Kev2go

Any player can adjust fuel based on thier mission, but part of CAS isn't jut flying a to b to drop ordinance, but be able to loiter around ahead on standby to provide cover for the troops on the ground as new threats emerge. Anything less than max internal fuel is a joke.

yup those silly responses already happening lol

That's what the naysayers said about the eurofighter.... And relative to the mv22 that's frontline combat jet. Not a utility tiltrotor

not exactly comparable considering the s97 is a prototype bird still in development and no in operational use.

would be neat to see very unique aircraft

Same But only because m one of "those" people that own nearly everything. ( minus civil stuff like christen eagle etc)

yes multicrew is planned As of an official ED roadmap update (April 15 2020) of things to come they are aiming for a MAY 2020 implementation of Huey multicrew. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=269757

they mentioned enhanced capabilities in a newsletter https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4160206&postcount=232 To quote " Following the free A-10C cockpit update, we will be releasing A-10C Warthog 2 in 2020. This will be a dramatic visual and systems upgrade to our A-10C. Once the new features have been finalized, we look forward to sharing them with you. In addition to DCS: A-10C Warthog 2 being available as a new module that will replace DCS: A-10C Warthog, it will also be available to existing A-10C Warthog owners at a significant discount." This strongly implies the paid retail upgrade will include enhanced new capabilities not present for current version of A10C in game beyond a "weathered cockpit" More recently in an interview mostly focused on P47, Nick Grey mentioned helmet cueing system. a direct question to is asked by a GR member to expand and clarify on the earlier statement made at 10:05 ( specifically 10:54)

Free to beleive what i want? Look whos talking. Your the one going round and round plugging your ears being dismissive of what was being stated in the interview. Your the one believing what you want. NOT the other way around. I don't know why you think HMCS is unbelievable for ED to develop for a paid upgrade of the Hog.

says the one who bringing it up in the first place.... Its your perception that its been swept under the rug. But if you look at the re updated roadmap Multicrew has not been forgotten, they are aiming for May 2020. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=269757

thats quite a different thing to compare a implementing a new a product feature within a aircraft module vs engine FPS optimization. So please don't use such false equivalency fallacy. Besides There is no fixed date on that..... Just because that hasn't happened yet doesn't mean they reneged on thier promise.

JHMCS can also do this in multirole fighters, but like that system you also have the option of not using it.

Its like you did not even read my response, and are just copy pasting a generic retort from another thread...... All i simply said is that it would be unreasonable to expect ED to really be lazy simply slap on HMCS on Suite 3.0 hog we currently have and expect to call it A10C 2.0... HOWEVER since you bring it up, , that being said given the context of the interview it would be quite dismissive for your to say otherwise since the interview and answer given are very much pertaining to the DCS product. So if HMD came to the A10C, there clearly would be more on the HOG 2.0 than just HMCS

why? cuse hes lucky enough so many hornets? :D

i think its pretty easy to deduce that if it gets HMCS, it means an A10C suite 7b , which we can expect a whole slew of other stuff that came in between after suite 3.0 through to 7, and not merely HMCS slapped onto the current hog we have.

I know there is no hard definition. BUt generally there are aircraft generations for the sake of generalization, so as too not spent countless of hours looking at specific aircraft, but simply a generalized comparison of a group of aircraft from a given time period. even if some aircaft are behind in certain areas, or ahead in others. There are certain categories that are universally agreed upon by various nations. So what the OP wants by gen 1 jets, IS simply looking at ww2- korean era aircraft. A time period in aviation where Jets are not able to break sound barrier in level flight, before any sort of guided missiles ( gun fighters ) and mostly are day fighters. Gen 4.5 isnt sketchy. Its a fine midway point to make for non stealth aircraft designs in a post cold war era due to considerable improvements to the designs and level of modernization made in avionics technology from 70s-80s. I mean especially as of late you can essentially stick comparable level of avionics seen in gen 5 aircraft in a gen 4 airframe ( IE network centric capability, Modern displays , processing power, AESA radars etc etc.) the only thing older designs cant be made into are the very low RCS, because that essentially mandates designed a new airframe from scratch. I mean even looking a design that isnt totally made from scratch, there is still quite a significant difference in capability between a F16V block 70 and a F16A. that even that sort of aircraft could be fairly lumped into such a generation.

It really depends on the definition. most jets from ww2 to about korea are lumped as generation 1 due to falling under certain defining characteristics among various nations. Even though Mig15 or F86 are no doubt better than say a Me262.

Yes both are lightening 2 AT (same model)

would rather see F-86H. basically a better T/W ratio F86F with M39 revolving cannons, more modern unguided munitions( M117, Mk80 series, and Hydra rocket pods) and a larger payload. F86H would be interesting what if that never happened against a hypothetical Mig17F.

They probably would sell if they had a modern enough multi-role capable fighter derivative of flanker family , such as Su30MKI/SM, or especially larger extent Su35S, latter of which would feel like a full blown super fighter, relative to F/a18 or Viper. Unfortunately its such type of jets that aren't realistic to expect, especially from ED.

Razbam is actively developing the Mig23MLA. So its still not impossible to expect a 3rd party to do a Su17 or Su22. or perhaps a mig29A model since it also redundant, vastly exported, and even was formerly operated by ex warpact nations.

not exactly a fair comparison. Vintage mi24 helo to a modern flanker family fixed wing jet. They didnt deny not being able too russian helos. Certainly not antique versions. Only Russian fixed particularly modern flanker). The Mig24P they are making is a 1980s derivative of a helicopter that initially went into active duty service in 70s. ( they did the P because big bad 30mm cannon for anti tank) So far most remaining aged Mi24's have been withdrawn from active duty RUAF service. The modernized MI35M production is the replacement coupled with a number of MI24's rebuilt to Mi35 standards.

title of the thread should be changed as there countless aircraft listed that are not even jets.

Against a sabre you can easily disengage at will, be it tomcat, hornet or viper , purely because all of them have vastly superior T/W ratio and top speed that is so disproportionately better to the sabre they may as well be UFO', making typical dog fighting entirely unnecessary. Its not exactly a winning strategy to bet that all pilots are so dumb as to not be able to do anything other than do horzontal turn pulling as much as they can on their stick to fly in circles. The only missiles sabre could ever carry would be a pair of Aim9B's which are such absolute **** and have extreme limitations for their launch parameters they entirely unsuitable for any meaningful BFM manuvers, not to mention are easily spoofable even when flying in a straight line.

there is quite a bit if open source information on such systems, especially datalinks. Particularly Link 16 that you can model many aspects of applications of it it fairly accurately.