probad

you're not max performing your f-15 either by the sounds of it, you're going way too fast if you constantly get overg warnings because your left hand opens the throttle and then goes to sleep

op, you're perpetuating the hollywood myth that somehow fbw negates the unpredictability of human decision making when it comes down to it there is one thing that gets you out of the line of fire and that's geometry. the fundamental goal of flying aids is to keep you moving so you can continue to create/solve geometric problems, and keeping them around will help keep you alive far longer than without.

1. find draggiest weapons 2. load up doubleracks of them 3. seek out merges 4. go on forums to complain the aircraft lacks performance smh

even disregarding sop, the picture at least seems to prove there's no physical conflict between the centerline tank and bk90 tailfins, which seems to be an issue in our virtual viggen. a minor issue to be sure, but nevertheless something that can be investigated for correction.

are there irl restrictions on inboard bk90 and centerline eft usage? edit: this photo exists but inboard bk90s clip with ceft ingame something must be wrong.

the radar equipped all weather interceptor is a direct descendant of ww2 night fighters. they are meant to attack targets that are using weather or nighttime -- in other words, exploiting poor visibility conditions to avoid engagements. such is the mig-19p, which is why it has a secondary reflector displaying a targeting proxy to enable gunnery even in zero visibility conditions. the mig-19p's primary purpose is to hunt down bombers under poor visibility, not to duke it out with enemy fighters -- that was the job of the lighter, radarless mig-19'S'.

oh of course you care, you care about your wants and your wishes perhaps you should give some care and consideration to the resources and priorities of the dev instead also newsflash: you're not their boss

if you can find definite numbers on the correct relationship between stabilizer and elevator deflections feel free to submit a report for corrections. "slight" is far too vague a word to be basing any corrections off of. relative to the large elevator deflections seen on contemporaneous aircraft the f-86's deflections can certainly be considered "slight". ultimately, what you or i think slight should mean is immaterial.

he's taking the concept of "real" far too much at face value, he seems to think that "real" is synonymous with fidelity a "real" simulation in this case only means that its an official product used by lockmart, but the objective of the simulation can actually be anything at all. in the example op cited, it's just for public promotional purposes. any amount of information can be omitted from the simulation. dear op. this is not the ace combat forums

i dont think op would understand what classified means if it bit him in the face

put it into a zip file, use 3rd party file hosting if you have to lmgtfy https://www.google.com/search?q=file+hosting&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

here, let me gaze into my crystal ball... you should upload a track so we actually have something concrete to look at

yeah it was never broken to begin with just admit its user error already

what is exactly the problem here?

if you pay close attention the f-86's entire slab can be seen to tilt with elevator inputs. irl:

i just wanted to prove to you it's aerodynamically possible in dcs, that its not like ed "simply neglected to code it" its honestly demonstrating falling leaf ultimately isnt even relevant to the thread, because i had to force it by pulling out the fcs -- because later version fcs as found in our hornet prevents falling leaf departures, period, end of story now op, put that copy of jetstream in the trash and start reading natops instead

has less to do with actual intellectual curiosity and more to do with building connections with something familiar if jetstream never aired falling leaf threads would be nonexistant its a lot like tourists that have to visit some famous tourist trap landmark they heard about just for that been-there factor well maybe you're doing it wrong here is for example a sustained inverted falling leaf:

no labels on my watch imposters are already easy enough to spot as it is

im fairly confident that ed's programmers are more knowledgeable and qualified on this subject than you youtube yokels

1. TWS 2. Link 16 3. ATFLIR 4. HMS 5. HARM 6. GBU 7. SLAM 8. Harpoon 9. AG radar 10. ALS

why worry about things youre not in control of?

none of which visualize vortices at this location:

context here

re: the much earlier discussion about f-35 vs f-18 vortex generation and the lack of traditional lerx designs this is a fantastic shot of f-35 vortex generation capabilities despite their thick section, looks like the chines ahead of the intake indeed are capable of generating their own vortices.

"it was a good idea but the chin inlet has got to go"