=475FG= Dawger

To explain further, in missions without easy comms, you must press the radio push to talk or transmit button to open the comms menu when in flight. This simulates the necessity of using the radio to communicate outside of the airplane This is true in all full fidelity modules AFAIK.

Aggressor F-5’s were in the desert and if the equipment is installed it has to be maintained and the pilots have to maintain proficiency. Easy decision to not bother with ILS. And it really isn’t needed. In 15,000 hours flying all over the world in all kinds of weather, I probably needed ILS to see the runway less than 500 times, maybe a lot less than that. Never once in a desert.

I forgot about PAR/GSR. Those are pretty exciting IRL. TBH, the way the weather works in DCS makes ILS pretty useless. Trying to get ILS mins at one airport is going to sock in all the rest, generally speaking.

T-38 is a trainer and required the ILS for the curriculum. I imagine the foreign buyers put the ILS in for much the same reason, proficiency in procedures versus any combat usefulness.

Non-Precision approach minimums are sufficient for what the F-5 does. 600 ft universally and as low as 400 in some spots If the F-5 needs an ILS, it shouldn’t even bother to sortie.

Imagine typing multiple paragraphs agonizing over when you are going to be able to play with your new toy? It does make for fun reading though.

I know that it being buggy sucks but you dont really need it to fly through the clouds for short periods. Other instruments provide all the information you need to fly blind.

Logistics is going to run out of F-5 wings long before it runs out burned out light bulbs for the F-4.

Naw, it just means they hit the big volume discount number and finally sent them to be produced.

No reason to stick to historically accurate paint schemes. Do custom paint. Makes it easier to find your wingman as well.

Can the Phantom WSO get a different name? Jester was not the guy in the back in the first place and its a horrible name. My pick would be ZEUS, Zero Effort Unless Supervised.

Its only 40 lbs or so. 80 lbs is the worst case. I think its the stick actuator that would fail before the hardware. Pizza curls ain't gonna cut it for FFB at a realistic level but any reasonably fit 70 year old can handle realistic stick forces.

If DCS had user map capability, this would be a fun one time map. It certainly would not be something worth paying money for, even if the period appropriate assets were available. I have flown Battle of Midway in 200 player PvP events a few times. They were fun events but by the time DCS has a complete set of assets for that battle, WWII will not hold interest for anyone still alive. It would be easier and much faster to resurrect an old WWII MMOLG and stage all those Pacific events on the maps they did decades ago. Probably more fun, too.

Having changed brake media myself for 40 years, I am familiar. However, all you are doing is proving my point. Brake media is subject to wear, yet, until that media is worn beyond limits, performance is not affected. Long before they reach that point, normal pre-flight inspection and routine maintenance will drive replacement of the affected component with no discernible performance impact from the pilot point of view. The simulated brake media is going to be scattered across the simulated landscape or at the bottom of a simulated smoking hole long before it is necessary to simulate replacing them.

I don’t get the idea of “wear and tear” either except for tires, paint, turbine temps and eroding leading edges or domes. You might fly a jet with multiple items “inop” if they aren’t mission or safety critical but even the ancient, clapped out, zero maintenance freighters I flew way back in the last century were basically binary. Worked or it didn’t.

It would help to know what post you are addressing. I don’t see anyone saying bent metal is good in any case.

Crosswind…

It has since been retired (partially) but I built this 6 years ago.

I would think the only way to really damage an F-4 while landing it is getting very sideways since that would be the most vulnerable angle.

Visibly bent metal after a hard landing would probably write off the jet, especially a built to crash on every landing Navy jet.

One of the problems with discussions like this is the inability to simplify for the purposes of understanding. Yes, the engine is rated for a maximum RPM for its intended application and then a reduction gearbox is engineered to meet the requirements of the propeller in order to keep it from exceeding the speed of sound at the tips. From the pilot’s point of view, the important information is the number (3000 in this case) and anything faster will greatly reduce propeller efficiency. That is a simplification that serves to aid in understanding the concept and it is the one widely used in the real world. Is it good to understand the engineering behind this? Probably. However, repeating over and over that RPM is driven by the engine limits and propeller gearboxes are used to slow the prop down only serves to muddy basic understanding. We see the direct result of this in how piston props get modeled in games, with many putting the engine on a self destruct timer any time the propeller is above the maximum continuous rating, which is ridiculous.

This is incorrect. The propeller used to also be called an airscrew. This is a useful analogy. Higher RPM means lower blade angle or, in screw terms, a finer thread pitch ( threads closer together) Fine Pitch, a term you will see in some aircraft manuals The screw is taking a smaller bite with each rotation with fine pitch Lower RPM means higher blade angle or a coarser thread pitch ( threads further apart) The screw is taking a bigger bite with every rotation in coarse pitch Manifold pressure is the torque or force you are applying to the screw. MP is your screwdriver. A fine thread screw with threads closer together is easier to drive than a coarse thread screw. So, higher RPM ( ) is always going to be easier on your engine. The situation to avoid is coarse pitch and high torque so you want to avoid high MP and low RPM. 3000 RPM should not be a factor in engine wear, at least not enough to ever be noticeable in less than a thousand or more hours of operation There could be some loss of efficiency at 3000 RPM as maximum RPM is determined by the RPM that cause the propeller tips to exceed the speed of sound This is the primary reason there is an RPM reduction after takeoff Hopefully, this makes the relationship between propeller RPM and Manifold Pressure slightly less murky https://skybrary.aero/articles/blade-pitch#:~:text="Fine" pitch refers to a,and fuel economy (cruise).

Every time someone with very direct real world experience points out something contrary to popular flight simmer doctrine, the excuses fly as to why that couldn’t possibly be correct. Smartest thing to do is not waste your time.

Amen, brother

Not much about BFM is anywhere near classified and there are real world guys flying in DCS. The ones I know are only interested in the fight and will happily wade into long odds furballs. They are not interested in “procedure”. They don’t hold back in a fight. They tend to stay away from BVR stuff because 1. It’s dull 2. There are classified aspects