bies

Agree, FC3 1980s Cold War and Desert Storm era was very well balanced naturally just because the aircraft represents the same timeframe. I was really surprised when ED announced Hornet will be some 15 years later 2005 variant, not fitting anything in DCS/FC3, without any proper timeframe opponents. First i was sure it's going to be a Desert Storm variant like Lot 10. (I wouldn't say FC3 was totally unrealistic, yes it's heavily simplified compared to DCS but not plain made up fiction without data. It was good for it's time.)

Instead of proposing to make some totally unrealistic Frankenstein modern Russian classified FC3 low fidelity aircrafts with fictional avionics and made up systems it would be incomparably easier to simply make 1980s/Desert Storm variants of F-16A or C block 30 and F/A-18A or C Lot 10. With one move F-16 and F-18 would fit perfectly whole DCS environment, same timeframe flyable REDFOR Soviet opponents we have like Su-27S, MiG-29A, MiG-21bis, soon MiG-23MLA, Su-25A, soon Su-17M, Mi-24P, Mi-8 + all DCS AI REDFOR aircrafts MiG-25PD, MiG-31, Su-24M etc. With more maneuverable F-16 and F-18 variants with engaging and exciting close combat and natural realistic balance due to aircrafts being from the same timeframe.

Amen. Plus F-16A (and to lesser degree F/A-18A as well) was much more maneuverable than sophisticated but very heavy 2000s C variant thus more fun to actually "fly". Both F-16 and F/A-18 modeled as 1980s/Desert Storm variants would have proper historical realistic flyable opponents in DCS from this timeframe and from real air wars MiG-29A, Su-27S, MiG-21bis, MiG-23MLA, Su-17M, Su-25A, Mirage F.1, Mi-24P, Mi-8 and allied F-14, Viggen, Huey, Mirage 2000, Gazelle, F-15C, A-6E, A-7E, F-5E, A-10A, Bo-105 and nearly all DCS assets, SAMs, radars etc.

Making some prototype or niche MiG-29 variant and omitting classic 9.12 used in real wars and being operated by the half of the world would be like omitting P-51D which did the heavy lifting during WW2 and modeling some H or L instead, which were too late for WW2 and decommissioned before Korea or produced in some tiny numbers without any significance.

For unrealistically modeled aircrafts made without proper documentation WT is already there and ED will never beat WT in WT's own game.

Engine is, as GGTharos said, -220 There is no specific block, but this is an F-15C MSIP II used from 1985 through the Desert Storm untill late 1990s. It had, compared to basic F-15C from 1979, modernized central computer, NCTR, digital weapon control panel instead of analog one and AMRAAM since 1991.

Hind is absolutely fantastic. It's the most satisfying helicopter to play in DCS with manual flight control and manual weapon employment and all of that with working multicrew. Overall attention to the details is outstanding. Thanks ED!

If someone is delusional enough to believe Indian MiG-29K entering service in 2010 (later than US F-22 Raptor) can be modeled go ahead, find the documentation, convince SMEs pilots to cooperate disclosing various data and behavior, convince the company to sign the license... Good luck. There is a good reason even most basic Indian documentation for Semi-modern equipment is even harder to find then Russian. Let alone details of MFD pages, radar operations and modes, details of the navigation system and radio communication, A/A and A/G avionics modes, sensors detection parameters, FBW flight control laws and limits, EM charts, acceleration and climb profiles, fictional strictly classified weapon and missiles parameters etc. Without all of that it would be as good as amateur made MOD... And if you want an FC3 - ED stated many times they do not plan to make any FC3 plane in the future. ED is passionate group, they strive for realism which is DCS signature, not making some fictional equipment.

Well block 50 CCIP is heavy. According to DCS it weighs 9026 kg / 19900 lbs empty. Early F-16A weighed 6613 kg / 14567 lbs. It's whooping 36% empty mass increase, with exactly the same 300 sq ft wing.

In Cold War/1980s servers flying along/against flayable historically accurate 1980s DCS aircrafts like Mirage 2000, Mirage F.1, F-14 Tomcat, Su-27S, MiG-23MLA, MiG-21bis, F-15C, L-39, Mi-24P, A-10A, Viggen, F-5E, A-6 Intruder, A-7 Corsair, Su-25A, Bolkov 105, Sea Harrier, Mi-8, C-101, F-4, Gazelle, Huey - MiG-29 9.12 will fit perfectly and it's going to be dangerous to every opponent being one of apex predators of it's era. Another thing is MiG-29 9.12 - contrary to some low serie/post Soviet variants/prototypes/niche export versions - had been used by some ~35 countries all around the world and it took part in many real life wars like Desert Storm, Iraq-Iran war, operation in Balkans, Ethiopian war in Africa, India-Pakistan Kargil war in Kashmir etc. For me 9.12 sits in a sweet spot fitting some 20 flayable opponents\allies in DCS in historical context when i.e. SMT would have to be totally unrealistic made up aircraft with fictional avionics made only to artificially create something to fit Viper and Hornet. (Plus SMT looks ugly with it's huge humpback, it has low thrust to weigh, high wing loading, weaker kinematic performance compared to Soviet hotrod 9.12, the only interesting part of SMT would be avionics which would need to be fictional and made up anyway being classified.) Realistic 9.12 will be a dream come true.

Why 1980s MiG-29 should have a chance against 2007 F-16? Do 1980s Mirage 2000 without AMRAAM or Link16 or JHMCS has a chance against 2007 AMRAAM, Datalink, JHMCS F-16? No. And it shouldn't have. Just like F-86 Sabre. 1970s/80s Mirage 2000 or MiG-21bis or F-5E or Mirage F.1 or Viggen or MiG-23MLA or A-6E or L-39 or A-7E or MiG-19 or F-14 or F-8J or Mirage III or EE lighting or C-101 shouldn't have a chance against few decades more recent totally different aviation era F-16C CCIP from 2007 and it's very good. It's perfectly fine. Not every aircraft in DCS should be compared to 2007 F-16C CCIP or F/A-18C Lot 20. I think our F-16 and F/A-18 should be modeled as 1980s/Deser Storm variants to be compatible with the whole rest of DCS environment and actually have symmetrical full fidelity opponents. (Disclaimer: If DCS F-16 or F/A-18 from 2007 would have their electronic warfare suite modeled close to how it works in real life no aircraft in DCS except 2010 JF-17 could do anything against them, not even lock them reliably. 1970s avionic of the Tomcat or Mirage 2000 or Su-27S would be absolutely trivial to jam and their missiles to deceive by 2007 EW suite.)

So Phantom could track up to 2900 knots closure and Tomcat only 1800 knots?

Yes, increased empty mass with heavier undercarriage, reinforced structure, additional tail fuel tanks, air refuel installation and probe, increased drag of enlarged vertical stabilizers and tall 2-seat canopy. Not a Soviet hotrod like Su-27S/P anymore, but it would still be ok in kinematic department, on par with most classic 4th gen fighters except for pure fighters like Su-27S, F-15C or Eurofighter.

What some guys are proposing is an absolute disaster, making UNREALISTIC Su-30 would undermine the DCS core. It would open Pandora's box to make fictional everything, it would massively decrease DCS standard for the future. Strive for realism is what constitutes DCS and what sets DCS apart from WT, Ace Combat and other medium level combat simulators. As much as I love Su-27 there is no such thing as "educated guess" without documentation, it's a key word to justify everything, it would be just a fiction. Made up systems working totally different than the real ones, fictional avionics, fictional MFD pages, fictional modes, fictional flight parameters, fictional weapon systems logic and performance etc. When even developer himself said they don't have required documentation to make Su-30 they absolutely shouldn't make it, "educated guess" MODs are already here. It would give me absolutely zero satisfaction to shoot down some enemy with my fictional Su-30 knowing my enemy's aircraft is on a completely different level of realism, simulation and documentation than my made up Su and I love DCS as it is, as as reasonably realistic as it can be - increasing it's standard with time, not decreasing it.

It could be connected with module you've selected as the DCS wallpaper theme. If you select MiG-21 you see MiG-21 model in the hangar, if you select F/A-18 you have Hornet 3D model, if you select Supercarrier you are on the 3D deck.

Yes. All of them MiG-29, MiG-25, MiG-31 are 1970s to early 1980s Cold War fighters. I hope for full fidelity MiG-25P or PD after the MiG-29. MiG-31, even from 1980s may be too classified but it would be nice as well. MiG-31 would be similar to analog cockpit powerful radar and weapon F-14 with even more extreme performance, but without maneuver air combat and carrier operations. MiG-25PD would be similar to MiG-21bis on steroids, with analog cockpit, extreme performance, look down radar and powerful weapon.

Yes, this definitely should be an option to chose. In one hand it's a good aid for training / beginner-friendly servers. On the other hand in more serious servers having an omnipotent GPS available for every aircraft is ruining any navigation challenge and navigation systems. Especially considering the fact even less realistic flight simulators have an option to rely on navigation systems only which doesn't seem to scare typical users. Using INS, TACAN, RSBN, beacons, Doppler, visual, radar corrections etc. depending on aircraft - is fun.

When it comes to Air to Air nearly all kills of the Cold War, were within visual range. Even at the very end during Desert Storm nearly all F-15 kills were within 10 miles very much within visual range. People read too much Wikipedia, reality was Sparrow, R-27, R-24 etc. we're useless outside of 10-15nm. Even at the very end of the Cold War US cutting edge technology F-15C MSIP, with support of the whole technology and war machine and NCTR radar IFF, still had to dogfight Iraqi MiG-25s and MiG-29s, turning and burning, shooting from very close range - this made it so attractive to look at, recreate, listen to the pilots stories. Similar with Sidra or Tobruk battles of the F-14s. Iran-Iraq war, Bekaa Valley Israel-Syria war. And even is some fighters managed to shoot some 15nm they still needed to guide the missiles all until the hit which meant merge. Not shoot, turn around and RTB. BVR during the Cold War was very far and between, with lots of limitations, in most cases impossible in practice.

So in this situation 1980s with declassified realistically modeled avionics and weapon systems and functionality, historical planeset for both sides and shorter developement time is the best. And it looks like it's really the direction of the DCS. I've analyzed modules in developement and nearly all of them are 1970s / 1980s cold war. Mi-24P Hind, Mirage F.1, A-7E Corsair II, A-6E Intruder, F-8J Crusader, MiG-17 Fresco, MiG-23MLA Flogger, MiG-29A Fulcrum, Bo-105, F-4E Phantom, Mirage III, EE Lighting, Sea Harrier, IA 58 Pucara, Fiat Go.91, Su-17 Fitter Plus current F-14 Tomcat, Mirage 2000, Viggen, F-5E Tiger, MiG-21bis, Gazelle, Huey Two types of missions / servers: 2000s USAF vs. USN fictional scenarios without context, with 1980/90 environment, AMRAAM/JSOW tossing from afar for newer players with low entry threshold, easier computer flight control and easy to employ standoff weapon And Cold War with proper environment, symetrical historically accurate realistic planesets for both sides, historically acurate and reasonably declassified SAMs, radars, ships, ground units, AA/AG weapon systems with simple logic, many full blown real wars to recreate when both sides actually shoot to each other etc.

I agree with nearly all of that, except for one detail: I.e. F/A-18A or C form 1980s Cold War would be virtual the same as 2004 except the need to model the most complicated and work-hours heavy systems - some DDI pages, GPS weapon integration JDAM, JSOW, SLAM-ER, Link16, AMRAAM, JHMCS, AIM-9X, some radar submodes, guidance algorithms of most modern smart weapons, towed decoy etc. - half of the work. Hornet with FM, graphics, Sparrows, Sidewinders, dumb bombs and unguided rockets, basic navigation etc. was basically ready in EA, some 2 years ago. It would take some ~2 years less to model Cold War Hornet than 2004 variant. Today both Hornet and Viper would have been 100% complete since some time and some other module, like i.e. F-4 would be in EA. And it would be more realistic and faithful simulation of reality since most modern classified parts of radar and EW suite - which has to be omitted or changed - didn't exist back then in 1980s or Desert Storm. And it would be able to meet symmetrical historically accurate REDFOR opponent MiG-29 9.12, Su-27S, MiG-23MLA, MiG-21bis, Mirage F.1 from Cold War times and Desert Storm.

Moving map with doppler sensor is better because it is less capable. It's more fun since it is not so perfect, requiring some attention, observation of environment, corrections - actual things to do. GPS would be perfectly accurate and you wouldn't have to do anything.

Apache, F-14, F-15, F-16, F/A-18, MiG-29, Su-27, Mirage 2000 etc. are all 1970s/1980s cold war airframes. The only reason some of them were still in service in ~2010 is fall of the Soviets and lack of any symmetrical wars or even possibly of such wars since 1991.

Even JA-37 Viggen, Gripen's predecessor, is impossible to model being classified, Heatblur tried. Rafale will never be in DCS as full fidelity module. The heart of Rafale is strictly classified AESA radar and even more classified Spectra EW suite. ED stated EF is possible only because exEF pilot is making it - ED said they would never be able to negotiate the license.

The true difference is Ka-50 was, depending on variant, basically a prototype or a low serie production due to fall of the Soviets = lack of resources. Mi-24 was a helicopter build in, literally, thousands by the Soviets and used in many real life wars since 1980s. One of most important and most iconic Soviet aircrafts.

2000s modern AMRAAM with guidance unit algorithms, R-77, ECM, ECCM, radar algorithms, discrimination, SAM systems like S-400, Patriot PAC-3, AEGIS, RL datalinks functions, modern ground AESA radars and many more, shortly - the whole environment - all of that will never be modeled in a realistic way because this are strictly classified closely guarded military secrets. It would be both - impossible to find the data and illegal to model. On the other hand with enough effort and passion they clearly have ED can model environment up to Desert Storm or late Cold War in reasonably realistic way, close to how this systems, with microchips comparable to modern calculator, worked IRL.