Lace

The Mirage was one of my first FF modules, and the first one I actually learned to operate properly. Since then it has been updated and changed so many times (it seems) that I am no longer current with the aircraft. I do fancy dipping back into the Mirage, but am not keen on wasting more time learning systems which are going to change again. Do the tutorials and documentation match the current aircraft version? TLDR; Is the Mirage now 'finished', and should I invest some time re-learning it?

That's a good shout actually. There have been a coupe of occasions when I have air-started in the Viper with the battery switch off. I guess if the throttle had an ICO detent that could kill the motor too.

Wait, cold and dark, in the air? I guess that's one way to add a bit of urgency to the start-up checklist.

I do thanks, and it is.

Why would you fly beyond Vne? Why would you need that? It's hardly essential to model as it is something you should be going out of your way to avoid. If you want realism, then fly to the prescribed limits and you won't have those issues. They are hardly a priority as most users will never put their aircraft in that state to begin with. This is a discipline issue, not a modelling issue.

There are a few things I do understand well, from years of study. One of those things is the effects of nuclear weapons. I have a library full of reference material and have visited the sites of both live and test detonations. You may know better than I do, but it is doubtful. Tactical nuclear weapons may pose a programming problem for DCS, fair enough, but that is not the same as saying they cannot be modelled.

I agree, there should be consequences, but, you know, EA and all that. There seems to be a lot of confusion on these forums, I was just clarifying that the aircraft won't hit an aerodynamic brick wall at Vne, it's up to the pilot to know and not exceed these limits.

Vne is an instruction, a speed limit, like on the highway. It doesn't mean the aircraft physically can't go faster than that, but the manual says you shouldn't. In the Viper's case I believe the limit comes from the dynamic pressure on the canopy, but IANAVPIRL.

If only DCS had some pickups and Technicals...

Apologies, I know it's been a while since the last mission. I've finished 7 and 8 is almost there now. I had intended to roll the two into one but was having issues with some elements of the helicopter landings. To simplify things, 7 is a runway attack, and 8 will be top cover for an assault. I'm on 2.7 and as I understand it these missions are not backward compatible, so apologies to anyone not on openbeta, but I wanted to try out some of the new clouds a try (you will need your ILS to get home on mission 7!). Northern Flank 7.miz

What do you mean by lack of Vne?

Agreed. To many here use Hollywood as a frame of reference. Military kit is often bugged, unreliable and less capable than (some) civvy stuff due to long procurement times and ever changing design briefs.

Ok, everyone is focussing on what DCS is now and how it is played currently. There is also a massive misunderstanding regarding the effect of a smaller nuclear weapon. Nobody is asking for MT class weapons. Here is an American 300kt B61 on somewhere all DCS players know - Batumi. We are not talking about wiping clean entire maps in an instant. That is Hollywood nuclear warfare. Link here: NUKEMAP by Alex Wellerstein (nuclearsecrecy.com) Imagine the new dynamic campaign. Each side has a couple of tactical nukes. You don't know which facility they are stored in, but you are tasked to find and destroy them before they can be used against you. Suddenly, intercepting an incoming strike has significantly more importance attached to it. You are no longer going to lose a hanger or two, but perhaps a huge part of your weapons and POL storage capacity. Do you throw everything you have at stopping them? Or is the attack a feint, or just probing your defences? Or how about another scenario, when your forces have been pushed back and are facing an enemy with numerical superiority (think Fulda type situation). Your only choice now is perhaps a tactical nuclear strike to buy you some time. But of course this brings it's own risks and now the enemy will be looking to match your escalation. Like any weapon it's use will be controlled by mission designers. If it is not in a warehouse, it can't be used. You don't want them, fine, but we aren't vaporising cities here, we're talking about a legitimate and realistic use of a weapon which was designed to be used at a tactical level, rather than strategic.

One of the reasons the A-10 engines were mounted above the wings was to more easily facilitate hot-pit rearms with less risk to ground crew. Go read some of the contemporary accounts of ODS, you will find plenty of examples of crews flying multiple sorties without leaving the cockpit. It was the very definition of surge tempo ops, and they were seriously expecting a much tougher fight than they actually received. With hindsight ODS looks like a cake-walk, the reality at the time was that the coalition were facing one of the most advanced AD networks and some of the most battle-hardened forces in the world, and a leadership who had already demonstrated an ability and willingness to use chemical and biological weapons against his own citizens.

Which is a much better way. There is no such thing as a stalling speed, only a stalling AoA. Fortunately AoA probes and their integration into GA glass cockpits is becoming cheaper and more common these days.

You mean like this? It does happen, but IRL there are procedures to follow and taxy speed limits so it is almost certainly far less common than an airquaker hurrying back to the runway after another hot pit rearm. The info I have states taxy at 20ish, turns at 10 (from the DED INS G/S).

There is no max landing weight for the Viper. If you can take off with it, you can land with it.

Most aircraft use airspeed rather than AoA for the simple reason that they don't have AoA indication. AoA is the only real defining factor in lift generation. The reason the approach speed changes with weight is to arrive at the correct AoA. You don't need to overdo the aerobraking pitch up either, or you risk a nozzle or airbrake strike, 10-13deg works ok, you just need to hold it for as long as the nose will remain controllable.

If you are having stopping problems you are not aerobraking or are trying to drop it into farm strips. It's really not that hard to land the Viper. Aero to 100, wheel brakes from 70-taxy speed.

Or just fly by AoA. Correct AoA, correct landing speed for current aircraft weight.

A large part of this (rotary shot down by fixed wing assets) is how people play DCS. Most missions and scenarios are completely unrealistic and written for player enjoyment. Look how many kills a DCS player will get, and compare it to real life combat pilots. Many DCS players will become an ace in one mission, with several hundred AA and AG kills within a few sorties. This is just not how it works in real life. Aircraft will be sent on a particular mission, and that is very rarely 'just fly around and find something to kill'. Unless downing a helicopter is an expressed mission objective it will probably be left alone, as AA weapons would be better employed against high threat targets. If for example you are flying a self-escorted strike mission, bumping into a helicopter is unlikely to prevent you from completing your mission, so you will not want to waste fuel, weapons or expendables engaging a target, while at the same time risk missing your TOT for the actual reason you are flying. Even a CAP mission is unlikely to waste time engaging rotary in a contested airspace, as the fixed wing assets present a greater threat. Let the SHORAD deal with the angry palm trees. The only time I can realistically see helicopters being engaged is like in ODS when everything else was stuck on the ground or hiding in Iran, and coalition forces had such numerical superiority that they could afford to spend the resources downing the odd helicopter. TLDR; The main reason helicopters don't get shot down by fighters is that the fighters usually have something more important to do.

Apart from the Spitfire, Mossie, 109 & 190s, Viggen, Mirage 2000, Gazelle, C-101 and (if you squint) the Harrier? The Typhoon and Mirage F1 are also on their way. Probably others I've missed. But, yes I agree a Tonka or Jag would be very welcome, and the AI units desperately need bolstering.

FC3 aircraft are simplified, but rely heavily on keybinds rather than clickable cockpit controls. For a VR user this is very inconvenient and make the FC3 aircraft far less accessible than the full-fidelity modules IMHO. You spend your time memorising keys rather than learning systems. The F-5 is a good shout, as is the AV-8B if you want multi-role and the novelty of naval ops and VSTOL. Don't discount the M2000 though, that was one of my first FF modules and it is a capable A/A platform with some A/G ability, though very little commonality with the American aircraft if you plan on changing aircraft later on.

Never done the full circuit but I've been on the karting track a few times.

Paul Ricard is my local circuit when I'm at my place in France, I regularly cycle up that way They used to do L39 flights from there too.