bies

Truth is there is not a single Cold War map in DCS right now and plenty of Cold War modules at the same time since Korea 1950 to Desert Storm 1991 - all forced to fly over WW2 or modern day maps. (MiG-15bis, F-86F, MiG-19P, MiG-21bis, F-5E, L-39, C-101, F-14A, Mi-24, Gazelle, Mi-8, UH-1H Huey) + WiP (Mirage F.1, Fiat G.91, MiG-23MLA, MiG-17, A-6 Intruder, A-7 Corsair, Bolkov 105, Sea Harrier, MiG-29A, Su-17, F-8 Crusader) + low fidelity A-10A, Su-25A, Su-27S, F-15C, MiG-29A As much as i love to see DCS Vietnam Bignewy and other guys are right - we don't have any Vietnam era aircrafts yet as F-5E, MiG-21bis, UH-1H Huey, F-14A and future A-7, A-6 are all 1970s/1980s post Vietnam variants. Only future MiG-19S and mods like A-4E or MiG-17 are going to represent Vietnam era. Possibly F-8J crusader but i'm not sure. With some proper maps we could make other Cold War conflicts like 1980s Iran-Iraq war since we have proper timeframe variants in DCS or in developement like Iranian F-5E, F-14A, UH-1H and Iraqi MiG-21bis, MiG-23MLA, MiG-29A, Mi-24, Mi-8, Su-22, Su-25A, Gazelle, Mirage F.1 + most proper ground assets. Or 1980s USA - Libya (El Dorado Canyon/Praying Mantis/Gulf of Sidra) with US Navy F-14A, A-7E, A-6E, Forrestal Class Carrier and Libyan MiG-21bis, MiG-23MLA, Su-22, Mirage F.1 + most proper ground assets. Or Desert Storm with US F-14A/B, F-15C, A-6E, A-7E, A-10A and Iraqi MiG-21bis, MiG-23MLA, MiG-29A, Su-22, Su-25A + most proper ground assets. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- But the reality is at this moment we can't make any realistic scenario in DCS except for WW2 1944 late Normandy operation. Lack of proper map or lack of proper aircraft variants. I would like the DCS to make some focus on just 2-3 real life realistic interesting conflicts (like Korea, Vietnam, 7 days war, Jom Kippur war, Iraq-Iran war, Lebanon war, Desert Storm etc. ) with proper map and few flayable modules. Instead of ONLY fictional scenarios with aircrafts from all possible eras. On the other hand we should be grateful for what ED gave us now, remember older simulators had mostly only one aircraft but also one properly simulated conflict with all enviroment. I just think instead of adding more and more modules it would be better to take a break and properly simulate just 2-3 interesting real conflicts with map and assets.

Neither atmospheric nor realistic. Kind of the least realistic thing you can imagine. Totally fictional war. USA vs Germany. In Caucasus. It smells like WT soup...

A-7E on Cold War scenarios and servers is going to be mighty. When most of other aircrafts are going to attack visually with dumb bombs and unguided rockets using very basic aids - A-7E will have HUD with CCIP guiding precisely even GP bombs and using very early guided weapon like Walleye or Maverick and Vulcan gun for strafing.

Carrier operations on the deck of WW2 Essex Class - USS Shangri-La in year 1962, somewhere in the Mediterranean Sea. With takeoffs and landings of the first, lightweight F-8A Crusaders being quite new, in service from 1957 (notice lector still calls it "F8U" along with the older Navy designation changed in the same 1962) There are also A-4D Skyhawks light attack planes, F4D Skyray high altitude interceptors with huge lift to mass. (Make sure you selected 1080P since video has great quality for 1962, year of Cuban missile crisis, it's way before Vietnam.)

In one of the last newsletters or interviews ED stated they want to make it after the super carrier, but they want to make it separate for the NATO and the USSR/Russia due to the big differences.

MiG-29 is not even officially announced yet - probably most of the modules currently being developed will be ready before the MiG-29. (Community mods are not available in most SP missions or MP servers so i didn't include them.) 1980s campaigns where Soviet MiG-21 and MiG-23 escorting Su-17 and Su-25 attacking NATO forces. MiG-29 and Su-27 intercepting Viggens, A-6 and A-7 escorted by NATO F-14 Tomcats and Mirages or fighting for air superiority against F-15s. With Bo-105, Gazelles, Hueys, Mi-24 and Mi-8 attacking ground forces. Or Israeli-Syrian 1982 Lebanon war, or 1980s Iraq-Iran war, or Desert Storm. Way more exciting than 2000s one sided mud hut bombing or USAF vs. USN fictional scenarios. But that's the future. Many of this modules will be finished during the next 2-3 years, including MiG-29.

9.12 obviously won't match "Hornet and Viper around 2005", but instead it will match other late Cold War F-14 Tomcat, Mirage F.1, Mirage 2000, Viggen, MiG-23MLA, A-6E Intruder, A-7E Corsair, Su-17M, MiG-21bis, F-5E, Mi-24, Mi-8, Gazelle, Huey, F-15C, A-10A, Su-27S, Su-25A, L-39, C-101, Bolkov 105 etc.

Especially Soviet and Warsaw Pact markings are missing. Cold War Europe and Afghanistan.

I think this pylons weight zero lbs at the moment in DCS. They do not change the mass at all in mission editor/armament menu. This is probably a WIP feature since the mass of this pylons was a big deal especially in BFM according to the pilot interview. And other planes like i.e. F/A-18 have the mass and drag of the removable pylons modeled already.

SAR missions have overall bug potential considering the amount of choppers we have. IIRC even Apache could emergency pick up one or two shoot down pilots or soldiers. Let alone dedicated transport cabin Huey, Mi-8 or Mi-24. With the new dynamic campaign there will be lot more emphasis on performing specific type of mission, probably including i.e. Combat SAR, there will be a real purpose to do that.

Competition, Flying Circus, is already very solid with ~ 13 aircrafts, soon ~20, including fighters, recon/light bombers, heavy bombers. WW1 map, soon another bigger one. Solid FM, DM, armament, WWI ground assets, field modifications and great VR implementation. Could DCS do even better? Possibly yes. But it would be tough and it would take many years. Why repeating the other work if ED can chose some different timeframe it already started to fill with content? I would like and I would definitely buy hypothetical DCS WWI pack. But the one thing I wouldn't like to see in DCS is just one or two WWI aircraft, without WWI map, assets, AI aircrafts, campaign or any context, to fly once or twice and leave it. DCS WW2 is fantastic now, with many 1944 flyable aircrafts from one particular timeframe for both sides, WW2 assets, two proper maps, realistic improved DM. But it took many years and passion of many guys some of them even flying the real WW2 warbirds today, like the Flying Legends.

I agree overall WWI era is very appealing. I only think just to compete on roughly equal terms with the other game DCS WWI would need to model WWI proper era map, at least few WWI aircrafts, some WWI assets like trucks, artillery, AAA, ballons, tanks of the era etc. Like they do with Normandy/Channel 1944 whit 2 proper maps, WW2 assets, 6 flyable aircrafts, few AAI aircrafts etc. It's a massive task for years. And right from the start DCS would be deprived it's biggest competitive advantage in this case - detailed modeling of complex systems - since WWI kites were extremely rudimentary. Considered WWI systems complexity and very scarce data the other game already gives WWI era aircrafts justice. There is close to nothing more in terms of complexity DCS could go to make people pay few times bigger price for close to identical fidelity. Instead DCS can comfortable chose some Korea, Vietnam or something like that with zero competition on the horizon and guaranteed big sales and community support.

As much as I enjoy WWI kites in another game (especially in VR WWI dogfights are absolutely stunning and WWI atmosphere is very special) it would stretch DCS even more adding another empty timeframe/war. Another thing is it would require a massive amount of work and many years modeling just 6-8 aircrafts only to go close to what another game offers now in terms of WWI since now DCS has zero WWI content, aircrafts, assets, maps or experience from the past When i try to be objective it looks like a poor idea from both business part and overall DCS coherent development plan.

It will take some time to release the MiG-29. I plan to fly it on proper late Cold War / Iraq-Iran war / Desert Storm timeframe missions and servers together with MiG-23MLA, MiG-21bis, Su-17, Su-25A, Su-27S, Mi-8, Mi-24 against F-14, F-15C, Mirage F.1, Mirage 2000, A-6 Intruder, A-7 Corsair, A-10A, F-5E, Huey, Gazelle, Bo-105 maybe Viggen. For sure not against 2007 Viper and Hornet - it would be a 25 years mismatch. Yak-38 would be a good ff module but Cuban Ace didn't make any ff before so I'm a bit sceptical for now. But i like how he chose declassified, historical, possible to model Yak-38 instead of some totally classified future something.

I like the "other game's" VR head restriction, it works good for me and it gives me no nausea or other negative effects. I know both options are compromise: nausea for some guys vs. "cheating" by looking outside the cockpit and immersion breaking.

It was worth to wait for the reworked external model, it looks great. Can't wait to seat inside the cockpit.

Post Desert Storm and fall of the USSR i agree, but it's true to all of air combat, both A/G and A/A. Near zero risk, hendicapped opposition, mud hut bombing with GPS self guided bombs or LGB, loiter an hour on station, refuel, loiter another hour, release JDAM from 20,000ft to kill few helpless terror guys, RTB. During its prime F-15A and C performed super exciting MiG hunting air superiority missions shooting down over 100 enemy aircraft in air combat in all out wars during 1982 battle over Bekaa Valley Lebanon War and 1991 Desert Storm Gulf War. Eagle scored all MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-25, MiG-29, Su-7, Su-17, Su-25, Mirage F-1 and even a few helicopters including Mi-24.

Exactly. And it was not even true as F-15 was not completely a single role. USAF wanted it to be like that (USAF just wasn't stupid to use such expensive aircraft to drop some bomb and get shoot down by accidential AAA hit), but politicians forced McDonell to make it compatible with dumb bombs CCIP and it had the capability. But the "not a single pound for air to ground" remained. So F-15A or C had not smaller A/G capability than i.e. Su-27S, MiG-29 (which ED wants to do), F-5E and similar aircrafts which are allowed to DCS. And as you said there is lot of pure single role A/G modules. There is a great book about the F-15 written by the real F-15 pilot, commander of the 33rd Fighter Wing Douglas C Dildy "F-15 Eagle Engaged The World's Most Successful Jet Fighter" and he described how this forced A/G requirement influenced F-15 fire control computer and dynamic launch zone calculations. Edit: Oh, and IIRC Matt didn't say "we won't do F-15C because it was pure A/A" , but he said something like "being pure A/A it had to give first place to multirole F-18 and F-16". And that's the difference. But obviously word of mouth started to distort the meaning with time.

I use it in IL-2 to have important aircraft engine regime limits. In DCS i use kneeboard for similar purpose, it can be edited similar to IL-2 cockpit picture.

Block 30 - the first Big Mouth from 1980s and Desert Storm - has the best T/W, acceleration and climb rate. Better listen real life F-16 pilots who flied all the different F-16 variants, not Forum Theorist. Pilots called F-16C "lead noses" due to heavy radar inside the nose deteriorating maneuverability, but offering better detection parameters.

Is there even such a thing as "competitive players" in DCS now? Maybe I'm picking on, but this sentence sounds a bit cockily. I could imagine "competitive players" in WW2 warbirds, Korea or Cold War jets when you actually have to have the skill - which take many months - and most things depend on the pilot, the things he is doing manually, putting the thing on the thing, firing guns or some simple rear aspect position requiring IR missiles, controlling an aircraft by manual flight control system etc. Hell even late Cold War like Tomcat you have to work hard and really know what you are doing to make a good use of the raw radar system. Or support Sparrow/R-27 missile all until the hit. But how could the AMRAAM exchange be a competitive activity? What is to compete about here? It's all too simple to be better than the other guy. You accelerate, press the button before MAR and run. You have roughly 50% chance to win. I've been doing that for slightly more than a year, sometimes it was more fun, sometimes less, but i would never name it a competitive activity. Or maybe it's not even an AMRAAM exchange, but as @Sajarov said, the swift and effortless execution of the 1980s MiG-29 with totally different era AMRAAM armed 2007 F-16? Developers are modeling what they are allowed to model. Remember all the details of the AMRAAM and similar modern missiles are classified. What man can find on "Wikipedia" or other publicly available www pages is mostly BS, speculations or insignificant parameters.

Yes, FM will be revised. But it won't be same drastic change, more like fine tuning I guess. It's FM is already done true to the NASA wind tunnel tests report, ED is doing a great job. F-16 we have right now is simply very late variant post cold war block 50 CCIP around 2007. According to DCS it weighs some 9000kg empty... It will never be as maneuverable as early F-16A in BFM which was more than 1/4th lighter with exactly the same wing and airframe. Different era, different purpose.

What an irony, F-16 has been designed together with "The Fighter Mafia" as an ultimate dogfighter and the second smallest amount of people like it's BFM performance... I guess we need to wait for some early lightweight F-16A with pure maneuverability to show who's the boss in a knife fight.

IIRC Nick said in the interview they have a very talented guy coordinating AI work. On the other hand i doubt any advanced AI FM can be implemented right now before the multithreading because the main core is already hard pressed with calculations.