Top Jockey

Hello again everyone, Reading both the DCS Manual and Chuck's Guide, regarding the last iterations of the Magic Missile search pattern, I do have some doubts : - can't understand the difference between: " Vertical Narrow " and " Horizontal Narrow " They both state: " A 7° box shaped search sector centered on the gun cross position. "

Hello, This subject has been talked already, but mostly in scattered / low highlight threads. So I would take the opportunity to ask ED and anyone: are these functions foreseen to be implemented in a nearby future ? Thank you. edit (For the sake of truth, what is really missing is the SCAN function, with the moving seekerhead diamond and the expanded search area.)

For much that I praise the AH-64, I don't know about that...

Nostalgic times indeed...

... by the looks of it, when can we expect the full fidelity MiG-29A, 2023 / 24 ?

And besides, shouldn't it be the MiG-29G variant ? (Instead of " S " variant as stated in the images.)

So, does any of the devs know if the above situation ^ is resolved ? Thank you.

Outstanding, keep up the good work !

Ok it's done. All it took was indeed adding some lines from the MOD's .LUA file - thank you @Harlikwin !

Thank you Harlikwin, Although it doesn't sound very difficult, I'm not the most proficient guy applying mods - would it be just that ?

Hello again, So is there a way to have a working PL-12 missile (or SD-10, etc) in the J-11 for single-player ? Thank you.

Thank you. So do I, I remeber I've asked about it somewhere here 2 years ago or so already...

Hello, Are the SPOT / SCAN functions correctly featured in the F-16 already ?

Hello again, These 2 bird's specific BFM aerodynamic capabilities continue to catch my attention... and so, from time to time here I'm I reviewing many of the fine details you and others shared here. Which gets me to notice the bold : - what do you mean specifically with it, exactly in which aspect is it by far ? - when I see "E-M", I tend to remember E-M diagrams... do you mean with that bold, the Fulcrum's ability to pull more Gs than the Flanker at higher speeds + 800 kph ?

I've not installed the module yet, but if I recal correctly in Flamming Cliffs 3 it is: key "Q" - dispense chaff & flares key "E" - activate electronic countermeasures (onboard jammer)

Very good. A subject which catches my curiosity, although not always easy to find much specific info on it. (And then, ther's the several different iterations these systems were subject, in different airframes, along the time.) More info on it - from slightly after the middle of the page: " Air to air control panel (front main pilot's instrument panel). " http://aviation.watergeek.eu/f4j-panel.html

... and supposedly also having another function: allowing the AIM-9 seekerhead to perform a given moving search pattern - something like "Boresight Scan" ?

Regarding "legacy" AIM-9 variants, does anyone wish to share something about the S.E.A.M. (Sidewinder Expanded acquisition Mode) concept in the F-4 Phantom II ? Thank you.

Ok then, glad to know it is correct as is. So in that case, as I always mentioned - in DCS the Fulcrum's initial pitch rate does seem to be higher than the Flanker (without this one resorting to "direct link control"). This always was easily perceivable by observing in the F2 outside view, as when giving a sharp pull on the stick on both aircraft, the Fulcrum's nose can 'sling' around somewhat faster. Thank you for the Su-27 solo aerobatic program - it is indeed a joy to watch ! ( Looking carefully at the cockpit I could even recognize Mr. Viktor Pugachev inside. ) Several interesting moments: - at 4:10 yaw maneuver with assimetric thrust ; at 5:00 the aricraft briefly stops in the air ; at 9:26 a complete roll at very low altitude ; and others... One curiosity: - the pitch maneuvers from 1:43 to 1:51, were done using the "direct link control", correct ?

Very good, then (although not 100 % sure) I believe it isn't yet implemented in DCS Su-27 flight model... as I have the impression it still shows a considerably slower pitch rate than the MiG-29. (The last time I've compared the 2 aiframes pitch rate in DCS was an year ago or somehting.)

Thank you Dell_Murrey-RUS, 1. Oh, now I'm starting to understand : if in real life the Su-27's pitch rate can get that quick, then it's quick enough for me. However I called its pitch rate somewhat slow, because in DCS current flight model it doesn't feel as reaching > 50 degrees/sec... feels a little sluggish on that parameter. But I might be wrong, need to test more. (Besides, there's what you mentioned above also - some things DCS can simulate very well, others are more difficult.) 2. Interesting details, ok I wouldn't guess part of the motive for the command delay woul also be safety reasons.

Hello, No, I didn't wrote that in the first bold; I'm perfectly capable versus the A.I. of shooting down whichever of those 2 airframes, while flying one or the other. And my tipical operating fashion is the one in the second bold of your post. What I meant about the pitch rates was : - without using "direct link control" in the Su-27 (using only the 'paddle switch'), its pitch rate will be lower than the MiG-29A (for instance) ; - I was originally expecting in real life, the Su-27's at the least to equal the MiG-29's in that parameter, as it is afterall a more modern and refined design ... but Dell_Murrey-RUS already explained that it isn't to be expected. I'll send you feedback when I try your tracks - thank you for your time.

Very good - several details which are new to me. 1. Indeed, sometimes I tend to forget that. 2. Oh come on, regaring the pitch rate I believe you know much more than that... I'am by no means an expert on the subject, but in the fluidity / dynamic process which is the dogfight: - it can allow for a first shot oportunity, given the other circumstances being similar; - it can allow for a snapshot, which can be crucial as other shot oportunity might not arise; - it can make the difference in aiming at the bandit while on the HUD, or never catch him again anymore; Example: when already on the bandit's 6 o'clock, in the MiG-29A I feel I can put the cannon gunsight on him almost always I want (sure with some loss of speed)... in the Su-27 sometimes pursuing high energy fighters, I feel I must wait so it can start turning inside the bandit's turn radius so its cannon gunsight gets on him... - it can help slowing down one's aircraft quicker if needed while maneuvering; - ... and more tactics that I don't know; I'm not saying pitch rate is the "be-all and end-all", but I mean: Hornet, Mirage and Fuclrum pilots do praise this capability... 3. The last bold describes preciselly what I do feel when flying / fighting in the Su-27. So I'am curious: why did the developers of OKB Sukhoi did that 0.5 second reaction delay on purpose ? What would be the benefit ?

Sure, I asked preciselly your opinion. Interesting to see different points of view from different members regarding these 2 airframes. Fair enough, that's what i wanted to know.

1. Although you already know I was expecting more from the MiG-29A in some aspects ( yes - sustained turn rate ) ; I fully understand you, for a lot of technical reasons and concepts you've shared already: - very good T/W ratio , acceleration , vertical fight possibility - 1 circle fights , scissors maneuvers in some cases - capability to change energy (slow down and accelerate) quicker than other airframes - pitch rate ... 2. Regarding the bold parts: I understand, but would that be of a 'meaningful' help when fighting the Hornet with its current fligh model in DCS, or even an F-14B excelent performance ? (As many say in DCS the Hornet is maintaining even better STR than the Viper, which supposedly it shouldn't...) 3. Forgeting combat tactics perspective, but purely airframe technical comparison ; would you qualify the Su-27S as a better dogfighting airframe than the MiG-29A, or not at all ?