bies

B-58 looked great, fantastic era of aviation. And this otherworldly looking pressure capsule for supersonic ejection - when closed it still allowed the pilot to fly the aircraft. And it added whole lot of comfort in long flights as they can fly without pressure suits.

Vapour Labs 3rd party did a research making MiG-25 MOD. They planned original 1972 MiG-25P. In short, they were forced to make RBT recon/bomber variant as there is still basically zero information even about original 1972 MiG-25P with Smerch pulse radar or R-40 missiles. Everything classified. No data, no documentation, nothing. They would have to make everything fictional and they assessed it would be too unrealistic even for the MOD. Let alone modernized 1979 MiG-25PD. Let alone full fidelity anything. MiG-31 is much more classified then MiG-25PD - so, you get the picture... In USSR there were two forces using fighters; PVO Strany (Air Defense) with missiles and GCI-guided interceptor fighters had much more money and more fighters then VVS (Tactical Aviation) and everything about PVO was completely classified. Maybe some day they declassify original 1972 MiG-25P. Here are original Soviet Cold War 1980s MiG-31 analog cockpits, with powerfull Zaslon radar (and painfully slow and unreliable central computer) Overall cockpit arrangement, 4 belly pylons and R-33 missiles quite similar to F-14 Tomcat, but not suited for close air combat. It would be interesting, requiring good crew coordination as they both guys had completely different responsibilities, like in our F-14. Pilot's cockpit was very similar to MiG-21bis, no displays, analog instruments, no HUD, just combiner glass. Radar Officer's cockpit similar to F-14, main CRT display and two smaller IFF and radar diagnostic displays. Half blind, no forward visibility.

I'm originally from WW2 sims, F-4's Vulcan feels like cheating

Tes, it would definitely be a gamechanger. When EF avionics was being designed 20 years ago it was a challenge, especially when G-forces distorted the voice. But now there is plenty of applications like VAICOM which recognise voice commands easily and reliably. That's the future anyway.

Yes, for me the biggest appeal of flying F-104 is slick hotrod with Vulcan and maybe 2 Sidewinders and phenomenal performance in Air Superiority role BnZ as it was designed to do. Not heavy cow dragging as many missiles as possible - especially this early missiles required very tight positioning, impossible without cutting edge performance anyway. And i predict Vulcan will be responsible for as many kills as missiles if not more as it was exceptionally good weapon in Starfighter days.

IRST on different US Cold War interceptors (F-101, F-102, F-104, F-106, F-4, F-8, F-14, A-12)

The more missiles - the less performance. F-104 was small and had very small drag, every missile except for two wingtip Sidewinders degraded its performance. Just like the Mirage III, MiG-21, Draken. I remember dogfighting on MiG-21s with friends - against competent pilot you had to jettison all the missiles if the first turn didn't give the opportunity to fire them, or you were slowly, gradually losing the fight.

F-15E. Though F-15E APG-70 A/A capabilities or reliability were slightly lower as it required some small compromises to achieve efficiency in A/G modes.

Yes, pefect for the Cold War Germany map.

Many core game improvements in this and last updates, gorund and air AI, dynamic campaign, AI-units and weapons performance etc. Very good direction. Steady as she goes. And the whole experience is becoming significantly better. And lacking core and enviroment were holding the whole DCS back for a long time. As the experience is the whole enviroment, not only a particular module man uses, but first and foremost the enviroment. Good job.

Feel free to do so if you know where it is.

We may see a proper, analog, PAH-1 Bolkov-105, as additional variant, perfect for Cold War Gone Hot over Germany map! Looks like in practice it turned out to be easier then devs expected. It's so important because basically overwhelming majority of Bo-105 relevance, atmosphere and purpose was service in West Germany during the Cold War. https://discord.com/channels/787239191377477632/984055218322960385/1352399290957434931

Lynx AH Mk 1 in Germany, 1980s.

F-16XL didn't have Block 50 avionics. It had analog avionics of F-16A Block 10 as it has been developed in 1980/1981. F-16XL was also 2500kg heavier and generated far bigger drag at higher AoA then F-16A so it couldn't dogfight well. If F-16XL would't lose to F-15E, and actually been developed into fully functional aircraft it would enter service around 1988, it would receive F-16C Block 40 avionics, integrated with LANTIRN with wide, FLIR integrated HUD, as it was a strike aircraft. It would be like F-16 Block 40, but with better low level fast strike performance at cost of worse preformance in a dogfight.

Though this two were much different. P-80 from 1945 was evaluated by the USAF against German Me-262 and concluded being much worse then Me-262. F-80 from Korea was significantly better, more reliable, much faster, using a lot stronger engine and different wing profile. In my humble opinion F-84 may be better as P-80 didnt't make it to the WW2, and it was a bit dated in Korea. When F-84 had quite a payload and it was successfull ground pounder.

Yes, earler A-10A, F-15C, F-16, F/A-18 variants would be crucial for the map.

Right now only 2000s F-15C has been confirmed, original F-15C MSIPII from mid 1980s and Desert Storm has not been confirmed by ED:

Yes, original analog pre-LASTE Cold War / Desert Storm A-10A has been requested many times. It would be one of the most iconic aircraft over divided Germany map.

This eliminates the possibility of any Russian advanced module in the future. And eliminates the point of working on it at all - once it was released, the Russian government, obsessed with paranoia, could immediately block it any day and waste years of work, bringing the company to the brink of bankruptcy.

Before considering classified Su-27M, which would be made up, completely unrealistic and with fictional avionics, weapons, systems, sensors, performance, with zero SME input and fine tuning etc. - let's wait if 1980s Soviet Su-27S will be possible and announced after the 1980s Soviet MiG-29 9.12. Reasonably realistic 1980s Soviet Su-27S, working like the real aircraft, would be a lot better then made up, unrealistic, fictional, extremely simplified Su-27M. When Su-27S would flight along other 1980s Soviet MiG-29, Su-25, MiG-23MLA, Su-17M, MiG-21bis, Mi-24P, Mi-8 etc., and against 1980s NATO F-14A/B, Tornado IDS, A-6E Intruder, A-7E Corsair, Bo-105, Mirage 2000, L-39, IAI Kfir, Mirage F.1, Viggen, Gazelle L, Huey, C-101, F-4E etc.

They didn't. They were experimenting with NVG since Vietnam. In the late 1980s U.S. pilots were sporadically using quite advanced for the era AN/PVS-5. Even during Desert Storm in 1991 - the last battle of the Cold War - they were flying without NVGs. Even cutting edge late 1980s F-16C Block 40 and AH-64A were using FLIR. Only F-15E had, partially, NVG-compatible cockpit. And this was the US, decisively leading with microelectronics. The only device the USSR was using, at the end of 1980s, was Очки Ночного Видения-1. It was a simple gen 2 image intensifier, significantly inferior to standard AN/PVS-5 used in NATO aircraft, with poor clarity and low signal-to-noise ratio and poor resolution due to dated microelectronics, small 32 deg. field of view, lack of depth perception, big and bulky, poor reliability and high failure rate, blinded by cockpit's instruments illumination. It was used to takeoff and landings and navigation, not for any kind of air combat, it would be a grave danger - for the pilot wearing it, unable to see his flight instruments. MiG-29 and Su-27 had non-filtered instrument panels, blinding the googles. On MiG-29 and Su-25 - limited trials in the late '80s, operationally only in the '90s. On Su-27 rejected due to cockpit lighting issues and overall marginal use. It was used by special forces Mi-8/17 and Mi-24 pilots in some very specific conditions. "Dogfighting" wearing NVGs during the Cold War was basically impossible.

The guy must have felt like a king of the skies back then. Initial F-104A was designed by Kelly Johnson's team as an air superiority fighter to combat MiGs, with lessons from Korean War. In the late 1950s/early 1960s it had phenomenal performance, acceleration, speed, ceiling. The best armament in the world; vulcan gun and two Sidewinders. All this coupled with a good radar for the era. An ultimate BnZ suite.

I wouldn't bother as well, but there was a lot of differences between EF two decades ago wen it entered service - and todays P2Eb software, when it start to integrate Meteor.

This. Notice how most of the old simulators have just one or at most a few flyable aircrafts – but still were immensely enjoyable, drawing the player into the living world. Modules are nice, but what really matters for the experience are a proper timeframe map, an atmospheric campaign, preferably dynamic, a decent, believable AI, ground/air/sea assets from the proper timeframe, ATC and wingmen comms. You can make a fantastic experience even with just one single flyable, greatly recreated aircraft.