Harlikwin

Bless you

Yup, navy vs AF sidewinders tho. Also rails were sometimes not 100% compatible, i.e. the Aim-9G rails on British harriers had to be modified with a "file" to fit Aim9L during the falklands war as an example.

I don't even care if its modern, I just want to be a version that actually saw service.

Blk15 was exported way more tho. So its just a question of relevant how. And I mean yeah ok, 1 country got all the A/A kills.

Classis DCS development, new devs think its easy based on their non-existent prior experience, turns out waay more complicated than they think.

I mean, thats not really that unreasonable. If read about it, they were hard for fast movers to employ. One of the reasons the A10 guys got more use out of them was because usually the target was outrunning them.

An early Blk15 was the most prolific, exported, and versatile while still being old school. But I'd be fine with either at 10 or early 15. The late 15's are mfd monsters like our current Viper, don't want that.

null

So not much to debate

It wasn't very good. Most mav engagments were like 1 mile shots, if that because they could barely see anything.

Well. I'm not gonna disagree about the average DCS MP players skill issues. But it will get sorted out. Most of the better players on the CW servers already handle F5's and Mig21's decently enough, though they are in the minority. Those will be the guys that take to the F4 or 23 like ducks to water. But your average DCS 4th genner, yeah they will have a bad day.

Ah if thats the case I think I misunderstood them. One "interpolated" graph I have but don't think I can post has the 23MLA doing 14.5 dps STR at 45 sweep. It is interpolated/translated onto a western chart for comparison so I'm not sure if its correct. And if its true it "matches" what the Israelis have anecdotally said about the 23 and F4, but well, anecdotes. There is another nice one from a dutch F16A pilot that flew the MLD as well and said it outperformed the viper in BFM which is kinda eeeh, but does match what the soviets thought about it. All this being said, I think on release people will be surprised that the F4 can actually dogfight, and doubly true for the 23 since basically all of the western lore is about literally the worst first gen mig23 that ever flew, and while its somewhat accurate, its in no way accurate when discussing the ML/MLA/MLD versions. That being said I'll also say the same is likely true for optimistic assessments of how they though the 23 would fare against 4th gens. At the end of the day for DCS purposes, its all down to how well the Aero will actually get modeled, and how well the systems get modeled. Like if Jester 2.0 can pick out a gnats ass in lookdown, well thats likely a problem. Same thing if the MLA radar isn't somewhat janky but functional in lookdown. Oh one last comment I saw mentioned some issues with instability at high speed with the 23. That was a problem with early gen1 23's but it was also at high mach, like 2.0 and above. And it was solved in the 2nd gens for the most part from my understanding you can see a big difference in the vertical stab between the two.

So whats the difference between the black and red lines? And the 3/4 different graphs (is that alt?) With regards to the whole ML/MLA/MLD story. AFAIK, the ML manual is an early one, and it was revised for MLA with better data, also various things like G limits got upped between each one of those iterations, partly due to some changes in the airframes, but also from experience. From what I have anecdotally heard the 33 degree wing sweep got you like ~1-2 DPS more than the 45. Same thing for stuff like AOA limits as well. At any rate, that more or less means the F4 and 23 are relatively close performance wise for STR and ITR. Which is what RL testing from Israel anecdotally said (though they said their MLA/MLD (aerodynamically supposedly an MLA) the 23 outdid their F4. Also for all the GCI guys, while ofc the Soviets had GCI and used it doctrinally, they were basically horrified by how badly the Mid East air forces performed and basically setup their own version of Top-Gun, to teach BFM out in Khazakstan in the 70's. So more or less an analog to the US Vietnam experience. And by the early 80's you had experienced mig-23 pilots beating rookie mig29 pilots there, just like early on F15's got beat by F4's or 104's in DACT.

Yeah, but sadly not happening due to DL issues.

I hear ya. Also glad the radars on the modern jets are getting reworked to be more in line with the F15E radar model.

Yeah I get that you guys needed MT to do better cloud modeling or to have them exist in the game beyond just being a graphical shader layer. And that latest radar thing sort of hints that radar may be effected by weather so I'm hoping for progress.

Well thats good news. Clouds blocking IR and weather next I hope.

Probably not. It likely required additional features like an A/G weapons computer, possibly different hud etc. I.e. all the stuff the M got.

In that case I'd stick to US made ordnance for the F1, it carries both sidewinders and the various MkXX series of bombs as well as GBU's, which Iran did get some early GBU kits that they put to use during the iran/iraq war.

I'm not disagreeing with you. But I'm saying ED won't make a realistic naval sim because its too much work. I mean take a look at all the half done stuff that they have introduced and has fallen by the wayside. WW2 damage models, how many planes actually got one? Realistic bomb fusing? Again what % of even the WW2 stuff has this working? And my favorite, clouds and weather.

Yeah fox1 fights will be interesting. The Mig should be able to see the F4 from a pretty good distance, 70+ km is a detect distance for 3m2 target for the N003, and of course the F4 has a larger RCS 6-10m2. As for the fuel situation its interesting, the 23 had pretty good range performance especially up high, and given that it could very rapidly accelerate I don't forsee too many "bingo" problems for it. But yes only 2 big sticks means the most likely tactic will be 1 pass haul ass.

I mean honestly while I hate the fact the naval model is bad, I also have done the mental excersize of what a decent "naval" damage/missile/radar model would entail, and then multiply that by the 50 or so ships we have in DCS, so its no small task. OOF thats bad, I haven't tried bombing submarines...

Lol no it doesn't at least not for the MLA/MLD. And certainly not in look down. Also don't forget the flogger has decent IRST set as well so depending on the speed of mr Phanter and aspect it could see it from quite a ways away.

LOL none of that applies to the 23 that we will get in DCS. The MLA was 8G capable and turned better than a slatted phantom. The 23MLA handles better in terms of BFM than a 21bis.

I mean given how sporadically and generally badly modeled DCS naval stuff is, IDK that I care too much. You still have the Rb-04 and Rb-15 basically being laser guided to this day. And there is huge variability in damage done by anti ship missiles, despite relatively similar warhead sizes etc.