bfr

Interesting that we fleetingly see a carrier variant in that video.

The longer nose wheel strut was a variable thing needed for higher AoA off the smaller (than US) RN carriers when we still had ones with catapults, rather than it always being at its most exaggerated extension. They also swapped out the J79 engines for the RR Spey on the F-4K (not sure if the later lot of ex-USN F-4Js they bought for the RAF were re-engined).

I'm sure they said the J would follow this as a module in its own right. Like you say, E was a perfectly logical starting point given it was the model made in the greatest numbers.

This. I just type 'Update DCS' in the start menu and the right app comes up.

No doubt someone probably will do one in time when the paint kit is more widely available. I suppose Razbam did Israeli skins for the F-15E despite them operating the F-15I, but usually official skins tend to try to be historically accurate.

It'd seem unlikely they'd do an official scheme with the module as I think i'm right in saying Spain never operated the E model?

I must admit I was startled by how small the F1 is in the flesh when I first encountered one up close in the static display at an airshow.

A fair point. Perhaps the flying brick is tricky to get into position where a decent firing solution is available

RAF never operated the F-4E. British Phantom variants were all derived from the navalised F-4J I think (which I believe Heatblur will be doing next). Although no doubt an RAF themed scheme will turn up for the -E at some point.

If I remember right the DMAS upgraded variant won't be available on day 1 so that (plus the whistles and bells that enables) should ensure it'll be in EA for at least a little while.

When you think about it, Rick is exactly the qualities you want in a back-seater.

Yeah, haven't checked them personally but I'm sure someone said it was something daft like 16ft.

I wonder if the ships included on the map burning but not then sinking once destroyed is tied in with the reports i've seen from some other users that the water in some harbours is only a few feet deep? Although that assumes that the damage modelling/animation for ship objects takes such things into account.

And they might add support for Shrike to the existing Block 50 if its historically appropriate/accurate. I haven't seen any definitive information that the Block 50 can't rather just doesn't carry them. I don't recall them ever being on the roadmap for the DCS F-16, although the weapon being introduced into the game via the F-4 may change that.

Until they sort out anti-ship missile warheads/ship damage modelling (and I really wish they would get around to this) then Harpoons are kinda rubbish though. Adding support for Shrike is pretty niche appeal too. Super Hornet I believe is still constrained by lack of documentation? Much as i'd love to have one in the game.

I was a bit like that too. I wasn't initially all that bothered, and even now i've finally ordered it I still don't even expect it to become my daily driver. I do however appreciate and like that they're trying to raise the bar and am happy to support that ambition. And hopefully gains from this spill over into gains for other products (like I don't have masses of hours on the F-14 because I find working with Jester a bit clunky currently).

DCS UFC I used for quite a bit (its a paid app but not expensive) until I bought a Stream Deck XL. The same author does a moving map display app but I can't say I ever tried it.

If you like low level i've just blasted down a cracking valley I stumbled across near Storslett (N69 46 03.64 E21 01 29.14). It starts just SE of where the town is marked on the map and then slowly bends S before veering SE again. Lots of fun in a clean F-16.

They've timed this absolutely on purpose, haven't they?

Its on the 'coming later' list, or at least the airbase associated with the range is. And you can already clearly see where the airbase will go if you overfly its location.

Tried the HAS out on a friendly base and they seem to be 'sink into the ground' unfortunately. Yeah, i'd agree it'd be good if the elements were destructible. And yes, I noticed too that its individual sections that collapse. Although i've seen that on some bridges in other maps and it seems reasonable depending on the type of bridge.

Not tried a HAS or industrial plant as yet to compare. I did have a pop at some dam structures I came across but not a lot happened (which I think is usual on other maps).

This was with a couple of 2000lb'ers. From memory then static cargo ships in port in the Syria and Sinai maps would go down with just 1.

From what i've tried so far its standard 'collapse into the ground' stuff much like most of the other maps. Boats catch fire but don't appear to sink.

I did manage to destroy some spans of the longer bridge in Murmansk (GBU-24s)