FoxAlfa

I would love more news on the Mirage F1 if you ask me :)

The MiG is great and Full fidelity would be great... but in the meanwhile few of this improvements would make it even better... I hope ED finds time once the Viper progresses https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=245991

OK, classical deflection... trying to offer a superficial alternative to a binary question, you ether develop it on Viper (option A) or Hornet (option B)... there isn't option C... so deflection pointless and an unargumented here. Repeating something without providing a concrete answer doesn't make it true, my arguments are very clear why at current state getting first TWS on Viper, and then on the Hornet, would mean that we would as SUM we would get TWS on BOTH SOONER. Yet you are using deflection and miss direction so caring this discussion is pointless, sorry but I am not buy it any more, thank you for your time and enjoy the patch.

OK, since we are discussing technical dept... what will accumulate more off it... Making and debugging a complex system on relative simple and bare to the bones system and then when bug-free integrating it on more complex system? OR Making it and debugging it on very complex system along side complex integration with lot of other dependencies?

And are you aware that software packages generate most of their income in first 3 month after launch... so if they delayed the Viper, then it might have been no money, no ED, no Viper TWS, no Hornet TWS and lot of us whining over spilled milk! Don't be a armchair general... Enjoy the patch and the Hornet and Viper, the TWS will come sooner or later.

What people fail to understand is that software development isn't a 1st grade math problem... X number of workers produce Y number of cars for Z time.... Getting in to context is major time waster in the software development... so development time for Viper Radar -> Viper TWS -> Hornet TWS is NOT the same time as Viper Radar -> Hornet TWS -> Viper TWS the second path could be actuality much much longer.

yes, basically more focus and targeted FLOOD-ish mode... basically if in EO range you should not be able to easily notch the Flanker and Fulcrum...

SPO SPO SPO Woohoo!!!! Woohoo!!! Thank you!!! Looking forward to it :)

I think there should be Mission Editor option to enable coalition based or code based IFF, that way the full code based system is left for full mil sim, but coalition based can be enable to reduce TK on more populous but less mil sim servers.

My heart goes to the m2000c pilots. Having to go with broken bird for a month is really hard

Borchi, I truly respect the amount of work gone into the Gazelle, and I can relate to being protective and proud of your work, you should be! But on the other hand it is quite a pity not improving it to the maximum it can be and especially since lot of people will take as benchmark when gauging if they should by your upcoming undisclosed. No body is working on assumptions here... data that is being quoted is the official manufacturer ones and can be easily checked by everyone. I think MDBA would be the first ones to promote their range as 7.5km then the 6.5km. Also the flight time and booster time can be now clearly seen again on the official manufacturers video. I do understand that video wasn't available when Gazelle was coded but there is again no reason not to apply that new found knowledge now especially if it would improve the product and make a lot of people happy. Regarding the smoke produces levels on launch I think we all agree they are on stringer igla level and there is a lot of both picture and video evidence coming from credible sources(army and industru) to verify that. I think this fixes according to new videos and information would dispel a lot of hostility currently regarding its performance.

MiG-29BM if you ask me.... a MiG-29C upgrade with MFI-55 display, Kh-31A/P and Kh-29T/L, KAB-500L, air refueling and a better radar and minimal change to existing model. It would give us a Redfor mid-2000s aircraft with minimal effort and time needed. https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/mig-29bm.htm https://tangosix.rs/2017/01/02/sve-o-beloruskoj-modernizaciji-mig-29bm

Also looking at the previous graph and the following manufactures video with the full flight of the missile... reducing the burn time from 5 to 3.5 sec should remedy a lot of performance issues... and of-course adding the same Smoke as for Igla/Stinger. Manufacturer video

Correct, if you compere the FM performance between ED added one and current one that mistral uses there is a BIG difference... the current one reaches 7,5 km while still traveling 2400 km/h when it self-destructs, it is out-performing the manufactures calmed 6.5 km effective range on a non-maneuvering target by a quite a margin. We could argue that ED one is under-performing it a bit but by a very small margin. MBDA Mistral promo page: https://www.mbda-systems.com/ground-based-air-defence/mistral-atam/

Mistral should have smoke on launch like other missiles. And here is also an official manufactures promo video

Hello, Probability asked for before, but it would really good if at least some basic warnings would be added to the crew like missile or AAA fire to the Hip and Huey. I can't imagine a human being being silent while he see a missile fly toward him :D

Great work, can we get a similar fix for the Fulcrum HUD?

I think so, probably GPS mount. Here are more pictures of the HUD with minimal difference in lower and top part

It's not a different version, its the different angle. The camera is well above head, so light is staying longer in the tinted glass thus making it darker. Similar effect to the angled armor and the round going trough it. And even if you compere it from that angle the one from the videos are still lighter then in the DCS. Its a small tweak but a very needed one.

I would also add as 9. the top part of the hud needs to be lighter and much more see trough. Many times I wasn't able to pick up the target since the HUD is way too dark. Real hud: DCS hud:

Technically it means it can reacquire target if the lock is lost... but it still needs a re-lock with mother-ship radar (although there are some discussions on this point too). The second case it could be it continues ballistic and takes down non-maneuver target due to proxy fuse, but nether here seams to be the case since the misslie is clearly maneuvering. For what I can tell a bug due to de-sync or AI in MP. Looks like a MP with AI plane shooting the player, but I could be wrong... I never got a kill like that on the Blue Flag for sure, missile always drops...

FoxAlfa - (Red/Blue) MiG-29S, M2000C, A-10C, F-14 or F-18 and ofc F-16 if it come out.

The R-27r is a SARH missile AKA Fox 1... it should drop the guidance as soon as the MiG-29 turned and stopped supporting it. I think it is a AI issue since player guided missiles don't behave this way or it could be a de-sync issue... anyway I hope ED up's the priority on the R-27 family update since it really starting to show and needless trigger people.

Tempest, don't get this tread wrong... the Fulcrum PFM is excellent now (with the right curves) and I can't recommend it enough... I spent over 100 hours and got around 200 kills in it on the Blue Flag and loved every single minute of it... this small things are more comfort of life things then any deal beakers...

Since the KH-66 is a beam-riding missile it is highly unlikely there was a possibility of buddy guidance...