Ignition

With the F-15E around the corner its really sad ED still didn't add new static buildings for the mission editor and damage model.

We also want an integrated radio simulation and forget about external programs. We're looking forward to one day use this feature 100%.

I tested it and its working correctly at 15nm (F-16 and F-18), since when ED changed the range? This new range it's more accurate than the 8nm.

The laser ranges in DCS are fixed at about 8nm since a long time. Here's a video of a LANTIRN in real life receiving good reflection at 13.1nm (1:00:12) at the left upper corner you can read SLR (slant range) 13.6nm and at 13.1nm it changes at 79.000 ft which indicates the laser is receiving reflections.

You need to fly more then. We can't feel the G in our body but you can train your muscle memory, you will almost never over G a plane again. It's just practice as everything else.

The F-14 has a G indicator, If you look to DCS videos of the F-14 on youtube you can see most of them went 10+G. Also some people can't dogfight in the F-18 without the paddle switch and make the F-18 an F-16 going beyond 7.5G. The big problem is DCS is trying to be a simulator but its just a game, you just respawn and that's it, there's no drawback. In real life if an F-16 went 9G that plane needs to be examined for several hours. In DCS every plane is brand new. It should take into account how you fly and that should go to your profile so if you constantly over G the plane then sometime it should brake. This way people will start to care for the plane and learn to fly it as it was meant to.

Agree. I wonder if the level quality for third party will be higher than their level quality for the F-16 release, because that was horrendous. It was almost a plane to fly and nothing more with all the missing features and bugs.

I like the long videos, specially when the maker is a former WSO who can tell how are things in the real plane. If you like quick tutorials and 0 reading in how the things work you need to wait for the release of the aircraft. Wait for the 1000000 youtubers making videos of the same thing to tell you how it works in the game.

Some sources say the AGM-130 has a maximum range beyond 40nm. I'm sure at high altitude and speed, it can be used above 30.000ft.

The precision of these bombs is very high, they may be even more precise than a LGB. The problem is they need a person to guide them by TV and its not an easy task. And yeah in DCS the weapon to weapon engagement its not fully developed. I know very high speed low level flying missiles are VERY hard to destroy but a bomb droping from altitude with anti flammable coating like they use in the navy I'm not so sure. The thing is a mission in DCS is not like in reality, If you don't have some scripts the SAMs will be on all the time. Many times the SAMs radars were off in real life, the chance for an AGM-88 to impact were VERY low and they didn't hit many times, I don't remember the numbers but its like 1 hit for more than 15 HARM. The good thing about that is you forced to turn off the radar and let the strike group do their job.

I know, I was refering to his comment on laser guided weapons beyond laser range.

The AGM-130 its kind a SLAM yes. I believe it has less range and it's a 2000lb bomb, I don't know about the AGM-84 probably its also a 2000lb. The GBU-15 it's kind the more modern versions of the Walleye AGM-62. Also the AGM-130 was used for SEAD.

There are no weapons which replace the AGM-65, maybe GBU-38, GBU-39, GBU-15 and AGM-130. The AGM-65 is very unique. As I understand the GBU-15 and AMG-130 are guided by GPS/INS (I don't know if the GBU-15 has GPS) and its guided by a camera through datalink pod AXQ-14 (in the plane) in the final phase. There are some videos on youtube of this weapon and the precision is even better than a LGB. The downside is the bomb doesn't stop so if you messed up the guidance it will explode in the wrong site. There's a video of this weapon impacting a train instead of the bridge, twice. If we have the GBU-39 I'm sure it will be the first version. Laser guided weapons may be guided by forces in the frontline, on the ground. So you can still drop them far away drom the range of the laser. About the AGM-65 I don't know. This weapon is launched from a rail so I'm not sure it can be mounted on the CFT.

In all the videos they show the LANTIRN and not the LITENING. So I don't think they have any issues with that. The only aircraft with TGP problems of this nature is the F-16C which ED doesn't have enough information of the LITENING so they are modeling the LANTIRN.

I hope not all liveries have some albino part. Altohugh some F-15E have one part they are scarce. Most of the F-15E are equally painted. It's a good addition though.

You're also making a game, and aircrafts should have the same standards at least for common things, like weapons or TGP. We all like the full fidelity modules and to have the most simulation as posible, but when it comes to these things is really weird some aircraft are just plug and play and/or have some beneficial features just because there're no information.

You want to arrive at the target with the least drift as possible. If you only have 1 point to do the fix and you can't find the correct position for wathever reason you will never find the target.

with the new maps I'm sure we can say goodbye to many dedicated servers. We have 3 in our community and only 1 is going to be able to keep going. It's getting really crazy.

Landing lights on take-off Also what I do: -master mode in AC and steady when powering on the aircraft -flash and taxi light when taxiing -on holding short, master mode normal, steady, and landing lights.

JDAMS and WCMD give more stand-off. As cool as the CBU-97 is, it has less range and it's less accurate with moderate winds. Also SFW will not destroy a building or structure.

If the quality will be the same as in the F-14 then ED is making a huge mistake removing the actual LITENING. You can't expect to have such quality in 2007. It was a bad quality even for the 90s. There wasn't anything else back then though.

I want to be the best (I know I will never be) in DCS at least in some things. I know I'm very bad at another ones like air to air. I always try to do the things as correct and precise as I can. I want a realistic representation FOR COMBAT scenarios, that's why I don't want the LANTIRN for this aircraft. I only care about combat and tactics. About the Sniper now I'm in doubt really. We can only hope. Ok, Thanks

Not if they keep both pods or If ED tells the image quality is exactly the same, I don't really care. I don't understand very well how ED mixed both pods, but well information from such things is not so easy to find.

I wonder which pod the AF would use in combat, I'm sure they would skip the LANTIRN. My money wasn't a mistake back then.

The image quality should be worse. Its an old pod.