Jump to content

Wizard_03

Members
  • Posts

    1594
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Wizard_03

  1. The FC3 model we have is also a franken-bird and is all over the place anyway. If they were to do a FF version it would probably need to be either super new or super early, or both.
  2. Not if you give it Aim-9x and JHMCS. There is certainly enough data available for a mid 2000s C eagle with all those bells and whistles. But if they stuck with the current In game available weapons of the franken-eagle we have now it's at a disadvantage sure. Especially against HOBS equipped one circle monsters like the hornet, and flanker. Even the MiG and viper can give it problems when they're rocking those. The mudhen may get 9x however raz has said they want to if there's enough info they can get their hands on. But it's still gonna be a pig compared to many of the dogfight specialists in game. A C eagle with them would be very competitive.
  3. It certainly won't be better from a kinematics perspective, It should do the job though like you said. For those on the receiving end it won't matter if you facing an F-15C or F-15E. You'll need to treat the mudhen with just as much respect at range. However atm the radar on the F-15C is SIGNIFICANTLY under performing, and so It may be quite the wake up call for those used to that when the F-15E comes out, because the FC3 Eagle has pretty much been abandoned by ED It and the Su-27S have identical ranges which is absolutely wrong and a holdover from FC3s "game balancing" days. Both aircraft (F-15C/E) should have pretty much the best radars in the game in terms of detection range and overall power. But based on how well the M2000s radar is modeled in the game I have high hopes for raz and the mudhen. So that alone will make it "better" and combine that with it's datalink you really won't be able to hide from F-15E like you can right now from the eagle. But imagine you survive all that and actually make it too the merge, and it STILL spanks you. That's F-15C. A Full FF F-15C will be able to give the eurofighter a run for its money.
  4. Fair enough, I know it's super minor but I absolutely love the look they have, just hoping we can replicate it in the sim one day. Development resources permitting.
  5. Definitely had them removed on shore based aggressors too.
  6. When y'all get around to modeling TARPS pod will/can we get the ECA for empty phoenix stations as well?
  7. The HB tomcat has one of the best 3D models in the game, to be fair, we're just asking for a little more visual options. Iranian tomcats did not use the tanks and the pylons are removed too so maybe when HB releases early/Iranian versions of the cat they can include this feature!
  8. The drop tank pylons should definitely be removable. Many aggressor/top gun birds had them removed. Especially early F-14As
  9. Wizard_03

    Link16/MIDS

    I'm not sure if Fighter to fighter D/L tracks appear on the radar page. Or if that's just a capability beyond suite 4, the information I found was unclear but apparently many modern aircraft can designate offboard tracks independent of ownship sensors. However regardless the SIT page will provide range and altitude for D/L tracks making it easy to cue the radar to the correct portion of sky. Not as Gucci as the hornet's MSI but it'll get the job done. But yes in any case F-15E with link16 will have an unprecedented airspace picture for DCS.
  10. 50 years ago the Eagle had its first flight and It still reigns supreme today. The legend lives on!
  11. Happy 50th anniversary for the Eagle. Hopefully we won't have to wait another 50 years to see a FF F-15C in DCS
  12. Happy 50th anniversary for the Eagle. Hopefully we won't have to wait another 50 years to see a FF F-15C in DCS
  13. Is this going to be implemented? It's on the master test button and is part of the startup checklist.
  14. Wizard_03

    Link16/MIDS

    So based on discord to answer my own question I can say D/L information is accessed through what is known as the SIT page. It's similar to the SA page in the hornet but without moving map capabilities. The jet doesn't use the same HAFU system the hornet has so D/L symbology is totally separate from ownship tracks like the viper at least for surv contacts from AWACS not sure about Fighter to fighter, and as far as I can tell the datalink information from AWACS, is limited to the SIT page and does not use any sort of MSI system to correlate tracks on the radar page or HMD like the hornet. Again not sure if peer network is different. I have a feeling it might be for the sake of BVR sorting. So overall you can get the same sort of information as the other link16 jets but there's less sensor fusion at it requires the pilot to do much of the correlation themselves. Which may not be that big of a deal since the radar we will be working with is much bigger and more powerful then the hornet or vipers so you won't need to rely as much on the D/L as you do in those jets. feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
  15. Wizard_03

    Link16/MIDS

    Can someone with more knowledge share some insight in how the DL is implemented in the mudhen? As I understand it should be included in the suite 4 SE we're getting. I'm just wondering what sort of functionality it has in comparison to the hornet and viper? Is it the same, better, worse, different ect. ?
  16. They're running out of reasons 'not' too do it lol
  17. It gives you three A2G weapon stations instead of two as the center one isn't used as a weapon station due to clearance and separation issues Its typically either fuel or nothing. (assuming were taking two bags which is pretty standard for strike missions) in addition to the a fore mentioned visibility benefits for the Lpod, very very common for USN/USMC hornets to be loaded asymmetrically both in double ugly and other configs. Single winder and single 120 are also common.
  18. Can we expect this item soon? REALLY bugs me lol Along with animated FCS Bit. I Only ask because in the last mini-update Wags teased the GBU-24 which is further down the list.
  19. Yeah again I have a poll that says otherwise, and besides we already have two A-10s, two FW-190s, Two maps that cover the same area, and pretty soon we're gonna get another KA-50, you can't tell me that resources are better allocated to those projects then a FF Eagle despite what RAZBAM is doing I don't see any conflict in sales as the two aircraft are; just that, two different aircraft and we already have variations on similar aircraft in game RN and they didn't/don't bat an eye at it. The hard part is the FM according to ED themselves and that is already in a release state, along with most of the related systems like hydro, and electrical even the FM with SAS off is complete along with stall and spin modes. Cockpit overhaul could be done with 3d scanning these days and is much much easier from an art perspective then it was when FC3 came out. Most of the switches are even animated in the current in game model. No new weapons need to be added with the exception of JHMCS and 9x (possibly) no complex A2G smart weapons or guided weapons and stores pages/info need be added since it doesn't use them. Based on how quickly they pumped out the viper I don't see the radar or weapon systems or datalink taking too much time since the ASM framework for them is already in place with the viper and hornet which are in fact MORE complex in that regard. Basically You have a half finished module out there that cost 10 bucks but with a little work you charge 4 to 6 times that much and people would buy it according to poll. I don't really see how this doesn't net them a bunch of money and us an Iconic plane that can be, should be in the game in a FF state for a relatively small amount of work compared with bring in a new aircraft from scratch. Evidently.
  20. Why? I have a huge poll showing people want it, overwhelming majority. Should be easy money for ya'll.
  21. Especially with jets where the HUD is your primary flight control instrument.
  22. Bingo, don't need the paddle for the slow speed nose authority and that alone is enough to kill the viper every time regardless. Get slow, get dead.
  23. Please. With normal gamma settings some of the HUDs specifically in the hornet and viper can get down right unreadable on a sunny day. This is a real life issue and not a bug and the real life solution is a pair of shades. I'm thinking like, an in game button to put them on. You could even have an option for the frames to be visible on the edge of the screen FOV like with the apache helmet display in setting or something. The MiG-21Bis has a helmet visor that can be put on via click box. Just need something like that for all the modern jets with bubble canopies and open glass HUDs. Please would improve Quality of life beyond imagination for me.
  24. First of all counter air isn't everything. The hornet is a much better strike fighter. It can carry more farther, and has a better selection of stores. Its a true multi-role. The F-16 is first and foremost a fighter, but you can also strap bombs to it, the multi-role capability in the viper was evolved over time including the ergonomics in the cockpit and systems which have the benefit of being integrated later after lessons had already been learned. The difference is the hornet had strike in mind as its central role from the get go, everything from stores management to weapon fire control integration is better in the hornet. You have much more control over getting the weapons on target and how that is accomplished. Which is critical because a lot of that functionality is important for the type of on the fly precision attack the hornet is required to preform. It can't rely on pre-planned missions as much as the viper can, and as a naval fighter, it may very well be the first or only available asset in theater to get the job done so It needs to be much more independent and have the ability to quickly and easily adjust its mission to changing circumstances while already air-born and en route to the mission area. The viper has the Ability to do many of the same missions, but its a lot more limited in some cases, one look at the JDAM page on the hornet vs the SMS page on the viper and you'll understand what I mean. The hornet is strike aircraft that can self escort. It's not really intended for the dedicated defensive counter-air role the viper was first designed for, It CAN do that mission but the viper is more suited to it. But on the other hand the viper makes a lot of sacrifices for that mission, stores and fuel capacity being chief among them. The hornet is a lot more balanced. As its the not the perfect jet for any given job but it CAN do pretty much any job. Which from a logistics standpoint is much more valuable these days. As having the perfect tool for the job at the right place at the right time in the right condition is going to be increasingly unlikely with the fast paced nature of modern conflict today. You need aircraft that excel in changing environments where you don't have the time to move in the absolute best of the best or doing so would cause you to loose an opportunity in the critical first hour first day of the war kinds of situations. The naval component of the hornet is very central to the way it was intended to be used. Deck space is limited so you need as much bang for your buck as you can get. Viper needs to be deployed in theater and have a nice big airbase with lots of intelligence and support to really shine. warhorse vs racehorse
×
×
  • Create New...