Krippz

Is that his body on the deck at 1:00? Poor guy; I read that the crash was due to his AOA indicator on his glare shield being installed incorrectly.

I've seen the clip of the shoot-down before but not the Georgian military's account of the incident. Thanks for sharing.

:megalol: best analogy I've read in years but quite fitting.

I've seen some sources online indicate that the ALR-69 can discern threat elevation and some saying that it cannot so any concrete insight would be nice. Thanks for the effort GG.

Looks like my tax dollars are being well spent ^^.

Agains't a manuvering target....I don't think so.

But Gas you show them your AIM-120's all the time on the 104th server :D

Topol-M this is your thread you aren't going anywhere ;)

But trying to balance the game through mission design is not the right course of action in my opinion. I think we are taking a little away from the virtual pilots here. A good Su-27 virtual pilot would beat an average F-15C pilot any day of the week. I mean you said it pretty well yourself a few posts back: I think we should focus more on having realistic operations, taskings and realistic composition of units, etc with respect to mission design.

Great work Batou. Thank you for your time and dedication to the community!

What a tease....

DCS F-15E (wishful thinking)

Nope I believe that's just another designation for Pe-8

Well you I don't think it's good etiquette to kick people because they aren't flying the way you want them to fly. If a guy mad dogs and his missles are splashing friendlies then that is a diffrent story. P.S. I also don't think it's good etiquette to mad dog in salvos :D

Fixed.

Korea extending into Russia and China.

Wow the new Mi-8, F-15E and KC-135 model suprised the hell out of me. Along with the mention of being able to load in third-party maps.

Agreed if players spent more on their pre-flight briefing and working with friendlies to accomplish their ATO and less time scrambling to take off and joining the virtual rat race the multiplayer experience would be a bit more worthwile. But in my opinion the scope of the mission dictates how SOME players play which is what I was getting at.

I believe you are right.

Hawker hunter.

Wow; simply amazing. Thank you for sharing!

I'm sorry but I can't recommend that build. He would want atleast an AM3 or LGA 1156, 1366 motherboard and compatible CPU. If he followed that build to the tee he would have to upgrade again relatively soon. It looks like DCS A-10C will be DX11 compliant so I would also recommend a DX11 GPU.

I couldn't agree with with you more but the onus is on the community to: 1. Make intelligently designed missions 2. Have squads run these mission on their servers. Number two takes courage because as you said with respect to FC2 a lot of people are used to "airquake".

Well you finally qualified your statement however in your earlier statements you were primarily speaking about the F-15 and Su-27 which lead to the misinterpretation. But once again you are basing things on conjecture; you feel the burn-thru ranges on the aircraft are not correct so they must be changed. Provide us with proof (e.g. Charts, documentation, etc) not conjecture. ED can't just change the range to an arbirtrary range they need documentation.

But Tekneinium you can't base things on conjecture. You have to back up claims with facts "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free". I'm sure that everyone wants the most accurate representation of system modeling in DCS but you can't "have your cake and eat it too". You can't ask the devs to create a high fidelity world and gripe if your beloved aircraft does not perform better than another.