bies

F-16N had tons (literally a ton) of equimpent removed, to have phenomenal kinematic performance. It had ~7400kg empty weight and 128kN GE engine, it was some ridiculous 1,73 to 1 empty weight T/W. Way higher then any aircraft it was supposed to simulate as aggressor. And it was obviously full envelope 9G which MiG-29 and especially Su-27 lacked.

This is a computer game, a simulation, we can explode the whole map ten times in a row if we like. No point being overly dramatic All the settlements arund Adler or Kobuleti are taking their virtual part of ordinance daily all around the world Nuclear delivery and nuclear interception were very interesting concepts, especially during the Cold War, just from tactical PoV, it would be something new, without harming a single being. And for now, conventional Nike Hercules would be great. Early NATO S-200 counterpart.

Well, Block 30 later received radar, avionics and even engine uppgrade (and more mass...), but the author of the topis is talking about original 1980s Cold War/ Desert Storm Block 30, lighter, with less spohisticated avionics. It would be a great counterpart for 1980s jets. Suited for Germany and Iraq map. (2000s modernised Block 30 would be very similar to our Block 50 we already have in terms of avionics and performance, it would be rather pointless.)

MP generating missions, like in other flight sims, even really old ones. It should be like in other sims, where you can see a map with airfields and automatically generated missions to chose. Where you have route & nav points already in your nav computer/cardridge, you just set proper weapon suited your mission. Naturally cooperate with other elements of your flight. This equals great experience even in much technically worse sims then DCS. Not a long-ass list of random airfields and aircrafts. Where you have to spawn not knowing where or why. Chosing some random weapon, flying to some random place, doing some random stuff, invent your mission by yourself in your head. Like every pilot is forced to be an air force general with detailed knowledge about the whole battlefield and air mission planner, which feels lika a chore, like a mission editor. Such random missions equals subpar experience and often close to no interaction with the world.

Our Soviet 1983 MiG-29 9.12 would be a counterpart for the F-16C Block 25 from 1984 or even F-16A Block 15 from 1981, maybe an F/A-18A from 1983. To some extend F-14A and F-15C from 1970s/early 1980s. But this are not really a strict counterparts as both countries had vastly different doctrines, due to many reasons. F-4 entered service in 1962, our upgraded variant in 1972 but in its core it was still a late 1950s 2nd generation design. No point looking for a direct counterparts though. Our MiG-29 9.12 is suited for all the late Cold War scenarios at its prime; 1980s Europe over divided Germany map, Desert Storm over Iraq/Kuwait. And 1990s Ethipia-Erithrea war, Balkan wars and more, it's i limited use even today, often non modernized since 1980s. It's a lot, arguably the hottest and most content packed period in DCS.

Did you check if pylons have drag? Drag is far more important then weight. Worth to remember it's EA right now.

Modeling real life, both, strong sides and limitations, is the beauty of full fidelity modules and DCS overall.

That was exactly the case with Soviet war production fighters with abysmal quality and big performance loss - yet they are still being modeled. BTW: Do Zero really had 1:1 (!) kil ratio against US fighters like Hellcat or Corsair? It that true? I thought it was like 1:5 or even worse...

An interview with Lt. Col. Fred "Spanky" Clifton is one of the most experienced aggressor pilots ever, having flown the F-15, F-5, F-16 and the MiG-29. He speaks very favorably about many MiG-29 traits, except for the cockpit workflow, range and its nearly useless IRST. How To Win In A Dogfight: Stories From A Pilot Who Flew F-16s And MiGs  Read More: https://www.jalopnik.com/how-to-win-in-a-dogfight-stories-from-a-pilot-who-flew-1682723379/ IRST used in cold war fighters like F-101, F-102, F-106, J-35 Draken, F-4B, MiG-23, MiG-25, Su-27, F-14A, MiG-29 etc. was usefull for high altitude good weather interceptions of enemy recon planes or bombers. Absolutely not in tactical fighter air combat. For today's IRST like PIRATE to be usefull in tactical fighter air combat, breakthroughts like Focal Plane Arrays and compelx digital signal processing were needed. If modeled correctly the IRST will be of very limited use, basically a reserve interception tool in specific conditions, where radar will be jammed and weather conditions favourable, but that's the beauty of the DCS - modeling RL limitations of the systems, contrary to FC3, WT etc.

This one would have an awesome vibe!

Great news! We already have most of Iranian air power of the war; F-4E, F-5E, F-14A, Gazelle L, Huey. Also Iraqi Mi-24, MiG-21bis, Mirage F.1.

Yes. They definitely should. It require some new logic though so it may not be a trivial task.

It's just an old simplification of the game during the time Ka-50 was being made. In more recent and more realistically modeled modules like Apache, you can lock any target, including destroyed or damaged, Hellfire L will hit the wreckages as well.

Zero looks so good. IIRC Zero is the most complete when it comes to documentation, even real flying aircraft.

Maybe Ki-84 Hayate or N1K2-J Shiden-Kai, to fight incoming US Corsair and Hellcat. How much documentation exist? Zero would be nice as well, but it may be hopelessly outdated in 1944 over Marianas.