Bogey Jammer

It would be easier for us to understand what MAC is about by presenting the differences (limitations) compared to DCS.

This aircraft is an interesting piece of engineering. The result was awesome at the time, and it was before the area-rule trend. BTW the belly tank was kept because luckily it enhances supersonic aerodynamics. I've read that the main issue of the stacked engine was maintenance difficulties. I've also read that during a modern exercise, an high altitude aircraft has to be intercepted. The lightning was the only one type to succeed due to its natural performances, all other gen 4 fighters missed or were too late. Problems: Razbam is not the de-facto maker of such module, and I'm not sure that the specific role and capabilities of this aircraft would be interesting enough in gameplay aspects.

I thought the RWR's lamps were located just above the radar scope. Soviet ergonomics… The textures start to look very good, there are already better than belsimtek's MiG-15. I guess it's helped by the new DCS graphic engine.

So in the end, what is the background story of the greenlight for this MiG-23 by Razbam, who got slapped in the face by ED last year ?

Candid question: is the defogger simulated ?

Meanwhile there is still years of work to just catch the development lag of the core functions. You'd better to not die of old age if you really expect an autobus simulation within DCS. See you in 40 years, I prefer to stay and enjoy the present.

There is no component available for that yet. ED pushed the engine too far to the future. And the next VR sets with their higher resolution will not stop the progression of the requirements. BTW if you think it's so easy to upgrade our hardware, can you send me 2000€ please ? I noticed that the masses are not really interested by the VR thing. They just don't need it. The trend for simple games are also a repetition of the first wii console's games. The main difference is the cost of hardware that prevent them to be fooled again so easily.

Don't waste your time, the recent updates are not made for performance improvements. You have to wait for the end (:clown_2:) of the carrier planes development to see ED to steer the workforce on the other core features. Or else you'll be eventually labeled as a troll for complaining about every single patch of the next 40 to come. Just don't overdo it. I understand your pain, we are on the same boat, but I believe it's better to wait for the completion of 2 generations of GPU before we can enjoy fully that DS folly.

Sorry but I prefer the 2nd image. The first one looks like this to me, not in an artistic way : Anyway the current textures were designed to fit the older graphic engine. I understand why the graphic artist wants to make a V2

*cough*

A complete cockpit model overhaul is in progress. No sign of life about the functionalities fixing though.

Yes What would still be interesting is the investigation of cold weather effect on altimeters within DCS. https://allaboutairplanes.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/correction-formula-on-altimeters-in-cold-weather/ I've noticed that I've measured the F-5E altitude computed from the CADC, and giving the gauge reading accuracy and difficulty to stabilize the aircraft, I'm quite surprised that the values are very similar to the Mirage 2000's. After that I tested the classic pneumatic mode, it shifts the altitude values and it's sensitive to Mach number variation as expected. I didn't knew that, so I just made some measurements and I confirm it. The F2/gauge ratio seems to be constant and very close to 1 with the dynamic weather engine, so it looks more reliable to me. I will now ditch the old static weather engine for my studies. Interesting question, I need to perform some calculations based on theory, and my tools use the ISA model only… Maybe I'll try to find it out later. My current results:

I've been playing with the altimeter's behavior and noticed that the in-cockpit value is different than the one displayed in the F2 view's info bar. There is some kind of ratio between the two, and this ratio is linearly evolving with altitude. Tried with the Mirage 2000 and the F-5E, standard conditions (15°C, no wind, 29.92, above the black sea). At around 25000 ft the ratio is 1, below that altitude the F2 altitude is higher than the cockpit value. Above, reverse the situation. I'm curious about this. Is it a real altimeter's behavior ? can the F2 altitude value can be considered as true ? (I think there is a slight instrument reading error about the F-5E :P)

Is it the same as pixel density for VR ?

This is fantasy, nobody wouldn't want to fly such a piece of junk

What does that mean ? You are working on the F/A-18 ??

You can apply the #2 remark to all AI aircraft. Yeah but there is no Rafale or Eurofighter to play with in DCS yet… 4 blades are better for the older stuff we have.

There is no problem. If women want to join just welcome them. DCS is all about the machines, not about the antisocial behavior issues of western societies. Bringing that debate here is useless, counter productive because it creates more conflicts and makes women to flea instead of attract them. If they don't want to join because they just don't like it, please let the woman live peacefully and don't force to attract them. In the military there is only one gender: soldier. PS: citing ATC voices example is a pure joke considering the underdevelopment and current issues of ATC within DCS. Falcon4 had AI women pilots, but where were the women players then ?

The 70's and life conditions in the users' countries would make it hard maybe…

Gamma variation won't help, black would still be black. It's just a response curve between the minimum and maximum values that don't change.

Do you want personal opinions now ? No it's not like that. We/I don't know what the deal is for exactly. Today it's just a marketing punchline against haters (I think I don't belong to them). Yeah they have access to the simulators, yeah some 2/5 pilots are liking the module in facebook, but I don't give a damn thing about that. I'm still repeating that the only thing I think about it is to gently wait for the final result for us, civilian gamers. I still have the feeling that French military isn't tolerant to consider its role as a vector for games and entertainment. I'm not talking about airshows and parades. It's very unusual and it's not like US Army which had gone far enough to create their own FPS game (it wasn't bad at all, I enjoyed it a lot back then). That would be a case of evolution of the Armée's mind but we don't know, especially the real motivations. It's not about denying the benefits, but it's about to not fall into a trap.

Sorry to have embarrassed you, but what we have are personal opinions only yet. Like we both said, time will tell. I hope for the best but the situation is unusual and has to be field tested.

http://www.checksix-forums.com/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=31576 Although I don't post there anymore. In the topic about that matter, there is no skepticism but some worries about the possible outcomes of the collaboration.

I'm even more skeptical now the name of Ghostrider is mentioned :hmm:

Lol no one has asked if the cockpit's toilet has been modeled yet:megalol: Anyway I'm glad that the Su-34 will finally get such a perfectly crafted model, it was the most urgent case.