47 Nick grey let it slip that they were doing a new enough suite that they would expect to incorporate HMCS.

Although it may come of as hyperbole, he does has a point though. There is no publicly available data on the JF17, whereas on the F16 you can find various manuals, be it basic FM, , weapons, or maintenance/ supplement related. ( even if its not the most up to date or for the specific circa 2007 version in DCS) thus ensuring that the community is in a position to fact check and better contribute by making better researched bug reports based on primary source information. With JF17 we have no choice but to trust Dekka at face value, whatever thier sources or how many sources they may be. However given some of their weapons performances , Namely SD10 vs Aim120C, makes their modelling questionable. There is a reason why ED declared that from now on only they will be allowed to model missile dynamics.

Whats better about the LD10 in actual practice over the AGM88C besides " its newer"?. LD10 is basically just an SD10 converted with anti radiation seeker head. The AGM88E would be a pretty different ball game to the AGM88C or LD10. From what i read AGM88D never entered operational use. IT was a developmental weapon that eventually lead to the AGM88E. I doubt we would get AGM88E because "circa 2007" viper using software tape 4.2 ( or 4.3) in this timeframe, that is assuming ED would have enough information to model newer Harms.

ED is not Razbam. Harrier is not an ED product.

But the Av8B N/A was already in use in the gulf war...... The 2000s era N/A is only better by having newer AMPCD as opposed to the MPCD displays ( which in DCS makes no practical difference apart from looking more gucci) , GPS aided navigation , JDAM's , and the ability to use Lightening targeting pod vs relying only on the ARBS. Its really not that much more fancy. The plan that they had was to make N/A first, and then do the AV8B+ which will have slightly downsized APG 65 Radar Razbam had already made av8b and other more complex aircraft in other sims.

meh i dont think a D model is a pipe dream especially not if representing and older era longbow Ah64D block 1 circa 1998-2002, or even an early block 2 circa 2003-2005. When it comes to fixed wing jets Neither do we have the absolute latest model F16C block 50 or the Latest F/A18C. TBH a mid 2000's Longbow will still have an inferior protective suite to the very late model OH58D we are getting from polychop ( no IR missile warning system , and older M130 countermeasures dispensing system with only 30 chaff or flare) The D model has seen upgrades since those years then and even then the AH64D is no longer the pinnacle of the Apache family since the Ah64E guardian is already in production and in operational service. Not that i would expect it even an early model Ah64E pre rebrand circa 2012 ( Ah64D block 3 as it was known at the time) isnt a generational leap over the longbow. Ah64E on its own has seen a continual series of upgrades. I had a look at the 2012 guardian manual. At that point in time the main difference was more powerfull 701D turbine engines ( engine commonality with UH60M) newer CM suite and AAR57 IR missile warning system, coupled with better processing/s software related stuff, and an ability to utilize and control UAV feed.

that is a myth that comes from a claim made by CNN https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/21/politics/us-syria-russia-dogfight/index.html The actual publicized debrief the pilot never said anything about the Su22 flaring in response to the missile being launched . It never did. the pilot noted the The Aim9X launched was a shot off the rails and disappeared, so the pilot quickly switch to the aim120. It was most likely a malfunction. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/14344/heres-the-definitive-account-of-the-syrian-su-22-shoot-down-from-the-pilots-themselves Missiles can fail IRL, but thats a totally different matter in DCS we dont have random failures.

I preferred the old AMPCD ( ignoring the lighting/ cockpit colour improvements which are nice) the new lower gain

all map gain does is decrease map brightness relative to symbol brightness. For you to see symbols the map is too dark. The issue is with AMPCD symbols. brightness and symbols gain doesn't make symbols visible enough even without MM more blurry and not bright enough relative to how was before in older beta builds and how it currently is in Stable build. Right now minus map, DDI displays are superior in resolution and readability in symbols to a more modern AMPCD display.

Theve become much more difficult to read in the last of patch. Seems to be the lighting? Now its virtually totally unreadable. Used to be better before. Overall even without map the amped symbols look less defined than the ddi,s right now. Which shouldn't be the case considering ddi is an archaic crt display whereas the amped is a much more modern 21st century lcd full color capable display

jester looses more often lock in situations where he shouldnt and will sometimes be unable to regain lock in situation where he should, I would know because in SP situations i will sometimes hop backseat, and be able to do his job my own damn self. IN MP this is not an option. So i totally get what hes talking about, so the excuse of " bruh its just the old AWG 9 and not jester " isn't always the case.

whats basically same range? V5 sees target 35-40NM and a Hornet sees one at 45-50NM? or would you imply even less?

both are "over performing" right now in terms of ranges. Both need to have lower max detection ranges, since they are not F15's. However whether in its current OP state or when it gets fixed, the Hornet will remain as the aircraft with the better radar relative to the Viper, because as discussed it is supposed to be that way. The only aspect of the the Viper that i can think of that is very7 likely under performing right now is its automatic target acquisition in close combat/ dogfight modes relative to the Hornet.

Whilst the biggest focus of discussion has been in A2A, il throw in that in A/G the Hornet radar will also be superior to the APG68 v5. Most notable difference will be the EXP 3- Medium SAR mode allowing a 1.2x1.2 NM area zoom Although in both EXP 1 and EXP 2 the hornet has some incremental advantages in DBS resolution as well. In the viper the EXP 1 will provide 8:1 resolution, in EXP 2 64:1 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4371433&postcount=17