Zius

In the original Flanker (1996), they already predicted the Crimea conflict. ;) On the other hand, there can be only that many maps in development at the same time...

Personally I'd prefer a F-5A, because it's what my country's airforce used, but the E is fine as well. I fully agree with what TLTeo said, a better aircraft is not always the better choice. That said, I am happy that we have the MiG-21bis rather than the F-13.

That depends entirely on how you create your mission. I usually start-up in the air and in / near an interesting sight-seeing / stunt location. Occassionally I start-up hot on the runway. Also occassionally I start-up close to a target. That way, you can just focus on the flying and not bother too much with procedures. The big advantage to DCS is that the planes perform very nicely and realistically. Which is also why I advocate non-FBW aircraft. It will teach good flying habits which will carry over in easier FBW aircraft or other less realistic sims.

I have to admit that the thought of the pilot defecting crossed my mind as well, but if the plan disappeared east of Misawa, then the only way to go is the Kuriles / Kamchatka. Even though stealthy, I don't think it's totally invisible and a missing aircraft flying over Japan to the west would be noticed. Crossing the Kuriles, I have no idea if that's possible without the Russians being aware of it. Anyway, these are not so nice thoughts... I hope the pilot managed to eject and will be recovered soon.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-defence-f35/japans-air-force-loses-contact-with-f-35-stealth-fighter-idUSKCN1RL1FJ A Japanese F-35 stealth fighter jet with one pilot on board disappeared from radar while on a training mission over the Pacific on Tuesday night, the defense ministry said. The fighter jet went missing at around 7:30 p.m. (1030 GMT) as it was flying some 135 km (84 miles) east of Misawa in northeastern Japan, a ministry spokeswoman said. It was not immediately clear if it had crashed, the spokesperson said, adding: “We are still trying to search for the aircraft.” “The cause is unknown,” Defense Minister Takeshi Iwaya said, adding that the remaining 12 F-35As deployed to Misawa were grounded, Kyodo News reported. The fate of the pilot was not immediately clear. The plane lost contact about 30 minutes after taking off from Misawa Air Base, public broadcaster NHK reported. The Self-Defence Forces and coastguard dispatched vessels to carry out rescue operations, NHK added. Japan’s first F-35A fighter squadron based at Misawa became operational on March 29.

I hope so... At least some dev team should see the potential by now...

I somewhat regularly fly with my daughter, she's now 7 but I think we started when she was 5. She can fly around quite well, take off and sometimes land. She mainly likes stunt flying, especially in Dubai (through the hotel on the palm island). Procedures bore her though. We usually fly the L-39 as it is easy enough to fly although she thinks it's too slow. My opinion: DCS is great for kids, especially non-FBW aircraft because they teach good flying habits. Just use the mission editor to jump right into where you want to start. Cold and dark start-ups may be a bit too much for younger kids.

https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/nederland/artikel/4670311/reddingsoperatie-vliegtuig-neergestort-hilversum and: https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/nederland/artikel/4670456/leerling-en-instructeur-vliegtuigje-neergestort-bevrijd Sorry, Dutch language article, the pictures speak for themselves. According to the article,this was a training flight, the student and instructor were practicing emergency procedures when something went wrong. They "landed" in a tree and got stuck 10m above the ground. Apparently both were soaked in kerosene when the fire brigade managed to rescue them. Both of them seem to be ok, one of them was taken to the hospital for check-ups.

Dunno, both Sweden and South Africa are much bigger than Switzerland. Maybe the Swiss already decided that the Gripen was not for them and were just looking for arguments. :dunno: But Fri13 has a great point, it's not only about raw performance. In fact, usually other considerations are more important. For instance, look how many countries are still flying the MiG-21 (incl. NATO members Croatia and Romania), while the MiG-29 has already been retired in similar countries (NATO members Czech Republic, Hungary and Romania). It seems obvious that the MiG-29 is superior to the MiG-21, but most likely more difficult/expensive to keep flying...

Well, the MiG-29A and Su-27S could still contain some equipment that's also on recent versions of these aircraft and still classified. Although I assume that NATO knows every last bit of the MiG-29A at least as they were/are in use by several NATO members. But this point of components still being classified was the reason why Heatblur made the AJS version of the Viggen and not the more advanced Jaktviggen version, as some equipment of that version is still used in the Gripen. Well, the Mi-8 and Yak-52 are old tech and also in very widespread civilian use around the world. So that's not the same as the MiG-29, even A version. Although I guess that the MiG-29A could be considered on a similar level as the Mi-24. The Ka-50 is of course more advanced, but it was developed in a different era, it was the first DCS module. What would be the marketing advantage of not having a suitable Opfor/Redfor fighter for the Hornet??? I think the lack of suitable opposition should be a big headache for ED, especially in multiplayer. Maybe they see the success of the Hornet and doubt that they can make the same money with a MiG-29A and they may even be correct. On the other hand, if the choice is between a F-8 or A-6 (both quite obscure/outdated/uninspiring aircraft in my humble opinion), or even the Viggen (which I think is fantastic, but is still rather niche as it was only used by one neutral country) and the most widespread modern(ish) Red fighter, the MiG-29, the choice which one will sell better is not so difficult in my opinion. Good point, but I still think that a MiG-29A should be possible using public sources. And I also think that both the MiG-29A and the Su-27S would be a great commercial succes and therefore worth the effort.

Never happened to me... Even though I often put the throttle at 100% and leave it there. Why? Laziness... :music_whistling: What do you think caused it?

On the contrary. The MiG-17F improves on all the qualities of the MiG-15, making it the ultimate (?) gunfighter. The MiG-17PF on the other hand adds a very primitive radar and useless missiles. There is now also Razbam's MiG-19 to consider. It has the radar and missiles. It's not as manoeverable as the MiG-15, but it is much faster... Looking forward to the promised MiG-19S.

Both the M2000 and the F-18 had their first flight in 1978. F-14 by comparison in 1970. But the M2k that we have is more or less the basic version, while the F-18 is an updated one...

Of all existing modules, only the Hornet and the Mirage 2000 are truly modern(ish) fighters. I think it doesn't make sense to wait for the Strike Eagle. The Super Hornet is not even on the horizon. Later this year the JF-17 is scheduled to come out. The F-16 is scheduled for late 2019 - 2020. The F-15E might come in 2020 or later. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116893

A Tornado certainly would be cool, but it would also be yet another Blue aircraft. What we need is Red aircraft, therefore MiG-29A.

MiG-21 without a doubt. It's also still in front-line service in a number of (potential Opfor) airforces, so... Or... MiG-19! :thumbup:

How about a Heatblur MiG-29A? That would be amazing. In the recent podcast, Wags said (paraphrasing) that a 3rd party would not be bound by the limits placed on ED by the Russian government / manufacturers. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=234647

+1 :thumbup: *That* would be fantastic!

Nice write-up Chuck! And thanks for the guide! :thumbup:

Meh. One of my favourite past times is downing B-17's in my MiG-15. Good stuff! :thumbup:

Wow... I though everybody was overreacting, as usual. Now I'm not sure anymore... Edit: I see I cross-posted with Cool-Hand. It seems that the article was also going a bit overboard with the alleged secrecy by Boeing. If the FAA required additional training, then that doesn't match with sentences in the article like "the company (Boeing) has decided against disclosing more details" and similar statements.

Yes, it's more complicated than that. If you compare an Audi A4 vs. a Kia Ceed, I'd rather have the Audi. But (given a similarly strong engine) they are comparable in performance, size, payload, fuel consumption etc. The Kia is not bad though. You can also compare the Kia to some Chinese brand that won't even be allowed on the road in Europe, and still find it comparable in performance, size, payload, fuel consumption etc. I'd still rather have the Audi. Or the Saab Gripen, as the case may be. You still need to (be able to) pay for it though. ;)

+1

If the goal would be to make DCS-level naval ships, I would be all for it. But unfortunately a ship is much more complicated than an aircraft. So several corners will need to be cut in order to keep everything manageable.

Because more people see it in a general forum?