BlackLion213

+1 Don't judge till release, lots of things may be tweaked and things like lightning conditions effect the look. Best to check it out on your own computer. MiG-21 has a custom afterburner effect, I agree that it looks really good. -Nick

I'm pretty sure you had it right. He was trying to clarify that "advanced" meant further along in development, not more modern or sophisticated. Little has been said on that front until recently, (September update) that some of the systems on "mystery aircraft 1 or 2" are more complicated than the Tomcats. Thats how I interpreted it. -Nick

I just read an article on the history of flight and there was a subsection discussing military aviation. The author specifically mentioned that the Swedes were unique masters of system and sensor integration (author was not Swedish BTW). I've also heard that the Viggen's datalink system was very advanced /effective for it's time. I don't see this as a contradiction or an endorsement. -Nick

Thank you for the clarification. One question that keeps running across my mind...will either of the upcoming "modern-ish" theaters present an opportunity for realistic missions in the MiG-21 as well? Best, Nick

Excellent, great to have you and feel free to share anecdotes at will. :D -Nick

Nice! I missed your response, that's great insight and it's awesome having someone with your access to information. I hear that was a common practice before the TCS was integrated into the fleet. The F-15 pilots did the same thing for a quite a while (like through the 1980s - perhaps till they received their NCTR system). Thank you for the anecdotes and welcome to the DCS forum. :) -Nick PS - thanks for the offer to get questions answered. What squadrons did your father deploy with?

No need to apologize for the right choice. ;) I don't think that IRS/IRST would be appropriate for any F-14A after 1975. The plan for a mid-1980s F-14A is definitely the right one. :thumbup: -Nick

You're probably right, I looked around back in April and couldn't find any evidence that the APG-69 upgrade ever happened for US F-5s. It was mentioned on many website, but no comment on dates of the upgrades or numbers. Also, all US documentation is for the AN/APQ-159, including the newer F-5N. It might be that there were hopes to upgrade to the APG-69 (after it was developed for the F-20), but it never actually came to fruition. -Nick

Nice! :thumbup: Love these pictures. -Nick

It's true that the USAF Phantoms had dual controls and WSOs had formal flight training. However, the USN had a different policy, primarily because landing on a carrier was simply not feasible for someone in the rear seat, at least for aircraft with rear seat visibility like the Phantom or Tomcat. As such, none of the USN Phantoms had rear controls and the RIOs (different name than their USAF counterparts) did not receive any flight training. They underwent NFO training instead of the Pilot training. The same carried forward to the Tomcat, which also had no rear controls of any kind. One of the benefit is that RIOs were highly committed to their craft in a way that a GIB might not be....GIB stands for "Guy In Back". The IIAF and IRIAF used pilots as their RIOs instead of dedicated RIOs and many felt that this lead to less competence in the RIO role. Mostly because GIBs simply dealt with their time in the RIO role, focused on returning to the front cockpit whenever they could. -Nick

Wow, didn't realize that things were already so functional a year ago. Great video, even with DCS 1.2. Also, love the website. :thumbup: -Nick

That's a great article, it's buried in my library somewhere. Fortunately, nothing mentioned about the F-14D doesn't also apply to the F-14B. The F-14D had much more modern avionics, a different ARI, better cockpit ergonomics, new HUD, and shared the APG-71 radar with the F-15E. However, it's aerodynamic performance and ACM capability is essentially identical to the F-14B; as is it's payload and A-G capability. So don't worry, you're not missing out on much with the F-14B. :thumbup: -Nick

Yes, the MiG-21Bis is my favorite module and I spend about 75% of my DCS time flying it. It is VERY well done. Part of what impressed me about the MiG-15 was it's ability to pry me out of the MiG-21 for a weekend. ;) The Belsimtek modules also really impress me and I own all them...even though I'm a dreadful helo pilot...need to practice more! I can't wait for the F-5E and would love to see a MiG-17 or MiG-19 in the future. I think VEAO might be planning a Hawker Hunter and they have several early jets (not transonic) in development as well. Still, I'm amazed at how many excellent modules I have at this point. The MiG-15 and F-86 are a lot of fun to fly and I love the diversity of experience offered thus far. I hope things continue to expand instead of changing direction. :) -Nick

That's really impressive, excellent work! I flew the MiG-15 a lot over the weekend, I agree that it's one of the best DCS modules currently available. We really need a Korea Map! I look forward to seeing more, perhaps you will also create a few liveries with your template. :music_whistling: -Nick

Well yes...that was the state of air combat from the late 1950s-early 1970s. Turbofan engines, the ability to carry a useful load of fuel, and good sensors have totally transformed the situation. But some of us like the historic experience (I strongly prefer it actually: 1940s-1990s). The Phantom was full of faults (in fairness, it's front-line service life was shorter than the development time for the F-22), but in terms of what the USN and USAF wanted (speed, rate of climb, and sensors), it was one of the best fighters in the world. Hence, all 3 services and many US allies chose it. It definitely had limitations (early dogfights between Phantom crews and Skyhawk crews left the Phantoms flabbergasted at their failures - before the days of DACT mind you), but it certainly got the job done. -Nick

Thank you for this poll, I'm glad there is real interest in all of these topics. I voted for new theaters since thats what many of the current DCS modules need to complete the experience. That said, a Dynamic Campaign is much like the huge upgrade offered by DCS1.5 - it enhances all of the existing modules and would make any campaign much more realistic. Would probably increase the relative value of DLC campaigns as well. I also think more 4th gen fighters is sure to be popular, I couldn't say no to any of them. My 2 cents, Nick

That's fair, I didn't know that much that phase of IRST. I'm glad to hear that it performed as advertised. As always, I appreciate the info. :) Yeah, the F-14D was such a brutally capable A-A platform. Amazing that they crammed so much capability in to one airframe. -Nick

Well, isn't that the same view? We both said it was of little value once the F-14D became prioritized in the strike role, hence it was not maintained. I agree that the system is helpful for A-A against stealthy targets or during periods of EMCON - but it was often used to complement other systems or EW. That's what I've heard. I didn't realize that a similar system has been integrated into the Super Hornet - that's interesting. :) -Nick

Nope, that's the F-14D. It was also deactivated later in the F-14D's service life since it didn't prove real useful and the USN lost interest in maintaining it. I think that it would be a helpful sensor under the right circumstances. The very early F-14A (like 1st cruise on Enterprise in 1974-75) had an experimental system on many of the aircraft. This aircraft has it, it resembles the TCS or bullet fairing, but is more spherical and the sensor is very dark/black: It wasn't used again until the F-14D received the improved version. -Nick

VF-84 is also featured in the background of the F-14 website, I suspect that it is well-liked at Leatherneck. I think this is an F-14 reference, not a Phantom reference. The Phantom era helmet insignia looked different from the Tomcat era - this helmet (and also the oxygen mask) are definitely Tomcat era. Here is a drawing of the Phantom era helmet insignia (drawing is the best I could find): -Nick

Tirak (as usual :)) gave a really nice overview of DCS. I'll add a few of my thoughts in addition to the great advice thus far. One of the great things about DCS is that the quality across the different modules is quite consistent and VERY high. Several of the modules are incomplete, mostly pending the EFM flight model (Hawk and C-101), but all the full DCS modules are very detailed with excellent flight models and beautiful 3D models. This means that you can pick an era or aircraft type that appeals to you and know that the module will be an excellent rendition. As opposed to aftermarket aircraft in FSX/P3D where there are huge variations in fidelity/quality between different payware add-on aircraft. Also, the F-15C and Su-27 have PFM flight models (the best kind vs SFM), excellent 3D models, but simplified cockpit systems. They inexpensive (~$10 each) and are easy to start with if you like modern aircraft. Learning the systems of the A-10C is really involving (I haven't really tried yet). The MiG-21 is where I started and I found it to be perfect in terms of "modern performance" (very fast and excellent rate of climb), simple yet accurate avionics, full EFM (high fidelity/advanced physics) flight model, and moderately challenging flight characteristics. Landing needs to be by the book, but once you get the hang of it, not too hard. The quality of the MiG-21 in terms of visuals and flight experience is second to none (at least for me :)). Therefore, I would pick an aircraft or era that appeals to you and try it out. Be prepared to open up the manual to avoid catastrophe. Also, many expect take-off to be no problem and the challenge to start once you're airborne, but DCS can be challenging start to finish. Don't get discouraged if you crash a lot at first. The WWII birds are quite hard to get into and out of the air, but with practice it's great fun. Lastly, I also returned to flight sims/computer stuff after a 12 year hiatus. TrackIR really makes a difference. I picked it up about 6 months after starting with DCS (8 months after returning to flight sims) and it's difficult to fully appreciate these cockpits until you have it - 6DoF is a really big deal! The degree of immersion is remarkable for sitting in a chair and looking at a screen. It adds so much to the experience and if can get it, I HIGHLY recommend it. I hope this info is helpful. DCS1.5 with TrackIR and good controls has so vastly exceeded by expectations of what a home flight experience can be. I hope you enjoy it too! -Nick

Thanks guys, I appreciate the thought nonetheless. :) -Nick

Cobra changed his avatar again. His current one is a Tomcat helmet with VF-84 markings. Here is how it was first posted on the LNS facebook page: In short, it's another Tomcat reference. -Nick

Nice video. Though if I get any more fired up, I'll simply burn to the ground...(insert combusting emoji...but we don't have one). :) Though, this video reminded me of a few funny coincidences regarding the Tomcat's combat record. The Tomcat (in USN service) shot down 5 aircraft - 4 conventional and 1 Helo (Mi-8 ). The conventional aircraft were all Libyan, one encounter in 1981 and another in 1989. 1. Both types of aircraft shot down were also Variable Geometry fighters (Su-22 and MiG-23). 2. Also, the aircraft side numbers were weirdly similar between the 2 encounters: 102 and 107 in 1981 and 202 and 207 in 1989. 3. Also, in spite of the F-14s unprecedented BVR ability, 4 kills were made with the AIM-9 and 1 with the AIM-7 - showing the huge influence of ROE in how an encounter proceeds. Anyway, bit of Tomcat combat trivia. -Nick

This sounds awesome! You're not kidding about the Gazelle being a lightweight machine. It's empty weight is less than that of a Mazda Miata...but with 590 shp! Thank you for your impressions. :) -Nick