TLTeo

Some -Es did carry the Falcon: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/0/6/5/1684560.jpg?v=v40 For what it's worth, the Viggen also was supposed to carry it (but we don't have it in DCS, probably because it was not a thing by the time the AJS upgrade came around). In fact, there are even pictures of F-15As firing them.

I think I will respectfully add my list of demands, that I generally hold to every DCS module that peaks my attention: is plane? can fly? is cool? That's all I got.

Thanks! And yeah I would expect the controls to be pretty different between aircraft among operators, it's not uncommon. I was reading through through an F-104 manual the other day and it's the same, several F-104G operators had very very different radar controls.

That's the point

I noticed that they didn't actually show what I think is the radar control panel (behind the throttle?) in any of the screenshots they've shared. The radar screen does have a bunch of lights that might correspond to radar modes/settings, but other than HA (which I guess is pulse search with next to no filtering?) the others do not correspond to the lettering. They also look nothing like the names of the radar modes on the Mirage 2000, so I have no idea what modes may or may not be included in the module.

I'm also not sure whether flap and slat deployment is automatic or not (or even contemplated in combat really).

Nop, Dassault tried that with the Rafale but it never worked iirc. And yeah the rate of fire is way lower than an M61 (~1000/1700 rpm vs 4500/6000rpm), so you have about the same firing time as in the Viper or Hornet.

Yea that's how I found this system. The problem is the pipper physically doesn't get rendered if you add more than 110 mills of depression (it only half shows at 120), so finding the precise setting is impossible anyway.

Bump because I think I FINALLY figured this out. So, both the BL-755 and the Belouga as far as I understand are designed for low level high speed delivery. Unfortunately, we're flying C-101s so we don't do high speed. Or rather, on paper a level delivery at 350KIAS and 600ft would work with ~200 mill depression, but unfortunately the gunsight disappears below 110 so that's not a good option imo. What works for me instead is to start a 20 degree dive around 5000ft and ~230 KIAS (which is more or less what I orbit at over a target). I keep MPR and full throttle in. Set the gunsight to 110 mills. The goal is to be at around 1500-1800 ft (which you can monitor easily by checking the radar altimeter in the ADI with your peripheral vision) and 350KIAS. The bomblets will disperse between the gunsight and bottom of the reflector glass, so if you put your target in the general area between the two you should hit it - we don't need to be very precise because it's a cluster munition anyway. The trick for me was to keep the throttle in - if you go idle you don't accelerate enough and the impact point ends up being below your nose/gunsight (because again, we're in C-101s so we don't do high speed), so you're kind of back to square one. And as a bonus, the ballistics of the Belouga and BL-755 are similar enough that this seems to work for both. The only caveat is that with the BL-755 sometimes you release late enough that you will hear the explosion and see the bomblets, but do no damage, so try to release closer to 1800ft than below 1500. The Belouga releases its bomblets much quicker so it's not really an issue.

Apologies for the bump - it wasn't the ejection seat. Issue is coming up again but I can't find out why nor replicate it consistently yet. This time I made sure to both arm the seat and close the canopy only when told.

Bump, I've also noticed this. @Hiromachi could you have a look at this? It makes for some really interesting ILS landings to say the least...

Yeah iirc the datalink shares some common features and as a result the documentation for a lot of stuff is classified (even if the implementation of the datalink itself wouldn't be a big deal in DCS for obvious reasons).

Uh, interesting. My understanding was that MTI uses a low PRF so the ambiguity on measuring the velocity is huge. I guess interpolating between successive detections solves that, but it would still be more uncertain than pulse Doppler?

It has some but it's an MTI radar than pulse Doppler one, which as far as I understand means it has a lower PRF and therefore a) it's generally worse in look down performance and b) it can't measure closing speed effectively.

Wooooo Kobuleti 2.0!

Out of curiosity, in TWS-A does the Phoenix still receive any guidance updates if I support it all the way to the hit, or does it just do its own thing after pitbull regardless of what the radar does? If it's the former, I think I know why my missiles seem to be well behaved - I generally dive to a lower altitude than my target after I shoot a missile meant for a kill, so maybe the radar is guiding the missile through the notch? Regarding the Su-27 vs Su-33 thing: that's peak DCS AI right there. It's insane that we don't seem to be remotely close to getting an AI overhaul because wow.

I love how any 3rd party developer can announce any number of modules that will take years and years to complete, and people still speculate on what the next aircraft after the next aircraft will be

I can't speak for multiplayer, but against the AI I really do not understand what kind of shots people are taking that make the Phoenix seem useless or even unreliable. Using the BVR mission on PG as an example, just replicating (poorly, all my hours in the Viggen didn't prepare me for this!) the tactics Ironmike posted in this thread makes it super easy to hold your own against any non Fox-3 4th gen jet - in fact, I actually find it way easier than Fox-1 only combat against 3rd gen jets. I would actually love to see some tracks of this super consistent ineffective behavior (ruling out stuff like the AI's magical chaff) because if anything, it would serve as a good comparison of what works vs what doesn't.

Nothing like that, the -E is much further away from the -C. A better comparison would be the F-14A and D.

Yeah I also would love to have one (or more) of these over engineered pieces of 50s optimism (although I wouldn't count the F-104 in that list). The Skyray, Sea Vixen, Javelin, Yak-28 Brewer/Firebar, those sorts of aircraft. But yeah I think what makes the F-13 stand out is its simplicity. Fishbeds after that all get some type of radar and all-weather equipment so in a way they get fairly close to what the bis can do, while the F-13 is still a pure daytime fighter (and is supposedly the best Mig-21 at that, minus the modern J7s/bisons/Lancers). In my mind that also makes it sufficiently different from the Mig-19P, which in a way is like a later Fishbed but worse overall. I think in general there is quite a lot of scope in DCS to deal with variants or sub-variants that is only being explored now between the A-10CII, Mirage F1, Phantom, and Tomcat. If especially the Phantom releases work out well, I can see other 3rd parties going that way.

Not a Phantom RIO (or driver) tho

Come to think of it, I think the three symbols are in order of severity of the radar looking at you. CW would be some sort of illuminator to guide Fox-1s, so for whatever reason the square wave would be a tracking radar and the TWS thingy some sort of lock? Seeing as the whole cockpit is in French it's very unlikely it stands for track while scan (and RWRs can't really tell whether they are being looked at in TWS or not, especially these old ones...).

Probably some classification of the emitter that's painting the aircraft with the "most" signal, kind of like the SPO-15 does?

As much as I want a Draken, three modules is already a lot of work. I'd rather HB didn't do the Razbam thing of announcing seven million planes and then not getting any actual work done on most of them for years.

Uh I may not have actually! I'll double check edit: alright for some reason I can't replicate the issue, so it must have been me just paying more attention to arming the seat.