Nerd1000

Given that there seems to be large amounts of relevant documentation and many RAAF pilots who are keen to talk about it, I must say I'm surprised that RAZBAM are building a Mirage IIICJ rather than a Mirage IIIO.

Prior to DCS Eagle Dynamics made Lock-On: Modern Air Combat (LOMAC) and its successor Flaming Cliffs 2. The FC3 module basically started out as a transplant of the content from FC2 and LOMAC into DCS, though it has since been updated and upgraded with new flight models and 3D geometry.

The little ones are the touchiest from what I've read. My chopper experience is limited to the V977 as I'm too poor to afford a bigger machine (I'd probably just break it in a crash anyway). That's a nice cub there. The only scale model I have is a foam Cessna 172- unfortunately the scale effect is spoiled by the red electrical tape covering the huge dents in the wings (sudden interface with tree :cry:). I mostly do depron scratch builds now.

I have a little WLtoys V977 cyclic pitch heli (weighs like 12 grams). There's an option for high rates, but even on low rates the thing is so responsive that I rarely move the sticks more than 1/4 of their travel, even when doing stunts like flips or stall turns (Full disclosure- I'm really bad at stunts, and that little heli has survived a lot of crashes). The 3-axis gyro stabilizer on that thing is amazing- I'd probably never get it off the ground if it used a flybar.

Absolutely. You may have seen people talking about 'energy' in the context of dogfights- energy is a combination of your speed and altitude, and the more you have the more likely you are to win. When the flankers are going 270 knots and you are going 500 knots, you have a big energy advantage- you can spend that energy doing maneuvers straight away, while the flankers must build up speed first (or settle for reduced turn rate). Fuel-wise, the Flanker has BIG fuel tanks- unlike the F-15 it is designed to carry all of its fuel internally, so a Flanker on full fuel is in a similar position to a F-15 with a couple of drop tanks loaded. Reducing their fuel load to 50% will make them a lot more maneuverable.

It isn't lawn mowing if you haven't got a prop to cut the grass with ;). IMO the only time you should be flying the A-10 low enough to make Betty shout at you is when you're too focused on other things (like that incoming SA-15 :eek:) for her to annoy you.

I read that are also some that use a UV sensor alongside the IR one- I guess the seeker will only track IR signatures that are not accompanied by a UV signature. the counter to that strategy is making a flare that is larger but operates at a lower temperature.

My problem when attacking helis with the R-60M is that by the time the missile gets tone you're practically inside minimum range. This is vs a Ka-50, attacking from slightly above, side aspect (so the missile is looking right down his exhaust pipe). In my experience AI helicopters are also psychic and will know to launch flares the moment your missile leaves the rail, even if you fire from directly astern where they have no windows :music_whistling:

The problem is that the server involved has impostors set to the largest size. Medium is far more sensible.

The AI use simplified flight and damage models, so this kind of strangeness isn't really out of the ordinary. They also have total omniscience, which is why IR SAMs can shoot you while hiding amongst trees.

Fair point- I was under the impression that the seekers were truly modular and interchangeable. Obviously that was not the case.

It is certainly plausible given that the R-55 and R-3S use the same seeker- swapping to the R-3R seeker might well have been as simple as crimping a few wires together.

According to the manual the engine relight system depends on an auxiliary oxygen supply that only lasts a couple of uses. Oxygen is consumed so long as the mid-air relight switch is on, so if it takes too long the first time you're likely to be unable to re-start the engine again.

Indeed, demand for British built merlins in other aircraft (e.g. engines for the 2-stage mosquitoes) would definitely have contributed too.

Does anyone else have trouble seeing the Nav lights on nearby MiGs? Over short distances I can see the lights of planes like the A-10 clearly even during the day, but the MiG's lights seem to disappear as soon as I'm more than 10m from the jet, even at night.

Consider the difference between the Republic of China (aka Taiwan) and the People's Republic of China (aka China).

My suspicion is that by 1944 Merlin 266s from the US were available in greater numbers than UK-built Merlin 66, leading to most late war production of merlin spitfires being Mk XVIs (also remember that 2-stage Griffon versions were ready, so Supermarine were probably scaling back Mk IX production to make room for Mk XIVs).

What speed are you turning at? It can make a big difference- I easily follow the F-5 in my MiG at speeds above 800 km/h but at slower speeds I have a lot more trouble. In the vertical, I'm yet to be out-climbed by a F-5 . Loops are a different matter because a loop is also a turn, albeit one in the vertical rather than the horizontal. Based on what you say it seems that the F-5 is in similar straits to the MiG when it comes to fuel use in combat, so I was wrong to suggest exploiting the MiG's thirst for kerosene in a dogfight.

Be careful relying on vertical maneuvers vs the MiG- he has a better TWR and top speed, so while your better turn rate will let you win in loops and similar moves the MiG can quickly gain an advantage if you use many climbs and dives. Another note- the MiG's afterburner drinks fuel like a Russian alcoholic whose wife has left him, especially at low altitude. That means that you don't actually need to win a 1v1 dogfight- if you can force the MiG to stay in afterburner for more than a couple of minutes he will probably end up on bingo fuel and be forced to retreat, presenting you with an easy shot.

But... muh 2g launch limit...:cry:

Given the current issues it might make sense for MiG vs Tiger missions to restrict AAMs for the MiG-21 and the F-5 to R-3S and GAR-8 respectively. It might make dogfights a bit more intersting too...

I got killed by a AIM-9P5 in MP not long ago. Of course at the time I was in a full afterburner 30 degree climb, not maneuvering at all, and was unaware of the presence of an F-5 behind me (in other words, I was the easiest possible target).

what's the deal with the +25lbs spitfire line? Shouldn't it be very similar to the 'DCS Spit IX' line at altitudes where the supercharger can't make more than 18lbs?

I haven't noticed much wandering of the nose, but I agree on the floating during landing- I now consistently overshoot my desired landing point because the plane 'floats' a lot more when you flare for touchdown. No biggie, just need to not pull back so hard on the stick.

That's why I said 'in theory' rather than 'in practice'. :smartass: