bies

Yes, but it include late 1990s additions like crucial NCTR IFF, digital radio (it had original analog radio before the update so it's aldeady done) and at least one radar mode to be proper 1980s/Desert Storm Mirage 2000. Yes, thanks for clarifying color DEC mode, do you know where it was implemented, more or less? I hope this small but important changes would be easy to implement as an option like with F-15E.

When i fly Mirage 2000 i've noticed it's mostly used in Cold War/1980s/Desert Storm scenarios - but our Mirage 2000 represents late 1990s upgrade with NCTR, color ground level terrain avoidance mode and digital radio (which replaced original 1980s analog radio your module used before the update). This is a bit unfortunate as it's a bit too late for late Cold War / 1980s or even Desert Storm scenarios. At the same time surely not proper to face 2000s F-16C, F/A-18C, F-15E etc. with JHMCS, AMRAAM, AIM-9X, Link 16. This would be Mirage 2000-5 era, which is out of reach. Could you please enable an option (similar to your F-15E) to make 1980s Mirage 2000 variant, disabling this few 1990s elements? It would make it proper also in scenarios when it can show its full potential. Cheers and thanks for your work!

What is this gun argument about? In late 1950s and in 1960s when Starfighter took part in combat a gun was still crucial, widely used by Starfighters in both A/A and A/G role. In 1970s a gun was relegated to secondary role by more reliable and higher performance missiles, but Starfighter was outdated in mid 1970s when F-14s and F-15s, and soon F-16s were flying around. What is haracteristic - all this 4th generation fighters still featured internal guns.

Last trend is withdrawal from physical stealts as it's impossible to hide from modern IRST which are able to detect even a heated air around flying aircraft from dezens of miles. AESA radars using GaN technology also offer fantastic performance. That's why the most sophisticated militaries like US or Chinese are all in designing very long range weapon and wingman drones, as they came into conclusion (considering plethora of parameters, technology advances and trends) manned aircraft going anywher near the enemy will be lost immediately. What is more AI systems are replacing more and more human inputs - and they are advancing rapidly. US pilot involved in the program stated the best human pilot doesn't stand the slightest chance against similar AI piloted fighter in close air combat as his movements and judgements are basically perfect and faultless to the tiniest move, making dozens of perfect imputs every second. Way beyound any human capabilities. He also stated close air combat is more of an excercise or demonstration and it is considered basically the least important part of the program, but he is not allowed to reveal other, way more important fields and combat acitvities AI is replacing human right now. According to him progress is so unbelievably rapid every few moths revolitionize AI capabilities to the poin it's even hard do understand the new parameters or rules perfectly valid just few months ago. This will relegate human from military aviation actual combar activities very quickly, making it completely unattractive from PC simulator point of view. That's why WW1, WW2, Cold War etc., when human pilots, with all their flaws, mistakes, emotions and imprefections, were still crucial element in air combat, will always be popular in PC smulators and games. Like Starfighters fighting MiGs over Vietnam in 1960s.

Gun surely will dissapear, 100nm+ missiles are already leading trend most advanced militaries invest in. In a long term directed energy weapon. Starfighter obviously became outdated in the middle of 1970s when F-14 Tomcat and F-15 Eagle became operational, but Starfighter was all about late 1950s and 1960s. When it was used in combat in the Vietnam war, in India-Pakistani wars, other flashpoints like Taiwan Strait, Berlin crisis. This was an era gun was still one of the main weapons, missiles were short range, limited sensor guidance, limited G-loads, limited engagement envelope etc. And those times Starfighter was one of the top fighters in the world.

Full fidelity fighter F-15A or C would be awesome. Maybe someday, Razbam did a great job with the F-15E.

USAF F-104C deployed during Vietnam war were flying with refueling probe regularly, escorting allied aircrafts and providing CAS.

1950s shining, bare metal, high visibility USAF liveries looked so satisfying.

Didn't know that, thx.

For me the gun is F-104's most important weapon. All Starfighters taking part in combat or crysis US F-104C over Vietnam, Taiwanese F-104A over the strait, Pakistani F-104A over Kashmir, German F-104G during Berlin Crisis were equipped with a gun. Pakistani put them to good use. Compared to gun-less 1960s MiG-21s, F-4 Phantoms - Starfighter with its 6 barreled revolver was awesome. When F-104 entered service Vulcan gun was brand new invention and the best gun in the world. During late 1950s/early 1960s gun was still among the most important and reliable weapon. Plus it's just more satisfying to strafe in supersonics slashing attack some MiG, compared to firing the missile.

Exactly what i was going to say. Uprated A was used in limited number, but it had the best kinematic performance, it used the most powerfull -19 engine together with the lightest airframe. Considering Aerges work so far C-101 with three and Mirage F.1 with four variants (including 2-seater and completely different avionics M) - i wouldn't rule out the possibility they are making 2-3 F-104 variants. Especially some were really similar. Time will tell.

I've never find it difficult to shoot down enemy fighters when flying Dora or Mustang, despite them having inferior turn rates. E. Hartmann in post war interview stated more than 90% of his victims never see him attacking untill his bullets started to hit them, with supersonic fighters such attacks are even easier and window in which attacker needs to be spotted is even smaller. Originally Kelly Johnson designed F-104 as air superiority fighter to defeat MiGs in air combat. Not as an interceptor. He personally contacted Korean war US fighter pilots to know what was, in practice, the most important factors in air combat. Their conclusion was more or less: speed, acceleration, climb rate, zoom climb, ceiling, gun. Thus he created a fighter which overperformed every existing aircraft in this parameters, armed with newly designed powerfull Vulcan gun. But USAF testing it was more inclined to use it as interceptor due to its fantastic performance. Still, their USAF pilots in units were trained for air combat to outfly enemy fighters, using it as the most powerfull BnZ fighter ever.

BVR didn't exist back then. Even Sparrow was well within visual range except for poor visibility/night. Gun was F-104 main weapon regardless of its turn rate, it was designed to perform high speed slashing attacks, like WW2 BnZ fighters with great kinematic performance, but reduced turn rate.

They mentioned early AN/ASG-14T1 radar and late J79-GE-19 engine.

It was even more complicated: originally Kelly Johnson designed F-104 as air superiority fighter to defeat MiGs in air combat. He personally contacted Korean war US fighter pilots to know what was, in practice, the most important factors in air combat. Their conclusion was more or less: speed, acceleration, climb rate, zoom climb, ceiling, gun. Thus he created a fighter which overperformed every existing aircraft in this parameters, armed with newly designed powerfull Vulcan gun. But USAF testing it was more inclined to use it as interceptor due to its fantastic performance. Still, their USAF pilots in units were trained for air combat to outfly enemy fighters, using it as the most powerfull BnZ fighter ever.

Later "beefed up version of the A" was the best performer among all - it has lightweight lowest drag "A" airframe and more powerfull engine. They were built for pure air superiority. This one would be great.

What variant of F-104 this is going to be? Or maybe it's too early to ask? I think some early USAF hot rod F-104A/C with pure performance from 1960s and Vietnam War would be neat. Maybe most popular multirole F-104G as well. Considering quality, flight model, engine model and overall realism and attention to detail of your C-101 and Mirage F.1 and the number of variants you've included i'm confident Starfighter will be top notch as well. Legendary Cold War american fighter, great choice and potential bestseller.

I enjoy both, both are very well made. I would say main difference is C-101 has NATO instruments logic when L-39 has Soviet/Warsaw Pact one, since both were used as trainers in two respective blocks.

Great idea. Snow as well.

Amateur made, totally unrealistic, fictional MODs, made by a single guy in a few days, by changing some random values, without any data, any SME input, with completely fictional avionics, weapons, sensors, flight models, performance - are fun to fly once or twice. But they are absolutely not any answer to "Redford question". Flying some Su-57 "patriotic" MOD Mach3 at 80,000ft (without semi-ramjet engines and with duralumin skin...) and turning 360° all day without losing any energy or without any laws of physics like some flying sorcerer becames cheap after 1-2 flights and it is not compatible with rest of DCS in any shape or form. It's nice MODs work and me or you can make Mach 4 NGAD superfighter in a few days, changing some random numbers in F-15 file and adding some free 3d model, but it doesn't mean it should be integrated into DCS. Full fidelity MiG-17, Su-22, MiG-23, maybe MiG-29 some day, are answer to "redfor question", not some arcade 100% fictional amateur made completely unrealistic Su-something MOD.

What can I say, A-1 looks awesome. Navy warthog of the early cold war. One of these aircrafts which looks just so-so, but in practice they are hell lot of fun. Low level ground attacks with guns, rockets, bombs, dodging AAA. CSAR missions and landings/takeoffs under fire. Early carrier operations with close to no aids.

When MiG-21 was used by North Vietnamise as hit-and-run interceptor operating from ambushes, in most cases doesn't even have gun which was lamented by Vietnamise pilots - the transsonic MiG-17 was perfectly suited for classic close air combat.

Wasting development time only to code whole new dumbed down enviroment, less realistic, more simplified, more fictional and made up. If i would be a developer coding such dumbed down version of my work would be the worst part of my job. Instead of many anticipated MORE realistic and LESS dumbed down features like SAM enviroment, radar simulation, IRST simulation, more realistic weather interaction, more realistic naval behaviour and systems simulation, more realsitic ground vehicle weapon simulation and armor, more realsitic damage simulation etc.

Game mode in a simulator would be a waste of development time.

Exactly. Thet's why i said 1980s Patriot / S300 CAN be modeled in reasonably realistic way if someone would like to use some manhours - not thet they already are. All the systems ar currently very simplified. When more modern systems can't me modeled anywhere near their real capabiliies which are 100% classified, regardless of manhours spent on them.