Chrinik

Maybe they should just go all out and release a "M-2000 E" variant of their module...Didn´t that use RDM?

RED side please check RED HQ on the forums. Thank you.

So on May 1st, 23:59...labor day. Got it, will be waiting. On a general note, yes, LNS are massive teasers. But dems the breaks. I wonder if they are under some kind of NDA that doesn´t even allow them to talk about being under NDA...

Stop ****ing saying I said IR missles are active missiles, I NEVER SAID THAT. ****ing hell, I lumped them IN WITH active radar missiles while talking about lag-proof tracking. I said "Active radar missles (including IRs) look for targets" (paraphrased)...this might have been confusing phrasing but I never said IRs are active...could have said Fire and Forget, yes. Sorry for agressiveness, but being misunderstood once is okay we resolved that, and then it got misunderstood again. And by the way, you are wrong. You can fire IR missiles without a lock and when it finds a suitable heatsource, it locks on to that and flies to that. It "actively" looks for targets with a passive sensor. This is why you can evade IR missiles WITH FLARES! That is why you don´t launch into the sun! That is why you call Fox-2 because friendly fire might occur when a friendly passes infront of your missile.

I know that, which is why I "included" them in the active section because they still "look for targets"...the fact they don´t give off emissions on their own makes them passive, but they still "actively" look for targets on their own, thus making them lag-resistant. Instead of relying on your AC to tell them where to go. My phrasing might be off. Also, I did some experimentation with the AMRAAM...I heard alot of complaints that the AIM-120s maximum range would be somewhere around 15 nautical miles ingame and people complained and complained. So I went up to 40000 feet+, acelerated to over Mach-1 and launched on a similarily fast enemy on hot aspect from 40 nm...my Radar didn´t even lock him before Rmax, which was around 45-50nm... Similar results in the Flanker, 90km launch range for R27ER Ya´ll want BVR right now, gotta go high and fast, not play airquake XD

Jo passt soweit, ich hab da Urlaub, und werde denke ich mal auftauchen, wenn ichs nicht vergesse... Bin vor Kurzem umgezogen und hab entsprechend zu tun. Aber das wird schon.

Why should MW-50 explode or burn? I know methanol is combustable, but it´s mixed 50/50 with water... If anything, any burning methanol will be washed out by the water, and the mixture would reduce it´s combustability. Unless I´m missing something here, which is probable. And on the topic of DM in DCS...IL-2 Cliffs of Dover simulates damage very well and in depth. It´s kept a couple people from transitioning, because the DM is very basic in DCS compared to all other sims, and even warthunder to some degree. Awesome!

This sounds so strange. DCS is "designed" to simulate all sorts of sizes of engagements. But the Airfields tend not to be. As has been said, you can´t stuff 40 choppers into a large hangar and pull them out as needed, they have to be ramp parked, and that limits space. If the physical airbase doesn´t have the space, it simply doesn´t...it´s not like they made the airbases up, you can google-earth all of them. Beslan really is this shitty concrete strip, not much room for 30+ choppers.

Yes, you can... And I was just about to suggest that. Your problem is inherently a control input issue.

To make myself clear...I am also not that audience and I welcome these new realism features...as long as it´s universally applied accourding to all plane specifications. And I´m looking forward to all planes having wing-flex and G-loads and stores ripping off and dislodging and jamming because of high G...and Alpha-Vortexes....XD But as it stands, the Flanker is the only one and is the testbed for it. What I was getting at is that a steady steam of new blood needs to be introduced not only to DCS, but also to the different airframes, and right now, only the die-hard MEN could be convinced to learn the Flanker as it literally needs "work" to fly effectively. The rest will forever stick with the Eagle because it´s "easier". I heard that arguement so many times. During Blue Flag, the amount of people joining blue side and immediately asking why there is no amraams, and then subsequently disconnecting was amazing from what I´ve experienced. Yes, personally we don´t need them...but if everyone thought that way the number of simmers would drop over the years until only some die-hard seniors fly anything.

How about we also mess with track IR so that you can´t move your head under high-G loads? I mean, if you want to deactivate switches in high-G because of arm movement, why not head movement as well...can´t really see me looking up-left at a bandit and then pulling 9 G up into him without my neck straining. ............................................. While I understand that ED is most proficient with the Flanker, I kinda feel iffy about all of those updates hitting the flanker first as some kind of testbed...It´s hard enough getting newbies into the airplane without having to constantly remind them that they are actually limiting their "kill ratio" and have "more work to do" as compared to the Eagle...so they just all keep flying Eagles because easy kills = more fun. Newbies don´t know how rewarding the Flanker can be, argueing on that point is meaningless.

People always get confused by the slmod refering the messages to the players nickname. In essence, read the post PAST the colon and it becomes clear. "XXX killed YYY with ZZZ"

Unfortunately, you cannot switch to a SU-25T while in the SU-33 campaign.

Fo´shizzle, dawg. I think this thread has run it´s gambit.

Jammers are used to mask your movement to gain a positional advantage on an enemy in a BVR conflict, break missile locks or override/blind the supporting RADAR, depending on the type of jammer. They are also handy for when you have a visual on the enemy missle, as the missle cannot properly lead a jamming target, and will be easier to outmaneuver kinematically. There is also a reason why you can´t keep your jammer on for extensive amounts of time. Jammers are hard to maintain, break constantly because of their complicated electronics, and generate alot of heat. Anecdotally: I read reports that the internal Jammer for the F-15C can be used for 5 minutes, after which it will start "melting out the back of your jet"...it uses about 80% of the cooling capacity of the jet just to keep it running. External Jammers are cooled by the airflow, which is probably alot more effective then any internal system. However, in DCS, you can turn your jammer on on takeoff, and never have to bother with it. Even an arbitrary timer after which the jammer would break would fix this, and cause people to be more careful with jammers. There are a lot of gamey systems in DCS that affect missle performance, doing crazy maneuvers the missle is trying to lead will cause the missle to bleed all it´s energy, lag is one other such phenomenon. A SARH missile that looses lock because of a jink due to lag goes stupid, as they can´t reaquire targets (for some reason), an active missle (inclusing IR) will simply reaquire after a jink because they actively look for targets, and guess what is theoretically still right infront of the missle if it goes dumb....the target you initially launched at. So it just sais "Oh, there you are" and keeps going. So while ED could try to look at their code bases and missle tracking logics and fix various aspects to make the missles perform better (or closer to real life) I don´t think they want to given all of the more lucrative buisness options they currently have available.

Pro-Tip for Combat: Getting shot at sucks. Getting hit sucks even more. Avoid both as best as possible.

Ah, mist, verpasst...bin grad am Umziehen und hab nicht reingeschaut. Wär sogar erreichbar gewesen. Aber ab nächsten Monat sollte der gröbste Umzugsstress vorbei sein. Mal schauen ob ich dann auch mal vorbeikommen kann, wär bestimmt interessant, mal ein paar DCSler in echt zu erleben. Kenn sonnst nur einen. Und der Wohnt in Berlin XD Ich find übrigens Orte nahe des Hauptbahnhofs geiler, aus offensichtlichen Gründen der Erreichbarkeit, und weil man dann vielleicht sogar was trinken kann.

http://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=98 Verarschen? Es gibt einen Stammtisch in Hannover, andere Städte weiß ich nicht.

This sounds like a personal problem that can be easily fixed by training.

Remember that the P-51 was not designed to fight at 100% full tanks. It is very easy in DCS to just run an air start and put all planes at 100% fuel. The P-51D had to fly-off about 45 Minutes of fuel just to get into a decent trim again, because they crammed so much fuel into this thing to be able to do it´s stuff. On airshows, they typically do not load it up with full fuel because they don´t need to be going anywhere...they put in exactly what they need, plus an emergency amount and that´s it. Those Pilots would probably tell you how much of a bathtub the P-51 is with full tanks, if they even ever flew her that way.

And now is the Fighter Year(s)... Stay patient, by Christmas 2016 you guys will be missing the turkey because of all the awesome planes you got to fly around in.

Devs should just never say anything about projects ever and just suddenly release a product. That way, the community won´t tear them to shreds and Q.Q about the release date. You didn´t have a DCS:F-14 3 years ago so what´s a few more years. The most patient of communities has always been the flight sim community, but this seems to be reversed for DCS.

Then make the mod, run a server that runs the mod. Problem solved.

Are you sure that´s the correct TacView? I see an F-15 sortie where you down an IL76...

A: I was not talking about the Super Hornet. B: I did not mean it would replace the F-14, but rather then building and retrofitting weapon systems onto the F-14, it would have probably still been supplemented by F-18s in the case of war that carried those systems from the design drawings. So F-14s would fly Air superiourity for carrier launched F-18s and Strikers, with the F-18s doubling as close protection escorting the other strikers after the strike mission was completed. Maybe. We will never know honestly, so take this as what it is, my opinion.