bies

1) Making some completely unrealistic fictional MODs for proper and realistically modeled 1980s Soviet aircrafts would be a waste of time, money and resources. 2) It would be better to include more proper late Cold War NATO aircrats, like our current F-14A/B, Mirage F.1, F-4E, Gazelle L and incoming Tornado IDS, A7E, A6E, Bo-105 PAH-1 etc. E.g. F-15C MSIP II from 1980s/Desert Storm or F-16A or C Bock 30 or Apache A would be nice in the future. 3) DCS will never be artificially balanced; 1944 P-51D won't stand real chance against 1964 MiG-21PF. 1955 MiG-19P won stand a chance against 1975 F-15A Eagle. 1983 MiG-29 9.12 won't stand a chance against 2003 F/A-18C. And it's fine, it's as it should be. If they would - it would actually point there is something fundamentally wrong with the whole simulation. PS. When electronic warfare will be modeled to the bigger extend in DCS, such 20 years older aircrafts like 1980s F-14A/B or MiG-29 9.12 will be even way more helpless against mid-2000s variants of F-16C or F/A-18C.

It's AI fault. ED is actively working on AI right now, AI ground forces progress is already noticable, and things like AI aircrafts having generic RWR, LWR, uninterrupted guidance etc. are very important to adress, as they are copletely changing the tactics. Making some legitimate ways impossible. Especially because this things are way easier to solve then AI behaviour in complex situations.

Yes, i must have heard it as i remember how they were waiting for Turkey to approve their operation from thir territory.

It must be true if he said so - and the reason why USAF gave 7440th Composite Wing and Saudi squadrons such a secondary/support role, mostly BARCAP outside of main combat area.

To put some facts in order - it was nearly all MSIP II during Gulf War. There was no F-15C MSIP I, original F-15 "MSIP Phase I" plan was canceled - USAF went straight to MSIP II ("MSIP Phase II"). MSIP II started in 1983, aircraft being operational since 1985 and modernization went fast and smooth. All of the USAF F-15C Eagle squadrons that deployed to Desert Storm flew under MSIP II upgrades, with NCTR, upgraded computer, MPCD, AMRAAM integration (not utilized due to blue-on-blue concerns) etc.; 27th TFS (1st TFW, FF) "Fighting Eagles" operating from King Abdulaziz AB, 71st TFS (1st TFW, FF) "Ironmen" from King Abdulaziz AB, 53rd TFS (4th TFW, BT) "Tigers" from Prince Sultan AB, 58th TFS (33rd TFW, EG) "Gorillas" from King Faisal AB - all were flying MSIP II. Saudi F-15C were pre-MISP II. This four USAF F-15C MSIP II squadrons achieved 34 out of 36 F-15C air kills of Gulf War, 2 were achieved by Saudi pre-MSIP F-15C. In late December 1990, USAFE had 10 F-15C Eagles already in Turkey on rotation and NATO exercises. When Turkey approved combat operations, those aircraft (drawn from rotational squadrons such as the 525th TFS and others) were merged into the 7440th Composite Wing (Provisional) at Incirlik on 16 January 1991. EDIT: This was non-MSIP II group, performing BARCAP outside of main combat area, in Northern Iraq, to prevent fleeing aircrafts from landing in Iran, similar to Saudi F-15C on the south. USAF didn't want any non-MSIP II aircraft to be engaged in air combat as non-MSIP II didn't have the new NCTR capability which was a BIG deal, they were afraid of blue-on-blue without this additional IFF.

Yes! After all this years - Fulcrum. And in the purest, best looking original variant, with the best kinematoc performance! This early Fulcrum was a rocket ship, before they started to add more and more stuff to it. Thanks ED.

So you want amateur-made MOD. Yes and not only than, except for flight model they would have to make detailed 3d model, detailed cockpit up to date standard, all the textures, weapons modeling, some crude, even if unrealistic avionics etc. It's like making 70% of the work - and selling it for 10% the price. And there is zero data to model it outside of MOD level of realism.

Yes, there is nothing making Cuba map practical at this moment, no enviroment, no assets.

Floggers BVR capabilities were extremely limited, Floggers had very small detection range (and tiny against notoriously hard to detect F-16), Flogger radars required GCI support and GCI-link radar stering from the ground to realistically pickup any target except for straight and high flying bomber, and GCI link has been easily jammed by Israelis, Situational awareness of Floggers, whith jammed communications and GCI-link, avionics not suited for autonomous operation, extremely limited cockpit visibility, was minimal, Sidewinders/Pythons didn't provide any launch warning for Floggers, Sidewinder had bigger F-pole, becuse it's fire-and-forget, then Beam-maneuver for R-23 as it's SAHR, required maintaining lock untill the hit, and the missile had poor kinematic performance and breaking the lock was easy for trained Israelis having high SA. I understand some random people may not know that, but guys intrested in flying sims, playing DCS regularly in multitude of different engagements... Please. Go Mirage F.1 with "BVR" 530 against F-16 with just Sidewinders. It will be quite one sided, despite theoretical BVR capability, not usefull against small tactical fighter. Or go and read about ~1977 ACEVAL/AIMVAL reports. They performed hundreds of simulated air combat encourters in every possible configuration and tactics. F-5 were able to break very stable F-15 lock of their big, modern, powefull, fast computer and algorithms aided radars. Breaking the lock of crude Flogger would be trivial in comparison for a small, nimble, tactical fighter.

Dictional something would be medicore. But 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis would be awesome. With F-4B, F-8, MiG-21F-13 and ather aircrafts of the era.

Israeli F-16A didn't have Sparrows during 1982 Bekaa Valley Mole Cricket operation. It would be against the whole F-16 design philosophy, adding drag, weight, price, complexity. The only F-16 using Sparrows were National Air Guard F-16A ADF and Taiwanese export variant with dumbed down APG-66(v) 3, used to intercept bombers. F-16A APG-66 lock range and lock stability was considered inadequate for air combat. F-16A was designed for close maneuver air combat with Sidewinders and guns. It received BVR capacity only after the Cold War / Desert Storm in early 1990s.

An early, lightweight, nimble Fw 190 A3 would be awesome over the channel in early 1942!

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: