Jump to content

SuperEtendard

ED Closed Beta Testers Team
  • Posts

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SuperEtendard

  • Birthday 09/05/1995

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS, IL-2 Great Battles.
  • Location
    Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Interests
    Aviation

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Nice, do you know when exactly did the F-4Es start to get the chaff and flares countermeasures retrofitted? I have heard it was around 1976 for chaff and then 1977 for flares but I haven't found concrete proof of it. The 1979 F-4E manual mentions the retrofit but it doesn't list a date from what I could see. If this is correct I guess the early 74 version of the module wouldn't have them but they should be there for the late DMAS version?
  2. Afaik the 21bis has an updated encripted IFF transponder, the MiG-19P has the old one so it should work on it.
  3. @Kirk66 In which year did you start your career on the F-4E?
  4. F-4J sustained turns at 37.5k pounds, lighter but also draggier loadout with sidewinders. With sidewinders mounted you have to pay attention to the G limit as for example at sea level you can sustain a regime that will overstress the pylons / airframe (and the limit decreases significantly at higher fuel loads/gross weight). This also applies to the F-4E if you mount sidewinders.
  5. After reading the FAQ, could there be a chance to have the option for a Vietnam conflict F4E with the original leading edge flaps wings?
  6. Though DCS does support radar guided anti ship missiles, used in both playable, AI, ED and third party modules (Harpoon, Kh-22, Silkworm, C-802 come to mind). I know the RB 15 is a complex weapon, but couldn't we have proper radar guidance implemented for the RB 04 at least given it's an older gen missile similar to the other ones in the game? Thanks
  7. The Merlin 25 in the Mosquito FB Mk VI was based on the Merlin XX (used in the Hurricane Mk II), this description indicates the Merlin XX shared the same carburettor as the Merlin 45, which was the Merlin used in the Spitfire Mk V with the stop gap Shilling's orifice to help with the negative G cut out issue.
  8. I think that's because it's not properly focused, look at this photo for example, it's much more sharp
  9. Nice to see multiple variants being added to cover different timeframes :happy: Will there be earlier spec missiles for these? For example AIM-9G/H & AIM-7Es for the USN F-14A, and AIM-9J/P & AIM-7E for the IRIAF F-14A? Thanks
  10. Please implement a more modern graphical design / texture for this new software, like other forums do for example the Combat Ace community, War Thunder, IL-2 Sturmovik, Elite Dangerous forums.
  11. Some years ago you showed a preview of the ALR-45 that used a different type of display which is more advanced than this one you are presenting here but still not as good as the fully digital ALR-67 in the F-14B: Will this one still be available as an option or has it been rolled back in favour of the earlier spec? I would like to know more about these and how they were employed (if this later type was a later retrofit but only present in low numbers for example). Thanks.
  12. Marduk I think you are mistaking the Erhöhte Notleistung of the July '44 A-8 to the special boost the Jabo variants had (extra fuel injection allowing to have 1.65 ata in the first supercharger speed only), like the F-8. Both were different ways to achieve higher boost, the extra C3 fuel injection was for the Jabos for low altitude only, and the Erhöhte Notleistung worked for both low and mid altitudes but didn't require extra fuel injection, just increased manifold pressure as Yo-Yo said
  13. That data is from a Spitfire F Mk IX it seems, with Merlin 61. The Spit LF Mk IX with Merlin 66 would be at around 335 mph at sea level with +18 boost, also it's top speed is at around 23k feet, the chart you showed has a top speed at roughly 27k feet, compatible with the earlier F Mk IX with the less powerful higher altitude optimized Merlin 61. And that 350 mph Fw 190 A-8 value seems to be a 1.58/1.65 ata one with ETC bomb rack. DCS has the previous configuration with 1.42 ata. It also has it's top speed slightly below 20k feet, showing the boosted later settings, the earlier one has it's top speed slightly above 20k feet. In the dogfight thread I posted a chart of what would be roughly expected with the engine settings the planes have, taken from real charts (this A-8 without ETC)
  14. Shouldn't it be doing closer to 555 without ETC? http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190-a8-level-speed-13nov43.jpg
  15. For sea level, 15°C temperature and 1013,25 hPa pressure the speed with 1.42 ata, full closed shutters and ETC bomb rack should be around 530-540 km/h. Without the ETC bomb rack it should be 550-560 km/h. It is slow compared to the newer Allied fighters, very similar speed to the Spitfire LF Mk IX, but that one holds better acceleration, climb and maneuverability. So as I said in the dogfight thread the A-8 will be in a hard spot, specially against P-51. The Fw 190 was really good when it came out, but the A-8 is a decrease in performance because it has more drag and weight because of bigger guns and more armor than the earlier variants, meanwhile the Allied fighters got significantly better from 1941/1942 to 1944. The June 1944 variant modelled in DCS have the same 1700 HP power as the 1942 variant. In July a new engine setting was approved, with 1.58 ata in the first supercharger gear and 1.65 ata in the second gear increased power to roughly 1950 HP which helps with the increase in drag, making it slighty faster than the earlier variants, and mantaining a similar power to weight ratio. It still had higher wing loading thougj
×
×
  • Create New...