Kev2go

yup but even the Huey and F5E are well post nam era version

And? thats not a requirement. The chances of finding a F16C in the USAF still using the same avionics and exact same software tapes from 2007 is also pretty slim...... OR and F/A18C lot 20 as it was circa 2005..... No one is saying the Super Hornet has to be a 2008- present day vehicle...... In fact this is exactly why the Thread is only about Block 1's and only up a early block 2 lot 26, and no further ones. Programming launguage used RL thing is irrelevant. ED only emulates. DCS modules is not an exact replica of the aircraft. Just look how much stuff ED was able to streamline from Hornet development into Viper, and those are totally different aircaft altogether made by entirely different defence contractors.

Actually Lot 26's were still fitted with APG73's. Lot26's didn't get fitted with APG79 operationally at the start of its service life. It was s post production refit that came some years later. That is why Lot 26's are included into the poll. Hell even ECP 6038R2 ( fibre channel switches and 8X10 displays for F/A18F) was a refit for LOt 26's. An early life Lot 26 is barely a block 2 aircraft. ( but then thats why you had the marketers come up with block 2+ nomenclature) It has the provisions for lots of planned features at the start of its life but isnt really much more capable than the block 1 lot 25 until they are retrofitted eventually. Although Block 2's were planned to have APG79's from the get go, due to operational development and testing issues of the APG79 this didnt come into fruition as initially intended, One of the first aircraft with this APG79 radar was actually F/A18F BUNO 166639, A lot 27 production aircraft. ( and mind you this is only in "operation" with a test and evaluation squadron VX9 during 2005), same year it was only being declared for IOC. Up until 2007 only 28 APG79's had been produced. Lot 30 is when the APG79 went into full scale production. Hence why USN ordered 135 upgrade kits to have various block 2 LOt 26- lot 29 aircraft refitted with APG79 post production.

even worse. the newer Litening 2 G4 has 1K ( 1024x1024 p) FLIR res. the L2 AT( the version in DCS) FLIR imaging only is supposed to have 640 x 512p

Its FM "fix" are a resultant something breaking (bug) since 2nd last OB patch. If it was an intended FM change there would notes of it in the changelogs, but there never were.

naaa game just has poor fps in general ever since the last couple OB 2.5.6 patches. many are complaining about performance issues, even those with higher end CPU's.

there is sense to what he is saying. He doesn't need to be a fighter pilot. What he says is a generalization but more or less consistent with modern psychology and neuroscience related fields that have explore such things under cognitive and developmental branches.

4:19 to 4:28. is a A/G map image. But honestly because its a VHS era of recording the quality of the recording itself is subapr. and is not an ideal indication, nor do you see any of the modes operated. IF people did some open source hunting on thier own you can get a decent ballpark idea from open sources you can get of what to expect from imaging quality of generation of mechanical radars of a comparable generation and timeframes.

where are you getting that from? NWP 3.22.5? https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/legacy_files/files/media/csis/pubs/941015lessonsgulfiv-chap05.pdf it certainly seems not during the gulf war. This is a publication from 1994. "It is also planning upgrades to the APG-65 radars on its F/A-18s that will provide an all-weather stand-off imaging capability, and a strip mode radar coverage for reconnaissance purposes, as well as hardware and software changes that increase synthetic aperture radar capability" However for all intents and purposes those series of "upgrades" Lead to development of the APG73 which replaced the APG65's. https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=328

Really? like a quick search would tell you this. The Radars the Hornets were using in Desert Storm was with the original APG65 radar.... APG73 ( phase 1) was adopted starting 1994 with full rate production in 1996. A few years later PHASE 2 upgrades followed which addressed improvements in A/G capabilities. The very last APG73 Phase 2 was delivered by 2006. Our DCS Hornet will almost certainly have be the APG 73 phase 2. So medium resolution SAR will be achievable via EXP 3, which certainly means better A/G map resolution and additional level of zoom to what was available during the gulf war. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=192382

BUNO stands for Bureau number. BUNO is basically the equivalent of serial number issued for any other product you see on the market. This specific DCS hornet with BUNO # 165407 ThiS a very specific F/A18C from LOT 20 batch ( block 51 production aircraft) which was produced in 1998.

AN/APR39 RWR. something that should have been included to begin with given the 3d model.

That would be even better than the UH1N due to the greater engine power and quad rotor blades, giving it superior utility transport/lift abilities, and some will like the full on glass cockpit setup, BUt the classic Hueys with the dual rotor blades still have that classic "whomp whomp" sound, that is closely reminiscent of the older Bell 205/ Uh1H series. Uh1N is that interesting middle middle ground where it has enough modernization to be relevant for 21st century scenarios ( proper defensive suite, EGI and FLIR), but still has that classic huey fuel due to still mostly analog cockpit, and the satisfying sound it makes twin rotor blades. That and the Uh1N represents a broader set of users. Uh1Y is only in use with USMC atm, wheras with the Uh1N has seen serivce beyond the USMC. The US navy and US air force have used it, along with a fairly long list of foreign export users, which may make this more appealing to a broader amount of the DCs player base ( even if the focus of the derivative aims to be mostly based specific model for single user type like most modules) I dont know if enough legally obtainable information is around for the dev's to decide to model a Uh1Y. Yea theres a operators manual you can find online, but likely even more documentation needed beyond just that.

yeah funny enough the AI Uh1H's also absorb 7.62 from miniguns like a sponge as well.

would be nice. Although would rather see a something from the UH60 family. That being said i certainly wouldn't say no. The Uh1N would still offer a classic Huey feel but improve on the huey design where it lacks most ( relative to mi8 ), by having an analog flight control system and a Stability and Control Augmentation systems coupled with some basic Autopilot functions. IF its recent enough version is represented from the late 90s going into 2000s then it would also mean a UH1N that has been further refined with Helmet mounted sight ( HUD) EGI, AN/AA47 Missile warning system, AN/ALE47 countermeasure suite and option for FLIR system, which would make it far more usable in modern scenarios and in a contested environment than the UH1H.

The Jf17 may be, however The Hornet or Viper are not representative of 2015 iterations. Even ED has officially stated many times ( especially when reminding players asking for newer weapons) the Hornet they are simulating is roughly circa mid 2000s ( 2005 ish) whilst the F16C block 50 is circa 2007. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3394160&postcount=5 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3751826&postcount=9 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3916880&postcount=24

No. Well beyond the current timeframe of our fighters even if you could get enough information for it to make a halfway believable guesstimation of its performance. Aim120D only achieved IOC starting in 2015. http://raytheon.mediaroom.com/2015-04-09-Latest-AMRAAM-variant-achieves-key-program-milestones Would be more reasonable to ask for the AIm120 C7 first before jumping straight to an AIm120D anyways, but even for that i wouldn't hold my breath.

its not just the ka50.... A10C recieved a 3d cockpit facelift and there are very much official development aims for a new A10C v2.0 module Its just that the Ka50 has been around the longer than any other module and has happened to get more updates. So there is no reason to think some years down the line other modules won't eventually get updates.

its doubtfull it will be anywhere near as incomplete as F18 was at launch. There are lots of features that can ( and almost certainly will be) directly carried over from the current A10C.

I agree. all of which you can still get with a newer suite. Which is in order since the current HOG isnt quite accurate anyways as ED went with a hybrid Suite 3.0 and 5.0 fraken hog https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=248167 So a proper simulation of the things you want would in fact bring it up to at least a proper suite 5.0 which ANG got at the time with thier DTC version of A10C.

Not related to the P47 In the interview there were some very interesting tidbits regarding the A10C hog 2.0 (HMCS)

:megalol:

The DACT version ( especially the USAF one) happens to be also very comparable to the typical vanilla generic configuration F5E that many other nations utilized...... Its capabilities aren't unique to DACT exclusive aircraft. Although officially sold single player campaigns focus on DACT above the NTTR you are incorrect on your assertion on " very specific(F5E) version in DCS " is in fact not a very "specific" version of the F5E . It is something of a franken tiger actually. ( A hybrid of a Basic Vanilla F5E that the USAF also used, and the US navy F5N) and a proper DACT version(s) it would need to be split to two variations for the USAF and USN F5N's ( latter of which are buybacks of swiss modded F5E's) . kind of like DCS P51D was somewhat inaccurate for European theatre but was eventually split into D25 and D30.

also to remember was against a Mig21F13 not a MIg21Bis.

difference is developing a HMD doesn't require new API for this. Such particular function already exists on other aircraft, thus is not a fair comparison to make to those other mechanics.