bies

Early F-16A would have one more benefit - it has modern for the era, but very simple to use and learn analog avionics, and it was all about close rane A/A and A/G combat. The most exciting essence of air combat.

It would be nice, but right now the default "zoom" is like boniculars The level of zoom has been chosen some ~20 years ago, when computers and graphisc was significantly worse. But right now the level of common zoom is exaggerated, literally like binoculars.

It looks fantastic. The best idea for them map in DCS! And even more legendary aircrafts for this map are coming; MiG-29, Tornado IDS, Bolkov-105, Fiat G.91, Su-25, MiG-17, A-6, A-7, Su-17, F-100, F-104 etc.

Block 40 was specialised strike aircraft, integrated with both LANTIRN pods - navigation and attack, with LANTIRN FLIR integrated with wide raster HUD, AN/ALR-56M radar warning receiver, AN/ALQ-213 electronic warfare suite etc. Block 40 was slightly heavier then Block 30, but lighter then Block 50, and significantly lighter then our late CJ Block 50.

Especially this were quite simple systems, with relatively simple detection and guiding algorithms - thus they can be modeled easier and far more realistic then more modern ones, which are both strictly classified and immensly complex.

Me as well.

Razbam's MLA variant was a good choice.

Yes, it would be nice.

And Petrovich autonomously searching for targets, but this is common with other helicopters.

British Cold War heavies looked great, that's for sure.

Yes, if i would have to chose only one single map in DCS, it would definitely be Cold War Germany.

Did OH-6 use rigid rotor?

That's true, ED's Apache has came a long way and now its flight control are working really well and predictable, compared to the first release. Some fine tuning, especially the yaw control, and it will be as controlable and precise as that:

h6_heli.mp4 https://dofreality.com/product/heli/motion-heli-cockpit-6-axis-hero-h6/

Good luck digging trough the forum and Discord

I like 2-seaters when it's essential for their combat effectiveness, like strike aircrafts, long range interceptors, helicopters, trainers. But compromising performance of lightweight, agile fighter like Mirage 2000 or F-16 or MiG-29? No.

The source where what exactly is described about the MiG-29?

1980s MiG-29 9.12 was very risky and Russians practically forced ED to stop the development two times, the project was close to being cancelled and all ED time, work and investment lost. Fortunately now it looks like they are on final and we will be able to have realistically modeled original Soviet / WarPac MiG-29 9.12A in DCS, but it was always at the edge. Manual is only a small fraction of material needed to make realistically modeled full fidelity aircraft. Noone stopped ED from making low fidelity FC3 aircraft of any kind, they were considered game-like realism, and noone cared, like noone cared about F-22 TAW in 1998, years before Raptor entered service. But when you want to reasonably realistic recreation like full fidelity DCS module, not only you need the vast amount of documentation and preferably SME (AKA pilots which flown the thing, willing to cooperate, help to correct and fine tune things), but also a permission of the officials. ED has no permission to model even original Soviet Su-27S from 1985 right now.

That right now it's impossible as part of the team still live inside Russia and they have to obey. Before the war they encouraged 3rd parties, but noone is eager to take the risk of being forced to cancel mid-development, or being forbidden to sell in Russia, so far.

Only time will tell. But good to remember even just one FF module may be great - nearly all previous simulators had only one single flayable aircraft - still often offering fantastic experience. Because what matters for the overall experience is proper enviroment, proper era map, proper era AI air, ground, sea assets, working ATC, well made camaign, preferably dynamic, decent air, ground, sea enemy and friendly AI, well modeled foundation like missile or countermeasures simulation. Not exactly just more aircrafts to test. And ED is, slowly, but moving in this direction (ATC, Dynamic Campaign, AI improvements, weather, expanded weapon simulation, damage modeling, improved radar and IR simulation) as they already have many times (!) more full fidelity aircrafts then any simulator in history

RAZBAM...

That's for sure. MiG-15, MiG-19, MiG-21, Mi-24, L-39 are already here. And MiG-17, MiG-23, Su-17, MiG-29 are during development. FC3 Su-25 receives a big update, costing ED lots of money and work, it may develop into high fidelity as well, especially considering popularity and demand - Cold War tactical CAS/attackers like A-1, A-7, A-10, Su-17, Su-25 are just very attractive and engaging to operate, close visual range combat, sturdy build, lots of manual skills involved, lots of action etc.

Su-15 or Tu-128 would be great as AI opponents if we ever have some Cold War US strategic bomber. Su-15 was an interceptor designed to work in integrated air defense, it was used ONLY by PVO Strany (it means the details are probably strictly classified even today), never exported, its R-98 and modernised R-98M had 2G overload of intercepted target. It means it could hit the B-52, B-58, Victor, but B-1b, F-111 or Vulcan could outmaneuver the missile with 2.5G turn. Su-15TM had also verly limited capability to detect targets below its altitude as its radar was similar to original MiG-25P Smerch. Overall it entered service in 1967, but in 1970s it already became quite dated. Since early 1980s start to be replace by the MiG-23P (PVO variant with GCI link). And Su-15 weren't deployed outside of USSR. Overall even MiG-25PD would be significantly more universal, more suited of air combat, with rich combat history. When in Su-15 the pilot was basically to controll GCI-linked interception autopilot and some autonomous action in case of unexpected situation. Soviets were obsessed with replacing human by the machine everywhere, aviation, navy, air defense etc. as they percieved human as the weakest link in the chain. Though at that time it did them far more harm then good as automatic systems of the era were quite simple, predictable, unreliable and inflexible.

F-80C, F-84E/G, F-9F-4/F-5, Meteor F.8, F3D Skyknight, FJ-1 Fury - all were used during Korean War. And all would be great for Cold War Germany as well. Though we have such exotic, non-combat maps for mostly fictional scenarios, yet Korea 1950s is still absent.

Yes. It would save so much time rearming, especially because most WW2, Cold War jets, helicopters etc. were using symmetrical loadouts nearly 100% of the time. In practice only a few multirole jets sometimes use assymetrical loadouts.