Chrinik

So the A-10C module is how many years old and went through how many fixes? And the M2K is how many years old and went through how many fixes? Sure, you can criticize a product as soon as people start demanding money for it, no problem there. But you can also wait 5 years until all the issues are ironed out and the accepted level of quality has been reached and buy it then. Noone stops you from doing that. So please, don´t complain about a raw steak you just ordered and payed for before I even threw it on the grill, just because the steak of the guy next to you was done perfectly 5 minutes ago. Also, consider that the US DoD probably payed for the A-10C module preemptively (the one we got being an off-shoot of the one they developed to train real A-10 pilots)...unless they didn´t, in which case I retract the statement.

I hope you realised this was from 2014 and you just necroed a year old thread.

This is my entry. Some Flanker love. I couldn´t get the DCS Logo on the pic.

Regarding "flare resistant Aim-9". http://aviationweek.com/blog/we-didn-t-know-what-90-percent-switches-did The last paragraph details the problems with "testing" flare resistant heat seekers.

I think people are so giddy for the F/A-18 C they literally wish every plane is one. Since they can´t wait. I mean, the F/A-18 C will be the first aircraft (I consider FC3 to be toys) in this sim that can literally do everything. Carrierops? Check. GBUs? Check. ARMs? Check. ASMs? Check. Mavericks? Check. Air to Air? 12 Spamraam check. So yeah, M-2000 C S5 RDI can not use ARM, ASM or any of that sort...we should be lucky it can even drop GBUs, even if they require buddy laze.

Very nice. I´ll go ahead and do that.

Well, I thought that organizing large numbers of people to overtake a server entirely is a little harsh...so I settled for just one day XD

Honestly, I come to realise more and more that their "unique thrust and force distribution" will reference a prop plane... Yaaaaawn...Sorry guys, but I don´t really care much for WW2 Prop planes in DCS, there´s tons of WW2 plane sims out there for that scenario. Seen them all before. Not to dampen your spirits, you guys can get exited about WW2 planes all you like, I´m fine with that. But if the "mystery" planes would both be WW2, I´d be disappointed. More interested in early 70ies-late 80ies birds.

I was thinking for a bit and decided to kick this idea out to the masses to decide. Alot of people, including me, seem to like the MiG-21, despite it´s age and apparent lack of on-par enemies to fight, it attracts alot fo people simply by being a well made, very fun fighter/interceptor to fly and use. So I thought, why not pick a day a month and make an Event centered around the MiG-21. First of all, you MiG-drivers are probably gonna like the idea anyway, but what I would be really interested, is all you mission- and scenariodesigners, aswell as serverhosts. Give some plane apropriate tasks (No SEAD missions, f.e.), have one side be whatever, the other side is nothing but MiG-21s in very large numbers (4-1 ratio or even 5-1 in favor of the MiG) This would mean a single Eagle would find itself fighting 4-5 MiGs...this would probably create an interesting challenge for both sides. And of course their could be Bomberintercepts, some Mudmoving etc. to spice things up. So, anyone interested?

Ich habe ja auch gesagt, das keiner ein Problem damit hat, ihm zu helfen. Es klang für mich und andere nur so, das er einen "Flightinstructor" sucht, der ihm alles beibringt, und das natürlich unregelmäßig weil es nach seinem Zeitplan gehen soll, sorry wenn ich da seine Posts und den Threattitel als Anhaltspunkt für seine Absichten herangezogen hab, statt meine Vorstellungskraft. Da muss man schon ein bisschen Eigeninitiative zeigen. Und das bei euch keine Gegenleistung erwartet wird, und dann zählst du mir die Gegenleistungen auf...naja.

From what I read from RAZBAMs updates, the Super 530D will pretty much outrange both of them by a large margin. But we´ll have to wait and see.

No...you don´t even know how much difference the two MFCDs and the navigation and computer systems behind them make. Even if you restrict the weapons and no TGP...a true 80ies scenario can pretty much only be archieved with FC3 and MiG-21. MiG-21 was (and is) still in mainstay use by some countries at that time. Amraam was not in operational use in the Gulf War, B version was introduced in 94 and C version in 96 so that´s out. Sparrow it is. But you probably already knew that. SU-25s in the beginning of Afghanistan carried KH-25Ls, not MLs tho. MLs came out later as said by Basher.

In closing I want to say that this issue could be resolved if we removed the C amraam from the game. I mean, serriously...why is the C variant even in FC3? It was specifically designed to be carried internally by the F22 Raptor back in the day. :lol: I mean, what are we complaining about, FC-3 is a game...F-15 is best in BVR, SU-27 is best in everything else, since the F-15 can´t even carry any air to ground, while the SU-27 can. I fly the 33 as a strike-fighter most times anyway since it´s plentiful hardpoints give me a good selection of weapons to carry. Since we don´t know which Amraam C we have in the sim, I am going to assume the first batch. The R-27ER had a much longer burntime and more thrust, creating a longer ranged missle then the Aim-120. This negated SARH disadvantages as when you can shoot sooner, you have the advantage. The Eagle (or whoever) would have had to press the attack with a missle underway at him. Doable, as at these extreme ranges, flight times and closure rates where higher then in DCS. This was changed in subsequent updates to the C variant 120. It´s later variants do indeed outrange almost anything with some boasting ranges closer to the Pheonix then any "medium range missle" has the right to have. But it would be an interesting "balance" for DCS, sure, the Eagle gets active missles that can be launched stealthily, but the 27 has more range, so different tactics have to be employed by both. Of course, this is based on googleable data. I am sure Missle PK data exists for both relevant missles, but especially when they come from the militaries that employ them, expect data to be skewed downwards by X% as having publically available information about how your equipment performs is still a big nono for many big players. I have spend too much time with military intelligence personell to not suspect everyone to be lying at all times. It just benefits you, as Sun Tzu already said. So let´s all agree to stay on topic now, If anyone has rebuttals to my comment, please, I have a PN box. To stay on topic now, I wish ED will fix missle aerodynamics and tracking issues and all that fun stuff, especially since it´s a big part of the sim to lob missles at each other. The BVR ranges in this game are laughable, and ED confirmed this, saying that missle performance at 12000[?] feet and above was "acceptable" but anything below was way too low...boosting the ranges for the lower altitudes resulted in "outrageous performance" at higher altitudes. So they are looking into that. What they could also fix would be the indefinate ECM Jamming bull that is going on in DCS for, what I believe to be, ever. The reason why jammers have an off button is that they can only run a very limited amount of time. Very short in fact. The F-15Cs jammer for example, when turned on, requires 80% of the entire airplanes cooling capacity just to run, and then still randomly breaks, is a harsh mistress to maintain, and even if nothing breaks, after 5 minutes it starts melting out the back of your aircraft... Fighter sized jammers are not indefinately usable is what I am trying to convey. The nature of "take off, music on" is also hurting both the sim, and the russian birds as for some reason their TWS doesn´t work if there is a single jammed threat anywhere. It reduces combat ranges, and skews they way actual BVR combat was fought, the radar screen wasn´t full of jammed contacts everywhere, you would use the jammer if you noticed a bandit is looking at you, to mask your movement to get critical advantages (like climbing, going cold, whatever you decide to do really), and then turned it off again when the threat was dealt with.

Have you ever flown the SU-27, Mig-29, A10 or SU-25? Point pipper at target, hold trigger, pull level, wait for bombs to drop. Who needs a targeting pod for that? Even with a targeting pod, CCRP is considered less accurate then CCIP because there is no way you will hit the exact spot you need. The only reason the A-10C does it with the TGP is when it drops LGBs and the terminal guidance relies on the TGP to paint the target with the laser...try CCRPing in it with dumb bombs and see how much the TGP helps you...not alot. If you need to be that close to spot a tank, CCIP is your friend. Otherwise, I have no problems spotting a tank target from a couple kilometers out with the mk.1 Eyeball, putting a pipper on it, and pulling level in time. Computer does the rest. Then you go on and compare the RADAR with that of the MiG-21...serriously, have you even googled the Mirage 2000 C? You are sick of flying old tech, yet, even the A-10C in this module is old by now and we won´t ever get a truely "modern" aircraft because the tech is classified to such high degrees nobody could do anything about it. And even if you flew a modern bird yourself and made the module yourself, you´d be sued by your government and the maker of the original plane for releasing classified data to the public. So sorry, 80ies and 90ies tech it will be for a while.

What about it? They aren´t adding anything in terms of capability or weapons, just updating the cockpit and FM to be in line with the rest of the FC-3 aircraft.

Anticipation is rising, pre-ordered it to show RAZBAM there is money to be made in DCS for high level combat aircraft... Atleast it wasn´t another god damn trainer, then I wouldn´t have bothered. I usually don´t preorder anything and wait for release as I feel it´s unhealthy to pay upfront for something you have no idea you will enjoy, but this time, I made an exception, since it´s the first fighter after the release of the MiG-21...and while we love the Fishbed, it just can´t serriously compete in the modern arena. Hope the servers will make room for extra Mirage slots over FC3 models now.

The same way they work in the SU-27 and Mig-29? They also have no designators, but guess what, they have COMPUTERS...they do all this hard math-sh!t for the pilot. Also, you don´t get MICA because you get a version that can´t use them. And from what I heard 40km range above 7000m sounds plenty enough to compete with any old FC3 toy.

What´s stopping you? Load also means fuel, real militaries need to keep track of that. Why carry 12 missiles when 4 are enough? Load decreases range, when you need to go far, you go light. So having more customization options would be neat.

They don´t fly it because it doesn´t have stealth spamraams. If you´ve ever seen cockpit footage of a SU-27 in flight, the amount of waggeling the pilot does with the stick is hillarious to watch. It´s the best fighter in the world, doesn´t mean it´s easy to fly... Mig-29 will not have this problem, since it´s designed differently.

No...it´s very close. Probably shortly after the release of 1.5.

Du redest viel von der Gemeinschaft...aber das ist das Problem. Du willst nicht Teil der Gemeinschaft werden. Lediglich die gleichen Interessen zu haben, wie ich, macht einen nicht zu einem Teil der Gemeinschaft. Was kannst du dafür tun, und zurück geben? Du kannst ja nicht mal die Zeit aufbringen, die nötig wäre. Jemand soll also seine Zeit für dich Opfern, Zeit, in denen er Geschwadermitglieder ausbilden oder selber Spaß haben könnte, nur um es dir leichter zu machen. Ich bin auch in keinem DCS Geschwader, wohl aber in IL-2, ich lerne wo ich kann. Ich erwarte aber keinen Privaten Flightinstructor, der mir alles beibringt. Brevity codes stehen im Netz, setz dich hin und lern vokabeln. Ich hab auch wenig Lust und Zeit regelmäßig IL-2 zu fliegen, aber das JG-4 kennt meinen Level, weiß das ich mit den Funkbezeichnungen klar komme und auch mal Stunden lang eskorte fliegen kann, ohne das ich rummecker. Ich kann mich also jederzeit zu Missionen Anmelden und vorbeikommen. Sorry wenn das hier zu aggressiv klingt, du erwartest viel und gibst zu wenig. Guck dir die Informationen an, die im Internet verfügbar sind, tutorials gibts genug. Die hat die Gemeinschaft zur freien Verfügung gestellt. Probier sie selber aus. Mal zusammen zu fliegen und ich geb dir ein paar Tipps ist was völlig anderes, als sich ausbilden zu lassen, vergiss das niemals. Niemand hat was dagegen, dir zu helfen. Dich ausbilden, sorry, dafür hat kaum jemand die Zeit, ohne das es ihnen etwas bringt (Geschwadermitglied etc.)...und selbst dann wird nicht jeder individuell, sondern alle gleich ausgebildet, fehlt man bei einer lektion, pech. Ich hab keine Lust dich Wochenlang auszubilden, in dieser Zeit ja nicht privat fliegen zu können, nur damit wir uns nie wieder sehen. Nein, sorry, dafür arbeite ich in Vollkontischicht, da geht das nicht. Es ist einfach so das die Leute hier auf ihrem Level sind, weil sie entweder privat oder in Sims viel Zeit ins Lernen investiert haben. Das dauert mitunter JAHRE! Führ dir das vor Augen und frag dich was du wirklich verlangst. Jemanden der dir tipps gibt und hilft? Kein Problem. Jemand der dir alles haarklein beibringt, bis dus kannst? Vergiss es.

RAZBAM are new in DCS and a relatively established dev in FSX, the Mirage 2000 C looks to be close to release so why the salt? Also, making a Harrier is harder then you think...if you wanna do it right, you need licencing approval from the actual makers, lest you be sued into oblivion. Making something that looks like a Harrier and kinda flies like one is easy, but the systems that are critical to DCS, RADAR, weapons and the like, are an entirely different ballgame. See RAZBAMs harrier in FSX Eventually, you will get a Harrier, but stop demanding it like you are entitled to it.

Yeah, if the 104th crew would litter the mountains with MANPADs, we wouldn´t have this problem, now would we? But the server culture in DCS is very different. I see the 104th as the game server, something where the rules aren´t as tight, the missions aren´t as complex and the community just comes together and exchanges ammunition. The inclusion of all available machines is a dead giveaway. And yes, the leading cause of death is INS guided Slammer to the face. It is infuriating the level of technological difference we have to bear, the 27ER atleast had a range advantage. But that´s neither here nor there. I find that as the numbers of DCS level modules increase and they actually are combat worthy planes, not friggin trainers, the nature of missions will change. The 104th will see both sides drowning in F15s (for the newbs), F14s and F18s, Amraams(and pheonixes XD) going every which way, and the COOP servers will be able to create more dedicated missions of NATO vs. PACT AI. Sure, compstomping might sound boring to you as a true dogfight can only be archieved by human vs. human. But unless we get some proper modules on the OPFOR side we can´t have a realistic, balanced mission. The only setting we can have proper dogfighting in right now is Korea, with both the Sabre and the MiG-15 available, but the rest of the sim doesn´t provide era specific units and assets to play around with, thus making mission design very limited. All in all, the current nature of DCS combat lies in the simple fact that availability of modules is low...we only have one dedicated fighter module out right now, one dedicated ground attack plane (and they are decades apart)...and even in the near future, the plane advantage will go towards NATO craft. But since DCS is a Sandbox, I rather enjoy flying COOP missions, like Doctors Operation Pinholes. Random fighter spawn in the black edition (mig-15, Sabre,Mig-21 and 23(to my suprise) and the availability of AWACS means that even the Mig-21 drivers get to do and practice their thing, protecting the groundpounders from enemy incursion. I had some proper intense dogfights on the tfs-51 servers with a swarm of Sabres against my threeship of MiG-21s. Well, Iran has a couple F-14s...I heard ED is focusing on the Iranian faction...let´s see how that turns out.

People will bitch and moan about everything. You can´t please all. While I have a couple people complaining about the SU-27s constant need for trim, the F-15 is also in for a FM update, lets see reactions to that XD On the other hand, FBW systems should allow for hands off flying, as it counteracts the aerodynamic instability. That´s how they advertise it anyway...but comparing the flight behavior between FBW on and FBW off, I think it helps plenty XD The MiG-29 has no such FBW systems because it is aerodynamically stable. It will fly differently and more fluently then the unstable SU-27 while still retaining remarkable turntimes.

The Radar of the MiG-21 is not a search radar, more like a targeting system. Both are not BVR capable, but the MiG-21 is faster, higher, in every respect. The L39-ZA can defend itself against a MiG, but it probably will have issues properly dealing with them, as all the MiG has to do is Boom and Zoom and egress outside the ZAs weapon envelope.