deadpool

Please reopen in light of Thanks.

It's almost non existing. Systems don't fail, you can't degrade stores, nada. But I think that's the case for the Hornet also, so .. taking the Hornet as the elder brother .. it's going to be quite some time before we see that .. if we ever do that is.

The two big ED birds have none of that modelled. Hornet, Viper, ... you can fly inverted for as long as you like .. push negative Gs until you can see your bloodtype as clear as day .. whatever .. I was really surprised when I flew the JF17 with a centerline tank in a dogfight (and it HAS a g limiter) and saw the centerline tank keep flying straight when I was pulling .. I was smiling This is the problem: what's the target audience? WWII people? Airquakers? Realism-oriented folks? When you advertise something with: "the most realistic ... yada yada" then it hints at the last group. And then you shouldn't need a Hardcore mode... If you want to do Airquake, fly one of the other games that have that as target audience.

What I am not getting is that they will not have any documents on the AIM-120 or the ECM pods .. yet they just model that .. guesstimates etc. Now my curiosity and frustration gets poked when suddenly the rules change. How dire!!! must the paper-front be for them to not guesstimate the pod .. To me it sounds like they couldn't even get their hands on footage on youtube or whatnot. And *this* then further means that there was *nothing* on the pod when they announced it originally. And that's horrible sales behaviour. I find it amazing at what lax realism some of the hornets toys (and yes .. given that you get the walleye, which will never see the light of day in a 2005 conflict (from the time perioud it's supposed to be in)) are in .. and the sheer quantity .. this is adding insult to injury. But it has been for quite some time. The F-16 in DCS should be a warning to everyone on how you botch a product launch and drag it through the dirt. And since there are no competitors, they get away with it. It's unfair, I wish it was different, but here we are.

The only thing that limits G in the viper is the pilot.

He would most likely have to justify this usage as it wears out the jet quite a bit. Better than getting shot down and bringing no jet home though. I guess in reality you would work more with your wingman to switch in dire situations to generate the best outcome at least wear to the machinery and pilot. DCS doesn't model the transonic wall of draghell. Flying just above or below M1 isn't economic.

My reasons: - Right era - Right tool for the job - Right spirit - Usability. It's an extension of the pilot as best as could be done back then.

In your poll .. Do you mean ingame BVR / BFM performance? or the real "working" "worthwhile" one that is being talked about by pilots?

From what little I understand distant ground clutter is also less of a problem. Look up would be mainly influenced by bloomed chaff and ECM, I understand. 15-20nm distance, he at 21000 me at 20000 .. I'd need to do trigonometry .. but it should be workable .. but especially with the curvature .. ground was a nofactor .. I have little faith in what ED passes for radar stuff tbh.

Mode: STT (and after lost lock, RWS with a blip there, but "locking it" would just reset the cursor .. ) The AN/AWG9 was able to automatically deactivate the MLC filter when the target was above the horizon. That what you want to filter out should not be there at this altitude in a look-up condition. Or with range gating .. or whatever .. So the USAF .. years later .. tossed that capability away? I am unconvinced.

My tip: Dig through Newspaper reportings and other public sources about shots fired in anger by F-16s (say Pakistan) .. look at the distances involved .. come to your own conclusion. And bare in mind that the USAF didn't upgrade the F-16s they had to the (9) radars, because they were happy with what they had. Is that something that has a range equal to my car reverse-gear distance-warn-beeper? ... I am sceptical. Why am I defensive about this? Because of things like how Chaff is modelled, because of things like how SAM magically makes RWRs not give a dime is modelled, etc. etc. all of it yells: "I don't understand radar or at least can't explain obvious weird things to others" (which I don't either) .. I wanted to rejoin with a tanker in DCS at 20.000ft (tanker was at 21.000ft) and it was notching me at around 15-20 nm .. I could see it .. it was big .. it was surely reflecting some of that magic radar-stuff. So yeah .. 1.) Whatever ED does .. we will have to love it, change it or leave it. 2.) ED should explain very very detailed why they came to whatever conclusion.

Furiz is just trying to be a smarty pants. I pressed the DL button in the mode selection of the WPN page and that turns the weapon off. I consider that a defective behaviour (as for example no reaction when pressing a non implemented feature might be better), Furiz apparently considers me to blame. I don't really care but provided the trackfile so that ED can make up their own mind. End of story. No drama. Nothing to see.

Roger, I stand corrected then! Thank you!

server-20210607-013508.trk