dimitrischal

Needless to say no matter how pointless these discussions are I get a tingling sensation in my pants hoping these planes come in DCS. So much more satisfying flying these than the spamraam datalinky more modern ones. And that hellish otherworldly J79 sound...

Not comparing it anywhere with the mig23 am i? I've been in the cockpit of a mig23 and besides being switches galore it was also cramped with poor visibility so? But its a single seater and can be readily simulated, difficulty is in the eye of the beholder... And for those not in squadrons? I was refering to the average joe who buys this and goes online. What then? Having a jerk hop in the back seat can actually make flying harder even impossible, hence the crm reference. Workload has only part to do with the older radar, it has to do with other things like flying the thing, navigating, employing ag weapons etc, it all adds up. People like to fly the thing multirole not only dogfight in it. I compared it with the f14 because the wso there has to be implemented also but he is a radar jockey, not actively controlling the ac afaik, the f4 is different. And being a generation newer it affords you the luxury of a slower ai interaction system because of the automation, reaction and decision margins in the f4 will be smaller, very important parameter. I didn't say its impossible to make it work just harder, i brought up the bombercat issue because multirole and ground attack in these planes is important(even the f14, only plane so far with 2 crew that can carry lantirn in DCS) and people will probably be doing these things while dodging migs at the same time instead of using them strictly air to air.

The f4 was pretty workload intensive for both crew members. I need to look in to this but both were required to fly the ac afaik. Also no look down shootdown capability on most versions so this is a whole different bird than the f14. The f14 will be a magnificent bird to fly and fight in and heatblur will be making a huge mistake not incorporating the bombercat functionality if they decide not to. The f4 will be much different I think. Much harder to fly let alone fight effectively in. Will require much better crm in multi crew. I don't know if you can reach this level of proficiency in what is essentially a video game.

That is so sweeeeet! Did they offer a 747 to go with that? lol couldn't help my self sorry... But seriously this will open new horizons. However with the F-18 coming I think a more modern Warsaw fighter with substantial bvr capabilities is a must. This would be awesome in Cold War servers though. Damn mean looking machine.

The F-5 was known for being notoriously hard to spot. Its slender side profile is both beautiful and a nightmare to fight against. The livery used in the ACG server adds to this considerably ,in contrast to the migs liveries, but i guess it was a phenomenon observed with the real aircraft too so i don't know if anything should be done. You should try to use awacs more and utilize zoom and boom attacks taking advantage of the migs higher speed or fly very low and fast hoping to see the enemy's shape against the horizon. Neither the mig nor the f-5 have smokeless engines, looking for smoketrails also works very well. The greek airforce had taken delivery of several f-5 in this light blue color,originally built for the iranian airforce i believe, that when weathered made them exceptionally hard to spot over the Aegean sea. The camouflage was later applied with success on f-4s.

Like I said easier to build a good fighter around one big engine rather than 2 smaller ones. It's also cheaper and easier to maintain. I don't think anyone argues the f16 is a better fighter but in the naval environment the hornet was a more logical airframe. I don't think any of the two were ever matched or beaten in an actual combat environment by any enemy fighter so picking at stats and details is pretty futile anyway. I don't think the navy has a choice now anyway regarding the f35.

F4, F14, F18 a6 two engines A7, F8 one so? Does this prove me wrong or you right? Look at the loses in peacetime operations and training, engine failure is pretty much always at the top 3 causes. As for the f35 argument the second engine was a small price to pay for a common airframe but every time the Navy got to pick its own hardware for the last 40 years its workhorse aircraft were primarily twins. Single engine is good economics. Especially for land based airforces. And easy to design a fighter around. The navy wanted 2 for obvious reasons. All the planes flying around the world now except for small fighters and private planes have two engines. Reality check.

A fighter plane is orders of magnitude more likely to suffer an engine failure than take shrapnel in the engine in its life in the real world. A twin like the f18 will turn your flight in a sim check ride, an f16 a bailout situation. Now imagine this over the ocean 150 miles from the carrier. The f18 is inherently a safer design for normal operations especially over water.

Flying at mach 2.0 at 45000 feet might sound cool but will get old soon. The mig-31 or mig-25 is in a pretty disadvatageous position in most altitudes and speeds that regular fighters fly except for fast and high. And even then you can go through caucasus in mere minutes and down again for fuel. The WSO intercept procedure was heavily automated and visibility was very constricted (although he also had a full set of controls) so i don't know who would be interested in taking the seat. Its funny that even before the f-14 came out people have been asking for even more modules... Gets kind of repetitive because this isn't driven by the desire to fly another great plane reproduced in amazing detail but to keep things balanced in mp so everyone can keep their preffered side happy. If someone came out with a fc3 level mig31 and mig25 people would buy them like hotcakes, an r-77 equiped su-27 even better. Then the bitching would stop. Funny how people are threatened by a 1980's missile and radar yet they have absolutely no problem playing everyday in servers with early 2000's aim120c's.

I wonder if something like that happens, what will happen to the fc3 aircraft? will it be a different purchase? Will both be allowed in mp at the same time, like different versions? Will the fc3 aircraft be replaced with the full fidelity aircraft at a cost or free(slim chances)?

:pilotfly:Nap of earth flight with terrain following radar and autopilot.:pilotfly:

I love the mirage. No matter what tactics you choose you have to be aggressive to win engagements. I would buy it again and would pay full price for a D version if one existed.

And a whole truckload of tornadoes,f-4s,f-5s, mirage f-1s and mig23s,mig27s or su24s mixed together. And no fox 3 missiles for anyone except the much feared f-14. Whole different ballgame, much more interesting imo, with a lot of planes of that era being developed now. Many options for modules more interesting than a su-22.

In proper cold war 1985 scenarios and multiplayer... Sounds like paradise

I want a high fidelity module of a soviet aircraft that is capable of matching the f-18 and/or f-14 or at least can put up a fight. This game is missing something newer than the mig-21 on the soviet side (fc3 planes aside). A ruski cousin of the viggen is nice to have but meh... I'd rather have a su-24 and fly multicrew night missions with pgms.

I agree that the trim doesn't affect the takeoff and landing speeds, i phrased it poorly, wrong trim however does lead to early or late rotation and too steep or shallow approaches. The settings in the manual are pretty good, i use 5-6 on approach too and find the f-5 pretty much flies itself down. When cruising the technique is always the same set pitch, then power and trim last.

I think the P5's are (were before the update?) better than any weapon on the mig. The f-5 is easier to fly in a turn fight and has better visibility but can bleed energy faster in very tight turns.

Trim setting for takeoff or approach speeds has nothing to do with trim setting for level flight. All planes are like this irl. Pitch trim is really important when the plane is loaded but also to reduce takeoff speed and distance and landing speeds especially on the f-5,busted tyres are common with improper trim settings. At what speed do you rotate and how much input does it take? For the f-5 i think i use a pitch trim of 1 or 2 during flight. Actually the f-5 is more representative in this matter of real planes than others in dcs

A full fidelity f-14 has nothing to do with the fc3 fighters to which many people see it as a successor or addition. It had a crew of 2 and fighting in it was a full time job for the both of them. A lot of hearts are going to break when people find out that even with the fancy jester ai fighting in the tomcat will be challenging for multicrew and pretty damn hard for 1 player. Also since most of the buyers of the tomcat will be fc3 fighter players i can see a steep curve there;-) So no there you have it. No need for nerfing. I'd still give my right nut for a proper full fidelity soviet fighter to pit it up against.

I have witnessed a FW190 getting shot down by an AIM120 online. i don't know how this could be considered fun. The vast selection of aircraft in game is amazing and a good thing to have but honestly you can't have everything in the same server simultaneously. It's up to the community to create a tailor made experienced that is balanced and fun for everybody. This isn't the norm. IMO despite the A10C being the best module in game it pretty much stands alone. All other planes of its era are the arcade FC3 junk. The gen 3 jet arena is growing and shows great potential though.