Pocket Sized

Yeah, the cooling systems in fighters are engineered very precisely to work just fine if you fly the airplane in a sensible manner . Which is to say, KEEP YOUR SPEED UP! Doesn't matter what plane you're flying, lower power settings and higher airspeeds will save your engine. Each plane has at least 5 engine management discussion threads in its subforum.

Precisely. The low mounted wing and radiators probably add to it as well.

This x1000 That's the point I was trying to make when I mentioned the lack of basic A/G capabilities on our Eagle.

Because of its differently configured center of gravity and horizontal stabilizer.

The spitfire is tail heavy, and the elevator is pointed down slightly in cruise to compensate for this and reduce drag in hard turns. This leads to some rather fiddly pitch handling when you're not in a dogfight.

I think this makes the most sense. It's pretty absurd how clean the signal is from an actively cooled high quality sensor. It's just, like, really expensive though.

I hate making unsubstantiated claims like this, but I'm not so sure about 90° per second. That's FOUR seconds for a single roll. Inertia roll coupling will typically only cause issues at extremely high roll rates if you're at high speed because the aerodynamic stabilizing forces are very strong. That is, ignoring sideslip effects. Currently, fairly large slip angles produce a surprisingly small rolling moment. (Kick the rudder at 400kmh or so) So maybe that's why roll coupled departures are hard to accomplish in game? I've never managed to replicate the usual roll divergence you'd expect with roll coupling.

Somebody asked this in the past, and a video was posted of a real spit taking off with an artificial horizon that was practically upside down :D The current behavior is probably not far off, these instruments are notorious for drifting over time.

No matter what anyone says, the FM is closer to reality with the increased roll rate. The fishbed has an absolutely miniscule amount of roll inertia compared to other aircraft in DCS, even the F-5. Before the update the MiG felt heavier than the Flanker.

Yeah, it's definitely supposed to be wind noise. It's very quiet over the sound of the engine, so that may make it sound like a jet engine.

I've tried ground firing sidewinders from the A-10. Even if I'm sitting on the tail, the missile hits the ground in front if me (which is questionable imo, the missile should have plenty of thrust to climb from that position) But the problem with firing them from a hover is the lack of control authority. The Harrier's unstable hovering characteristics means you have to keep pitch and roll near zero, and yaw response is very sluggish. If you pitch up to get tone on a bandit, by the time you get the missile off you will be entering an uncontrollable backflip...

Unlike the Mirage, the Harrier won't bleed energy out the arse when you look at the control stick due to the different wing designs. You can only pull 15-20 degrees of alpha before you stall, and the plane will have excellent low end acceleration. So there shouldn't be many situations where you find yourself low and slow unintentionally.

Of course! I'm not saying the harrier is slow ;) It's just that the acceleration will fall off much more severely than it would in other jet aircraft due to the engine and intake design (in comparison to, say, a MiG-15 or Su-25)

Probably not, the aircraft flies like a bus in a hover (past a certain pitch/bank angle, you have to eject because it will flip over) Also, you'd be reducing the energy budget of your Sidewinders considerably. That being said, you CAN use the nozzles to tighten your turn in a dogfight, a pretty common practice IRL. Giving yourself an extra G to work with at any speed is pretty useful!

I highly doubt we'll be getting upgrades that have only recently been put into service on the F-15. Especially when you consider that our Eagle should have CCIP ground attack capabilities, but doesn't because it's not utilized by the USAF in real life. What I wouldn't give for a simple A/G gun pipper...

Worth mentioning that yes, the Harrier has a static TWR of near 1.0 at combat weight. That giant bellmouth intake is essential for VTOL because it gobbles up huge amounts of air at low speed. At high speed, however, it loses efficiency and becomes a massive source of parasite drag. The aircraft probably won't accelerate as quickly as some of you might think.

In DCS? Longer range or something idk In real life? Because mavericks suck. Keep in mind that they're an optical/thermally guided missile, so it's possible for them to lock the wrong target or lose track after launch. Don't even get me started on force correlated launches, they're only good for hitting one section of a large target, ie the corner of a warehouse. Laser mavericks are good because somebody on the ground can point a laser and the missile will land there from a decent standoff range no matter what he's pointing at. It could be a camouflaged tank, underground bunker, or a frog on a unicycle... none of which a standard maverick would be able to target. (Except maybe the last one, but you'd have to be REALLY close)

That's what he's going to ask the texturizer, presumably.

Nice! Reminds me of the way the Huey shimmies a bit at low RPM.

Are you absolutely certain you're getting a HIGH RPM warning? The helicopter should fly just fine if the rotor is overspeeding (within reason). Low RPM will make it difficult to fly. Look at the engine gauges. Does the gas generator spool up when you raise collective? What about torque? Make sure the twist grip throttle is at full (hold page up).

In flight, the tail will break upon exceeding 3 Gs (indicated by the small gauge on top of the front panel). This is probably what happened when you pitched up.

We probably can't have a color TGP for the same reason we can't have laser mavericks: they aren't available on the version of the Hog ED agreed to make with the USAF. However there definitely are improvements that could be made to the current TGP, most notably a proper FLIR simulation, but that's already been discussed at great length in other threads.

The flight model is very good. I'd say it's still a tiny bit questionable in some edge case scenarios but if you fly like a half sensible person, unlike me, you'll never notice. From a gameplay perspective, it's amazing. The FBW softens your inputs to prevent you from killing yourself before you hit the ground, but it doesn't feel restrictive at all. The plane stays where you put it and will always be trimmed for 1G flight unless you're nearly stalling. Formation takes a bit of getting used to and PIO is common due to the damped nature of the flight controls, but eventually it will "click" and you'll be able to stay right where you want to be. Definitely worth the money.

Bullets spin absurdly fast, not sure if it's 300k rpm but it's a few hundred times per second at least. Unless the camera is physically stabilized to within a few dozen RPM of zero, the image is going to be blurry due to the exposure time on each pixel (no amount of processing could fix it) So I vote april fools, although I haven't watched the video.

High speed roll coupling is certainly not something to be messed with. (Forgive the foul language of the test pilot!)This is your standard roll coupled departure. [Youtube]wZNaQuUGluk#t=35s Upon reaching a certain roll rate, the aerodynamic stabilizing forces are overpowered by inertial destabilizing forces. This causes the nose to swing away from the roll axis, further increasing the inertial forces. This can be seen if you roll at high AoA, the nose and tail want to be perpendicular to the roll axis (flat spin), so AoA will increase.