jojyrocks

My REALISTIC expectations in accordance to my wish-list or wishes: American jets: F-4 Phantom series ( Yes, I know the E version is being worked on, But would love to see the Naval versions too like the B or J). I hope they add in the Naval versions too F-104 Starfighter (Preferable C, G and or S model) F-105D Thunderchief A-4 Skyhawk (Preferable E or F) T-45 Goshhawk ( Since its based on our past VEAO Hawk...but this time with land and sea fun) Euro Jets: SEPECAT Jaguar Tornado series Super Mystère (works well in our Middle East maps) Super Étendard Hawker Hunter (Late versions preferred) Russian Jets: Mig 27 (The 6 barrel 30mm cannon can be the Russian equivalent of A-10 although with low round count) Su-17/22 series Any possible Baseline Su-30 early version (Low possibility, but I at least hope they UPDATE the AI 3D models) Chinese jets: J-8 (Any possible late versions) Q-5 Fantan Any of those LATEST J-7 versions.

Its a bug? Likely? Or something to do with how the ground effect is modeled... So far, its the ONLY current aircraft in DCS that can never do that aerobrake nose up landing style like Air force pilots do for the Navy-centric Hornet. Rest of the aircrafts, its very much possible to aerobrake. Second hardest being the Mig 21 and 3rd being the Tomcat. The Hornet is simply impossible, UNLESS you set the FLAPS to HALF and the runway is very long, then it is most certainly possible. I hope the Flight model tweaking is in their roadmap of "to do" things...

What does trained AI in skill selection mean or do in accordance with skill level? What is the difference?

You certainly cannot Aerobrake land the Hornet like the Finnish and Swiss pilots do and hold the nose up. - skip to 7:20 -skip to 4:40 As of present. Its IMPOSSIBLE to aerobrake and hold the nose up on a Hornet with full flaps landing configuration.

That's why I kept saying J-8 model of WHICHEVER modern variant they CAN get their hands on. Well...whichever variant that is doable for them. Most J-8s are BEING REPLACED fully. Its in very limited service.

The problem still exists despite the latest patch quoting its fix. Also the Front wheels still kinda wobble sideways. I feel as if nothing has changed on Mig 21...:noexpression:

If it is the J-8 series. I do hope it is the modern one to fit in with the current jets, and even still the most latest of J-8 are being phased out in favour of the J-10 which is their current mainstay frontline fighter. Well, whichever version they CAN get their hands on with the J-8. If they can do a J-17. Surely the latest variant of J-8 or close to it can be done.

If doable by 3rd party devs they would most certainly try out the more modern Su-27 family series....yes from the Chinese variants and derivatives too. It would certainly sell so well. So from the THIRD party devs. IF they can. They could possibly do an EARLY Su-30 model and the base version could be doable. At least the Chinese Sukhoi family might have a chance. I don't know what their NEXT module truly is, though. No confirmation on that. ED did say most of the 3D model AI model improvements are done by their third party sources.

Impossible to hope for a flyable Su-30 version of even FC3 kind when we don't even have a possible improvement underway mentioned in the placeholder roadmap for an improved 3D AI Model for the Su-30. Currently we have a paint/gimp version of Su-30 that looks VERY odd in the current improved AI model graphics.

Reminds me of the OLD Jane's F-15E series where you could contact JSTARS for Ground contact or target info. I think it'll take a LOOOOONG while to get that implemented.

So, why they aerobrake is pretty much understandable since MOST land bases have long runways and F-14 along with spoilers will stop better than say, an F-15 or F-16. As to WHY we even see SOME pilots do it? Maybe they'd want to go easy on the landing gear. I mean, if you HAVE a long runway and you have the CHOICE to go easy on the gears, then most have been seen to do it. There is no harm in going easy on the gears and brakes, IF you do have long runway to use. As for tailstrike risk. Just look at the Mig 29 for example! Its got a taller nose gear and it cannot do a high AoA aerobrake as it certainly would risk a tailstrike. But we still see pilots doing it. Most of it does look they'd have a tailstrike. (6:48 and watch how close those Engine cans are to the ground and that a bit more, that engine is in trouble). There are vids of F-14 and compare that with this one...Tailstrike difference F-14 spoilers do provide downforce and extra drag effect. How it works in DCS and how it activates seem different. Drag effect of spoilers on is very noticeable.

So...no other planes come to mind. That only leaves, the AH-64, and I guess it is mind blowing to some. Not me, since I don't really fly helos. But that's just me :D I really thought it was either F-104 or A4 Skyhawk. Hope its not some turboprop or propeller plane, coz that is not mind blowing. Well, maybe to some...

I would more than LOVE to see some cold war planes. Especially the F-104... But so far...it seems ED does not want to give us high hopes or they'd decide to cut the module building all together and just stop, leaving rest to third party. Hope its not the latter... Most of the latest jets will not be available to be made as module. Only the Redforce remains stuck...

They also noted the Special interest in the F-104 from the community. They also did say they won't be doing modules like F-100 or the F-101 Voodoo. Maybe some third party hint for the F-104.

DCS world F-14...yeah we know it stops efficiently. Maybe the drag on the spoilers is more or how it affects the F-14 here. As for, in real life, we seen air show. We gotta ask the pilot on WHY he'd need to aerobrake and keep the nose up attitude? (like we see those F-15s do for example). There are vids posted here F-14 pilots of both models and their pilots doing aerobraking with the nose up, yes, with spoilers engaged, flaps full and speed brakes deployed. I dont get how spoilers work in DCS. Do the spoilers come up when we cut power to idle or when the nosewheel touches the ground? In vids seen here, spoilers are seen even with nose up attitude, as in nose wheel still not in contact with the ground.

Its being VERY slowly done... Lots of AI 3D models need updation and only some in the roadmap plans. Su-30 is missing. With the upcoming graphical engine enhancements, those models would look completely out of place.

Ah, my mistake...wrong example added in...:doh: Tu-160 Blackjack and Mig 31 to name a few...can't name all.

Well...for some reason, I do not see any roadmap update plans on that too. Maybe its hard to even update that. I guess we'll be seeing Windows XP era AI Su-30 model for a loooooooong till 2024 and maybe even beyond. :lol: So, no plans on updating our current 3D model of Su-30, Mig 27, Su-22, Tu-22M etc. There is even no indication in roadmaps either. Having those outdated assets in current graphics engine which is getting updated will be very odd and awkward...:noexpression:

ED already knows about this... This idea has been circulated before.But no one has put much thought into it. I think they wont be able to get even the materials or permission for even a low fidelity module. If that were possible. I think it would certainly have been done. So...expecting Su-30 of early version even in low fidelity is very LOW. Thinking about Mig 29K is out of the question, then...Its still in full service with the RuAF. So, we'll have to make do with the Super early Mig 29 in Full fidelity. We'll still be at a full disadvantage against majority of Bluefoce jets.

Why do we need to remove the ONLY redforce plane that has SOME advantage over the upcoming superb Bluforce planes? Removing this will make the Blueforce overpowered...they got AWACS datalink plus better missiles. I'm sure the LATE versions of J-11 has datalink modded into them.

Attaching the JATO rockets will make the Mig 21 lean to one side... Yep...the suspensions need work and at time its very wobbly..

The FM developers and testers have already concluded or said that this Friction problem is an ED related issue and at current they nor ED has any plans to rectify it any time soon. So there we have the answer...that maybe some day, hopefully, it can be rectified. And before others say about the F-14 NATOPS SOP procedure of landing and not do an aerobrake, its clearly stated that it is NOT recommended..but they did not use urgent wording like forbidden, and we STILL see SOME pilots in airshows doing just the opposite and doing those aerobraking at land bases. The Mig 29 risks a tail-strike coz of its design and cannot do a high AoA aerobraking risking an engine "can"/tailstrike. But some pilots still do it and in tandem release the brake chute. Too much AoA and risk a tailstrike. I suppose, most Navy carrier pilots don't see the point or use of an Aerobrake and they do land somewhat like they do in the carrier even in land bases. Since carrier based jets have strong landing gears. I guess they dont see the point of much on going easy on the landing gears. Only some jets so far are easy to aerobrake in DCS and more possible. Some require LOTS of practice, but can be done. The hardest so far is the Mig 21 (need a LOT of practice, can be done). Near impossible is the Hornet with full flaps (maybe the suspension modeled is too soft), but for some reason the W.brake are poor on Hornet and F-16 (Too much AoA on F-16, you risk hitting the extended speedbrakes). F-14 in DCS is like Mig 21, but needs a LOT of practice, you can aerobrake, but not keep it long enough like in one of the recent videos of an F-14B doing it. Again...it can be done, Just that the drag of flaps, spoilers and Speedbrake seems more and the extra friction acting up. F-14 comes to a stop very fast in DCS. Runway length is not much of problem. So, the problem is exaggerated friction from ED side, at least that's what most third party devs have said so far and they did say its quite complicated to correct it or not their prime priority.

If they weren't so sure about the Phantom back then, then why did they even bother to show the cockpit pics of their development? Did they find it part way that they didn't have the so called tech to complete it...? I think its something else...and that is anyone's guess...

Just stating an observation and no, not every airshows the Tomcat pilots land like that...nothing wrong with stating an observation. The thread moderator can lock this thread, then. I'd welcome it.

Playing SP missions is not viable at this point coz of the AI at a mess. AI will most certainly make your mission difficult as it is at current. Until AI is corrected a bit...developing SP campaigns is pretty pointless.