Kazansky222

At least some Iraqi Mig-23's had spo-15's at some point if I'm not mistaken. I believe Razbam said the MLA will have a spo-15

Do you mean the 3rd party SME's will be unable to talk to ED about the weapons?

Is there a reason the Tor M1 implementation in DCS will not engage large free fall bombs?

I'm not going to be able to play :( can't get the time off work.

Can you take a screen of your link, its blocked for me.

Very happy with Syria being added, would also love Cyprus, Sinai, Suez, and Straights of Tiran to really close it out and be the be all end all map for that "area" of the world.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316942493_Predictive_Missile_Guidance_with_Online_Trajectory_Learning Is a link to a PDF you can download that is a very well written academic paper written by the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Istanbul Technical University. Its easy enough to understand by just looking at the pictures but it is also written in a way that is easy to learn as well.

I like the cut of your jib!

With the Pimax 5k+ on Normal FoV I found mask size of .725 to be about right. If anybody else has been trying to dial it in. Has anybody tried large FoV? I haven't because I run in 144hz mode. But I'm curious of what the mask size is for large FoV

The cool thing is that with the C-101 they probably have some tools and procedures in place to make the F-1 go a bit more quickly. I think it'll be great for the Syria map. M2000, F-1 and Mig-29/23, throw in some Mig-21 and F-5. sprinkle in a little Mi-8/ Mi-24 / Uh-1 That sounds like an awesome little scenario.

Yea I'm still interested as well. Part of me is hoping the SA-5 will be part of ED trying to model a proper IADS and maybe even Lazur? But the Syria map got me thinking about the SA-5 again. The Scud did finally make its way into the game didn't it?

<64>Kazansky MiG-29A WhiteRaven8 Mysacina Mig-29A

So still no plans to fix Phoenix Magic INS. You know the MP guys would appreciate it if you did.

Yes please!!!! Do this Soon!!!!

I was wondering what kind of time frame we could we looking at for a MP fix for Magic INS for the Phoenix Missile. It is the last "fox 3" in the game to feature magic ins, while also being the longest range air to air weapon further increasing the need for a fix. Also what are the plans like for adding in dropped track functionality to the WCS to send/not send pit-bull command to the "fox 3" Phoenix enroute to target? For MP specifically, not Single player.

Stream from Yink's point of view. You can hear the english side of some of the coms for red / Iraq

Hey Chizh, I know its been a while I've just been studying the ED's new loft API implemented on the SD-10 I am very impressed, it seems like you guys have worked out the most efficient trajectory to carrier the most energy to a target. Do you have plans on also adding something similar to non lofted shots, something along the vein of Predictive Guidance posted above?

Its not often I find common sense posts in these forums.... but when I do a :thumbup: is warranted.

Should they be able to share data through an awacs if one is present?

*cough* Mig-29 *cough* , Mig-25 *cough* :joystick: :D

This is great! love the added harm detection mechanic!

Hello I was just wondering if their were plans to bring the HQ-9 into the China Asset Pack I've been working on this US/UAE vs Iran scenario, and since Iran uses alot of Chinese equipment I was hoping to see more Chinese SAMs. If there are no HQ-9 plans I'll just design it around older Russian equivalents. But was just curious maybe a list of whats planned for the China Asset Pack (with a few surprises withheld) would be forthcoming? :)

Tom Kazansky..... Tom Iceman Kazansky.... Its a pleasure ;)

So it looks to me like the JF-17 has a high fuel flow in a apples to apples static test. So.... looks accurate to me. Your 30k ft tests are invalid because they are at such radically different speeds. And doesn't account for inlet design which can count for almost half the "thrust" of an engine in depending on design, design speed ect... https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/inlet.html for informational purposes. But this one is impossible to fake out. the RD-93 burns more fuel installed in a static test vs the RD-33. So again, your own results show that its... pretty spot on.

I think an interesting test would be to have a Mig-29 and JF-17 sitting on the ground somewhere, near sea level and another test where they are at the highest airport in the game both with the same amount of fuel onboard say the 5100lbs that the Jiff carries. And have them both siting there with 1 engine running, crank them up to full AB or mil or whatever with the brakes held and let them sit and see who burns out of fuel first. and time it. maybe even try to record the fuel drop rate on the gauges. It would be more of an "apples to apples" seeing as they would both be at zero airspeed, same altitude ect.... Now if they are wildly different then there is def something going on. But if they are about the same, like the percentages expression from your time tests then I don't think there is a problem, or at least not a huge one.