Wizard_03

Im sure that’s true, but how’s it’s nose pointing authority? Because in the bug I can dump all my energy for a kill at the drop of a hat. You can control the jet down below 100 knots and still generate angles. MiG-29s have loads of excess power too it causes them to overshoot more often then not. Their sabotaged by their own performance, it requires excellent throttle control, at high AOA to prevent doing that. In the hornet it’s effortless.

Sorry I’ve only read a little on it, eurofighters history is very confusing to me, and it’s hard to find good sources there seems to be a political haze over its whole development. Akin to F-35 levels of bias Anyways when I said design I meant when they agreed on a delta wing canard layout which is great for EM and terrible for high AOA (the wing acts like an air brake at high alphas) there’s a reason the F-22 and F-35 do not use delta wings. It’s the same reason the mirage gets trashed by the hornet, In this game. In this day and age I’ll trade all the energy in the world for the first shot. Preserving energy is of no use when the enemy is ahead of your 3-9 but your still in his/her WEZ. Now BVR is a different story. It seems to me, hurling MRMs at high speed/altitude is something the Typhoon excels at, and the hornet is awful at. I guess we will have to see though. There just seems like a lot “brochure” information floating around about the Typhoon and I’m skeptical of sensationalist claims that it’s THE best. Lol

Ok sweet thanks I’ll roll on back

Yeah I get the same thing, using the 445.75 Driver. Can anyone confirm rolling back to 445.74 fixes it?

The Hornet still has higher ITR :) It really comes down the pilot and the available weapons. Guns only, sure the eurofighter can easily spank anything, and against it you really just hoping the driver messes up. But with heaters and then HOBS in the mix, things start to even out real quick. T/W doesn't come in to play if your hit before the second turn. The Eurofighter was designed in the era of rear aspect weapons just like the eagle and viper. The hornet was not, it doesn't need to get behind you to kill you. Many folks thought the same things about the viper, that it would demolish everything in BFM especially against the hornet, but that just hasn't been the case. That said I'm excited to see what the typhoon can really do, I've heard nothing but praises about it, I'm very interested to see if it lives up to the hype.

I don’t understand people on this one. Ok yes they need to look at the dial rotation again, it Doesn’t work as it should yada yada however. 1st off your talking about an NDB navigational aid in a sim with 4 maps....most aircraft use NDBs as a back up and it’s got such little legs that you simply can’t get far enough away from your airbase for navigating beyond visual dead reckoning to matter... 2nd of all you can pre-set the NBD near and far beacons in the ME so it’s not completely useless. It’s changing them that’s broken. So yes it’s a problem but HARDLY game breaking lol i didn’t buy the MiG-19P for the wonderful Soviet ARK-5 system...I bought it for the two thirty millimeter guns and its massive engines...but that’s me, they work fine. P.S. Gunsight works perfect for me.

Not that we’ll actually get it in DCS but I’d love to hear the SD-10 disciples complain about Meteor out ranging them. :D

I see, thanks for the heads up. I’ll stop holding my breath every update for it lol

Mine got all screwed up too, tried it SP. No game option selected. Lost the whole profile. Just spitfire AFAIK Also getting weird errors floating around on the input screen in the UI had the center mouse button key box floating over the columns that seemed to disappear when I scrolled, very odd. Seems like the input file got corrupted somehow. Again just with the spitfire

Any word on OBC implementation on master test panel?

Thanks for the update.

Pilot on aircrew interview said it can sustain 9Gs without loosing speed or energy. And the one on fighter pilot podcast claims it can accelerate to Mach 1 from 200 knots in less then 5 seconds down low.

Same and the more I learn about the typhoon the more impressive it seems

Yeah It seems odd to me too, its definitely not what I imagined their source material would say, and surprising that even older generation aircraft have that implemented and ours wouldn't. But like I said its really EDs guess that matters at this point as we're already somewhat side skirting realism anyways.

I completely agree, if you gonna "throw it in" lets get all the goodies. But AFAIK its not 07 hornet specifically its a "mid-2000s" hornet, and they probably chose that nomenclature deliberately to give them breathing room from people on these forums. lol

That’s the thing just because you can find a picture of something doesn’t mean that it translates to a capability. To get the kind of high fidelity that some of us enjoy here requires that they get really really specific about which airframe, from which production lot, in what software state. Lot 20 hornets from mid 2000s in practice never ever carried LITENING at all at that time? Why? because they we’re all used exclusively by the USN at that time. Could they have carried it? Probably, if they were ashore attached to a MEU, maybe...but Did they? We don’t know. Which version of LITENING would they have used, if they did? We don’t know. So what does that mean for us? While it’s up to ED, and what they want to do because it’s a Frankenstein situation now. How they want to integrate a qusi-hypothetical configuration is really up to them. Also Your thinking of BRU-33 which was intergraded from beginning, for dumb weapons. As far as BRU-55 goes it may have been cleared at that time on lot 20s, it’s possible. But the OFP we have doesn’t support it for sure. So again unless you want to get really really specific we’re in Frankenstein territory. Adding LITENING at all was a concession in light of the specific aircraft they choose, so it’s up to them because we’re beyond RL at this point

That's what I think people don't understand, you still need a license from the manufacturer AND permission from the Russian MoD to make something like DCS: (Russian Plane) Since they are IN Russia and are a Russian company subject to Russian laws, in Russia. Russia :)

Because individuals begged and begged for a LPOD because apparently to those people without one the aircraft is completely useless. So ED compromised and gave us something less then ultra-realistic to please the masses. They probably only have documentation for early versions so you can't have your cake and eat it too, same story with mounting it on 4, same story with BRU-55, yadda yadda. In any case ATFLIR should have it regardless. Best to just wait for the realistic pod.

And this one: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=258337

I see, I was referring to this bug but maybe I’m wrong or something changed. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3957246

Based on the fact there is an MSI option for the radar attack page and that’s what the game manual says and that’s how it worked when MSI was released. If a donor and my radar sees the same contact I should get a full HAFU circle If my radar sees it and the donors does not I should get top half HAFU only If donor sees it and my radar does not I should get bottom half HAFU only At no point should I get bricks with MSI boxed

Yes but you shouldn’t have any bricks if there is an off board donor seeing the same track. Right now with LTWS and MSI enabled it shows all contacts as bricks on Radar Attack page, regardless of donor information.

More Specifically did LITENING II have that capability, with a non-EGI bird. Later versions of LITENING got lots of upgrades in fact modern versions of that pod are superior to ATFLIR in many ways. Could be a limitation of the version of LITENING we have.

It’s a bug that was introduced last year with TWS that they have yet to address.

Can anyone tell me the differences between T1 jets with SRP 4.0 and 4.1? @Spectre11 Thanks for the write up btw!