CrazyGman

Yeah , i kinda figured, i mean the external model already has bendy wings and is at a pretty decent standard, possibly the exterior pilot model though could use tweaking.

Currently the FC3 MiG-29A we have in game, seems to be in a pretty good state for it's exterior model, and even the interior model having a few buttons and switches move. I know the flight model is also the most currently updated amoung the FC3 aircraft. My question is, are a lot of the current assests for the FC3 MiG-29A going to be used for the full fidelity model, or is the aircraft going to be redone from scratch with a completely new model, and systems?

It would be awesome if it was, a tactical commander could then guide multiple flights himself to what he see's would be the best position

Think of it like the battle of Brittan with the big table, except the ground controller can phisically move you himself by transmitting waypoints via a datalink to your autopilot, and it's linked and corrordinated with the SAM batteries as well. You and your team are then put in the most advantageous position, and the target you are prosecuting is marked on your hud without you having to have your radar on. Once your in range to engage the target, you take over the final part of the intercept, your radar is already dialed onto the target and you turn on your radar to lock your target then release your weapons, and follow up if it's required and after shooting down 1-2 planes you head back home. It's basically what the Soviet defensive strategy was, and what they figured was the best way to quickly organize and coordinate assests, to counter penetrating air attacks over their very large landmass which was also surrounded on pretty much all sides where the enemy could attack from. In theory if someone was to develop it with combined arms, you could in Multiplayer have someone in the tactical commander slot take control of your jets if you allowed them and try to steer a flight of you and your teamates into the most advantageous position, which would actually be kinda cool Anyway the good part of the system is it drastically reduces pilot workload so the pilots can really just be concerned with making sure all systems are working in the aircraft, and fine tuning the sensors so that you can quickly engage your target. The bad part of the system is that the sensor to pilot interface on your aircraft are not really well designed to help give you the best overall SA picture even though they are quite good for target acquisition and guiding weapons, but then that's a problem for ground controller to worry about overall SA. There's a lot of you and only a few of them, and while you are expensive and they want to keep you alive, because there are so many of you, all your training and hours are less then your opponents.

There were 5 Su-34s confirmed lost over Ukraine between Feb 28, 2023 and March 14, 2023. 3 were in the first week alone. What killed them all has not been confirmed in the majority of cases, as with a lot of the combat loses. There were also 4 Su-30s confirmed lost over the same 3 week time frame, and about 8 Su-25s These are just fixed wing assists as well, and the confirmed one. As for the drones, most of those are being shot down well inside Ukrainian lines and as you said if your not worried about a getting smacked down by a retaliatory missile, it's much easier to confirm your kill.

In truth the answer is....we don't know. The Ukrainians claim they did, the Russian's claim they didn't, both sides claim multiple kills that can't be corroberated. In the opening week of the war it was pretty much chaos up in the air with Ukraine ground based air defense significantly compromised in the initial days, and Russian Air power compromised due to a lot of jamming by their own side and friendly fire from their own side. In that environment it is very difficult for the people taking the shots themselves to even fully be sure what they fired hit. However with the chaos Ukrainan fighters did manage to hold the line until their SAM network could come back online, though apparently at high cost. Based on that I would say it's highly likely MiG-29s shot down a few Su-25s or Su-34s doing ground attack that pressed in too deep, and maybe the odd Russian fighter that got out of position. The truth will likely not be known till long after the conflict, with some aspects never being clear just like with all air to air combat.

Thanks for the answer. it's the permanent wing bending effect I was refereing too, and indeed, as you said it's been present for a long time. I don't find it now more prevelant in recent changes, I just never looked hard enough at the full wing to notice the permanent bend, just the control surfaces, where I couldn't see any changes. It was more just a curiosity for me what was actually causing the roll, now I can know what to look for, and it's very cool that this is modeled.

So relatively frequently if I pitch up suddenly at high speed (but not high enough that I rip wings) and usually this is when i'm trying to do a head on gun shot, the result will be that afterwards the aircraft will want to roll strongly to one side or another, and requires a large anount of trim to counteract. I'm just wondering what causes the roll effect, as I can't see any external damage on the aircraft? Is it due to bending the airframe and wings, or is it something to do with the stability augmentation system, now being thrown out of wack? (though there seems to be no way I can find to reset it)

The one thing that is odd with this system and I think adds to the confusion is because it seems that when you have the alidade in the bottom range of the scope in E constant elevation angle and you try to increase the elevation angle it doesn't show any change of angle untill you move the alidade range out futher, so it works counterintuitive compared to other aircraft where you change to anntena elevation and the value automatically changes. So people think D mode and E mode are reversed.

It's a later series MLA MiG 23. The ML and later varients have the radar displayed on the hud directly, like in the MiG-29 and Su-27,

So normally i've had no issue with the super 530F in game, however I did have an interesting occurance happen the other day. I was targeting two F-5s flying in formation, with about 500 meter seperation between the 2 of them. I lock on one target, and the hud showed the locked F-5 and launched the 530F from about 8nm with them at around 15000 feet, with them both head on with a relatively fast closure rate Once I launched the 530F i noticed it's trajectory seemed a little off, but not to any significant margin, however the missile it turns out was tracking the unlocked target. And the missile hit the target that was not locked up in the HUD. The seperation the 2 targets had was enough that this wasn't just the case of the missile getting close to the other target and the proximity fuse going active, in this case the missile tracked a different target then the one show on the HUD.

Answer yes, but like with the Cubans in Angola they were probably pretty heavily restricted.

Except that manual says full flaps for takeoff, and using full flaps makes that takeofff distance much shorter, and smoother, i don't even bother to trim up most of the time. Or you could just use full flaps like the manual says, and not have this problem.

It wasn't a AIM-9P5 was it? Those are front aspect

I mean the AI F-4Es have them. They said they were going to do "all" the weapons if i remember correctly from the pre-order trailer. It's a pretty iconic missiles, so I thing AIM-9E and AIM-7E is pretty likely.

Your right they won't in a lot of cases, espessially the 7E but they are their to help your team with you doing 3rd party kills. Best strat would have one teammate staggered back, and have the first teamate take the fight vertical, once the opponent also goes vertical, lock him up with the ACM mode and fire a AIM-7 when he's above you so that you won't lose lock to ground clutter. In a dogfight, yeah they are basically just extra weight but at least they are on the fuselage in indents so the aren't as big a hit to performance. Not like a F1 where if you merge, the big sticks on the wings are getting jettisoned.

I still strongly feel The F-4E will still struggle vs the Bis at low altitude espessially, below 4000m or 13000 feet. The Bis has an emergancy after burner that once you flip the switch in front of the throttle will activate at altitudes below 13000 feet giving it a 7100kgf instead of 6800kgf which increases the lower you go and the closer to mach 1 you get. which I have tested in game and can confirm. It maxes out to 9900kgf when your on the deck and near mach 1.0. In a dogfight in game your probably looking at about a 7500-8000kgf in most dogfight situations with it active. This gives it a significant power to weight boost over the F-4E. As well if you deploy takeoff flaps combined with the emergancy burner the MiG-21Bis at decent weight can easily win a slow fight vs a F-86sabre as the Bis can pretty much cut throttle to avoid an overshot and still float, and then put on the power when it needs to. So as the F-4 I would keep speed and try to keep the fight higher up to make the eburner lose effectiveness or not even engage, and avoid getting the fight slow down low unless you are already glued on the 6 ready to gun them

Loadout will be very important. Remember in Vietnam the US and allies had vastly more fighters and aircraft, and would use that to their advantage, so in that scenario you can load your aircraft for as much staying power as possible and just create a literal wall of jets and missile flying toward the enemy. If one ememy jet starts to dogfight, 2 friendly F-4s get on it's six and delete them. With the jet naked, it's pretty decent vs contemporaries, espessially using the vertical. The slats will help it float better, but probably not as good as the MiG-21 which is well known for pretty much becoming a kite at low speed, and still be able have good nose authority. I'd expect the F-4E with slats to have similar low speed characteristics as the F1. The main thing I think players will struggle with is loadout, and having a good loadout rather then strapping a ton of missiles and fuel to your jet. A MiG-21Bis with 6 missiles and full internal fuel is a pig, and will struggle against a 2 missile F-5 with 3/4 fuel. Balance that out with the MiG-21 with just 2-4 missiles and 3/4 fuel and the fight is now much more even. For the F-4 the Sparrows are recessed in which will help drag and they are on the fuselage which helps wieght distribution so they won't hit performance as hard as say a pair of super 530F's on the wing stations of a Mirage F1, but it's still 4 heavy missiles so be aware of that. The sidewinders are a bit more of a problem, they still have the same double rack regardless if you take 1 or 2, so while you will have reduced weight and drag with only 2x aim 9s instead of 4 you still have the drag from the rack. I feel with the F-4 I would do boom and through passes, untill your down to 4 missiles, and at least 3/4 fuel, after that I think you'll have the power and be nimble enough to go toe to toe with a Mirage F1 or a MiG-21 bis or a F-5. Try to dogfight before that and your going to need friends to help.

I use flat screen, and can confirm it does NOT work for me at all. Never needed it running 1440p on 27 inch screen, and I play competitive cold war multiplayer where spotting with just your eyes is essential. if your run DLSS then it's fine, the blurriness obfuscates how terrible looking it is, but god forbid you use MSAA.

So if you use DLSS with 0.5 sharpness it's actually not too bad. but using MSAA is where it is "VERY" jarring.

options.lua 1440p No VR

I've tested him in single missions. He is now way worse then even a first time player in the front seat. Things like roadside powerlines that cover less then 1% of the target now completely obscure them from him until you basically overfly them. In terms of actually obscured targets he's not too bad for what you'd expect but for obvious targets in the open he's more then terrible. For targets dirrectly off the nose that I myself can see and have told him to put the center of the sight over, he should pick those up right away, maybe not IFF them right away, but the previous implementation was already good at doing that. It's way overcooked. It's like they tested to see if they could make finding targets in clutter harder, made that work, and then failed to test to see how baseline on open targets was effected.

Sigh...so I have to create the file from scratch and then put in the command myself...because putting a tick box in the settings menu was too inconvenient? So now if I want it the old way i'm guessing it's not going to pass the integrity check on multiplayer servers?

I cannot find the autoexec.cfg file located in \Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Config\ I've checked and had others also check, and it's not anywhere there. I really really not a big fan of the new spotting dots.