bies

Plus AdA were using first F.1C without refueling probe in early 1970s. Good counterpart for our MiG-21bis, F-5E or future F-4E.

This is very much true, but i see that from another perspective as i think we could have some more widespread and relevant aircrafts than prototypes like Ka-50 or Su-25T. Let alone F-20. With very limited data, not real air war history to have some point of reference, practically impossible to find subject matter experts, it would be simply unrealistic module.

Cobra would be great, especially some earlier variant like AH-1G from Vietnam/mid Cold War or AH-1W from 1970s/80s with TOW missiles. When in a mood to fly extremally complex and sophisticated one i would fly Apache D, when i would prefer to fly simpler aircraft and enjoy just manual flying, looking, aiming, shooting without the need to remember long complicated procedures i would fly Cold War Cobra. AH-1Z would be both classified and too similar to AH64D.

First probably because Tejas entered service only in 2011 so it's strictly classified so it would have to be completely made up and have fictional avionics. Second because we don't have any 3rd party from India to make some exclusively Indian module knowing Indian language documentation. Third because India is absolutely crazy about it's military equipment documentation secrecy, even more than Russia.

It was December 1992, after Desert Storm, nothing controversial here. Desert Storm took place 17 January to 28 February 1991. What you cited is no fly zone more than 1,5 year after Desert Storm ended. AIM-120 was already operational by this time.

Some 3rd parties are doing just that, depending of how profitable such variant would be. I.e. Heatblur is making Iranian F-14A GR-95. Note it still takes huge amount of time despite of very minor changes it requires. Making completely new avionics and weapon systems for modern-ish AMRAAM carrying F-4 would take many additional years of work.

Do you have such document? Not trying to tell you you are wrong, but I've always heard something exactly opposite. USAF received short serie of 50-80 pre production version of AIM-120 deferent than production AIM-120A in 1988 and evaluated them and requested some changes. It became operational after Desert Storm. If USAF would secretly cleared AIM-120 to take off in combat area why they didn't use it a single time? Why even taking off with a missile if you are forbidden to launch it? To carry some ballast?

Is there a single photo from Desert Storm with any aircraft carrying AIM-120? AIM-120 became operational only after Desert Storm ended, why would anyone even take off with AIM-120 in combat area?

Great work RAZBAM, i appreciate all this details.

Mach=1.4, not 2.4, it's some mistake in the video. To go Mach 2.4 Tomcat would need to fly with max 4 Sparrows in semi-recessed low drag fuselage pylons only, no Sidewinders and for sure no Phoenixes. It would need to fly straight and high at least 37,000-40,000ft, accelerating for a long time. In tactical situation like the one in the video when they needed to have their options open and be able to outmaneuver the enemy flying at Mach 2 would be a big mistake.

Armed F-4 Phantom was losing relatively only small amount of speed compared to i.e. F-16 because Phantom carried AIM-7 Sparrows in non-universal semi-recessed fuselage pylons, without any external pylon and missiles were inside of fuselage air boundary layer. AIM-7 in F-4, F-14, F-15 or fuselage mounted on F/A-18, or even AIM-120 on EF2000, had relatively small drag index.

I would like to see any aircraft from this era, but F-84F Thunderstreak didn't have a luck to see any serious combat. It was too late for Korean War when F-84 Thunderjet was widely used, but USAF replaced it with F-105 Thunderchief before Vietnam War. All in all Thunderjet for Korean War or Thunderchief for Vietnam War would be better, but F-84F would be good as well for Cold War gone hot in Europe 1950s.

MiG-23 didn't change wing sweep angle during maneuver air combat due to severe G limitations during the wing sweep change process, it would need to fly nearly straight for several seconds. The full wing transfer took about 18 seconds, a little less when retracting the wing, which was helped by the incoming air flow during the backward stroke. Overall MiG-23 will be very challenging to model correctly as it behaved very differently depending on wing sweep, with many distinct quirks in all 3 planes controll and stability, it will be practically 3 flight models, i hope RAZBAM will nail it. With 45° MiG-23ML is very close to F-4E with both instantenous and sustained turn rates. Both F-4 and MiG-23 will require some serious piloting skills to BFM efficiently, nothing like F-16 or F/A-18 pulling full stick to turn. From MiG-23ML manual:

Making this frankenstein modern Phantom with totally different avionics, radar, weapons, systems etc. would require absolutely huge amount of work, it would be practically completely different aircraft worth many years of research and coding. And it is classified so it would be totally unrealistic even after all this additional years of coding. Making F-14A GR-95 is taking years of coding and research even though there are only a few differences. Soon: "give P-51 Exterminator Predator Terminator with JHMCS, Link16 and AMRAAM"

S variant without radar had lighter nose and it was slightly more maneuverable. Both had a bit different use, P was all weather interceptor mostly for PVO, S was dogfighter for tactical/frontline aviation.

Fantastic update overall. All modules look impresive. The datails of Corsair's canvas, elastic hoses, flaps actuators etc. are crazy. Cockpit lighting presentation also. Vietnam era late 1960s US Navy pilot, finally something like that in DCS! Can't wait for this bird. Together with RAZBAM MiG-19S variant and RedStar MiG-17F, the F-8J Crusader will be the first truly Vietnam war aircraft in DCS. MiG-21 overhaul is very promising as well considering some systems have room for improvement after 8 years. Thanks for the update!

Was A-7E SO advanced? I've seen developer diary, its avionics is extremally impressive considering it's purely Cold War bird - US A-7 were decomissioned in late 1991, right after the collapse of the USSR and after Desert Storm ended. Combined Terrain Following & Terrain Avoidance radar mode, FLIR LANA pod image displayed directly on the HUD, analog color moving map film coupled with INS, fully functional HUD, AN/ARL-67 RWR, Shrike and HARM integration etc. It was packed with technology. Do someone know how A-7E compared with A-6E in night low level flying, radar bombing etc?

Thanks, it works perfectly. I don't know how i missed the f410 version of the software.

Hi, i my JetSeat works well, but is turns off generating an error when i fly F-14A Tomcat. F-14B Tomcat works well. It's like it can't assign "F-14A/B" profile which is genereated in the program. What to do to use it with F-14A like with F-14B? BTW: Thanks =Andre= for your work.

P-8 Poseidon has been proposed at least few times before. But we would need anti submarine warfare simulation as it doesn't exist in DCS right now, you can play i.e. Sonalyst's Dangerous Waters to see how enjoyable P-8 Poseidon (or SH-60) is with proper ASW simulation. ED most likely doesn't have any free manpower to make ASW simulation from the ground so we would need to wait some specialised naval 3rd party to join and to make it. When it comes to 737AEW&C - yes, some more detailed and realistic AWACS simulation is very much needed in DCS as it influence the whole air combat since 1960s - 2010. At least very basic factors like radar dish rotation and limited refresh rate, angular resolution and limited accuracy and merges, limited target diambiguation/identification capabilities etc. Commanding an air battle, like in "F-22 TAW", with resonably realistic AWACS would surely be satisfying. cheers

Yes, i liked this old simulators tematic images, GUI, atmospheric music, moody campaigns sometimes with written briefings, carefully made training missions etc. and this is the main reasons many guys still remember them inspite of old graphic and poor physics. DCS still has untapped potential here, right now - even when simulation part is unmatched - it looks clean, even sterile, business like, similar to civilian MSFS.

As far as i know F-111 had terrain-following radar since the first "A" variant used since 1967 during Vietnam war. The latest was F-111F from late 1970s, modernised in 1980s, with bigger intakes and more powerfull engines, better avionics, Pave Tack FLIR turret etc. This variant was used during 1986 El Dorado Canyon or 1991 Desert Storm. There are already F-111 request topics, it is among the most anticipated aircrafts. Hellcat is also very much posible since Nick Grey really like Hellcat according to the interview

I would say SEAD is not variety of missions but just one, it was specialised aircraft. Classic F-4B,C,D,E are multirole, interception, air superiority, ground attack, strike, CAS etc.

Yes, i would definitely want to see an F-4B or J without slats when Heatblur release their Navy variant later on. And to be able to compare it with slatted F-4E.

Yes, this is an awesome feature. Imagine i.e. Iranian F-14A GR95 dogfighting having only rear aspect Sidewinders J/P being forced to outfly the enemy to fire the missile from the rear aspect. Having F-4 variants from different timeframe will be awesome as well. I only wish to have some even earlier hard wing typical 1960s Vietnam era F-4E. But i still think the earlier variant from 1974 could be able to simulate proper late Vietnam era slatted F-4E.