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.

MiG-23MLA Razbam chosen is the best, the lightest airframe with the strongest engine and reinforced wing root. It was still a dangerous fighter in late 1970s. Wneh MLD was outdated when it entered production as MiG-29 was already in production alongside -23MLD variant.

Vietnam obviously, overall Korean War is such a low hanging fruit for the ED. Two main opponents, full fidelity F-86 and MiG-15, are already there. Mustand and La-7 as well, A-1 Skyraider in developement. Just making eagerly awaited and universally requested Korea map anyway. And Soviet ground assets. When all about Korean war screams great gameplay, two symmetrical sides, all out long conflict with tanks, artillery, warships, air power, engaging close air to air and air to ground combat etc.

My humble opinion is ED should make some coherent chosen operation. Not jumping on random places. We have great Normandy 1944 with proper map, air/ground/sea assets, but the only problem with current Normandy 1944 is some of the first birds like Bf-109K4 P-51D, Fw190D9, don't fit the timeframe/operation. When later, created with better overall idea in mind, like Mossie, P-47D, Fw190A8, Spitfire IX fit quite well. That's why right now it's probably a time to focus on Pacific when they already started with Marianas WW2 map, Corsair, Hellcat, maybe previous P-51, P-47 - and zero Japanese Zeroes and other, better fitting 1944 Marianas Philippines campaign Japanese aircraft. So even though Mediterranean would be great as well it's better to focus on one theatre at the time.

Overall Korean War is such a low hanging fruit for the ED! Two main opponents, full fidelity F-86 and MiG-15, are already there. Mustang and La-7 as well, A-1 Skyraider in developement. Just making universally requested Korea map and Soviet ground assets remain. And all about Korean War screams great gameplay, two symmetrical sides, all out long conflict with tanks, artillery, warships, air power, engaging close air to air and air to ground combat.

Corsair, finally!

Yes. There were 4 main F-15C standards: 1979 to 1984: Initial F-15C, similar to F-15A but a bit heavier, reinforced wing for 9G, a bit more internal fuel, added internal AN/ALQ-135 ECM, AN/ALR-45 flares/chaff, upgraded APG-63. Used in combat only by Saudi Arabia during 1991 Gulf War with 2 air kills Mirage F1. 1985 to 2004: F-15C MSIP II, added new F100-PW-220 engines, PACS armament control, MPCD display, AN-ALR-56C RWR, AN/ARL-47 flare/chaff, improved AN/ALQ-135 band 4 ECM, NCTR IFF, PSP processor, ACSG HOTAS, pugraded HUD, partial NVG integration, AMRAAM integration and wiring. This variant achieved nearly all F-15C air kills, it was used in late Cold War in Europe, 1991 Gulf War operation Desert Storm with 36 air kills, 1993-1995 Balkan War operation Deny Flight, 1999 operation Allied Force with 2 air kills MiG-29. This is FC3 F-15. 2005 to 2016: still F-15C MSIP II, but mid life upgrade, added Link-16, JHMCS, GPS-navigation, AIM-9X integration, APG-63v(1) with reliability and ECCM upgrade, newer computer. Used in Operation Iraq Freedom since ~2005, no air kills as Iraq basically didn't have aviation anymore. This will be FF DCS F-15. 2017 to 2026-pahse out: Golden Eagle, added AN/APG(v)3 AESA LPI radar, PAD Passive Attack Display with sensor fusion, AIM-120D integration, Sniper pod, new digital HUD classified AN/ALQ-135 ECM and AN/ALR-56C upgrades, classifed EPAWSS self protection. Used in patrols over Syria operation Inherent Resolve since ~2018, no air kills.

"Now" is not relevant as we don't have any assets or modules from "now" anyway. But yes, India-Pakistan would be a good map for the Cold War era all out wars in the region, especially from 1965 and 1971. As other were just limited scale engagements, not even wars. And 1947 didn't include any meaningful air operations. There is still no Korea or Vietnam, massive many years long wars, with thousands of aircrafts shoot down. Because developers initially prioritize less relevant regions. Probably will happen it the future.

1) Making some completely unrealistic fictional MODs for proper and realistically modeled 1980s Soviet aircrafts would be 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.