Airhunter

If anything, the analogue nature and not having anything that holds your hand is the charm with the Tomcat and I'm sure the -A will be different enough in many intricate ways.

Man machine interface in the real 29A is terrible. There are barely any HOTAS functions, the early IRST is close to useless in BVR, so is the radar. If you take a look at the main left panel you find the radar and sensor controls. In reality you need to adjust a ton of pre-defined paremeters to get a radar lock and track, while fiddling with switches and knobs on the main panel. The german 29G manual, which is available on the net gives you a decent idea.

Dont have the straight line flight distance for those right now but the R and T should be really close kinematically, the only factors are the seeker performance and detection range.

You realise those are all from an exhibition, right? No one bought them. I wonder why.

Whabam! Proof they are sill using 80's missiles. :thumbup: As for the ER's kinematic, straight line capabilities - there you go. I would also love to see your claimed information from the missile's manufacturer regarding any upgrades or specific guidence methods, do you have a link, website, brochure or book you are basing this all off?

This very instinct is one of the main stall/spin factors in general aviation. People with inadequate training tend to develop bad habits and do stupid things. Especially when coupled with spacial disorientation and vestibular illusions.

I can see them too but they are very dim, even compared to the various other lights in the cockpit. There is nothing wrong with my monitor in any game or application. All everybody on here is asking is for you to slightly up the brightness/visibility of said AOA indexer lights, that's it. And plese don't come with the "but in real life the lights were dim" argument, we are talking desktop sim here and you already made several "unrealistic" decisions in favor of DCS being a game, like the overly load switches, so why not apply the same logic here? Clearly no one complained about this before the lighting rework.

How would you know how a real Hornet sounds like from the cockpit anyway?

Ok regardless of gamma, why are most other light after the rework bright enough and visible quite well? Why was the indexer bright and visible since release up until 2.5.6?

It's not rocket science, just look up some videos of Mig-21's taxiing...

Will this option be in the next OB?

Maybe, depending where the CG is but it also aids as an airbrake (aerobraking). It's a huge surface deflecting into the windstream. I'd also be careful with the downforce with tire life and wear considered. For the most part the spoiler brake should create the sufficient lift-dump and downforce needed for braking.

Yes. This might be coming with the -A.

Funnily enough the Viper and all the FC3 jets have this modelled correct. Viper friction seems roughly authentic as well.

I never claim anything in that regard, but if there's an area I know quite a bit about I'll try and correct people who make false statements about said things. And I too know about ausairpower. :thumbup: Can you show me said statement? The "P" (as in russian P) would be an anti-radiation variant, which is kinda made obsoltele by the various Kh-X anti-rad missiles with superiour performance in all aspects. Hence why you see modern Flankers and strikers carrying those primarily. And you do realize how anti-rad missiles work and why they aren't used for the air to air role, right? I surely hope you do.

If you spoke even the slightest bit of russian you'd quickly realize that the 1 designation is for the export variants.

I am not taking anything personal, clearly some people on here are trying to always be right and make up their own reality as it fits them.

English please.

So both the RuAF and UAF pilots I talked to are lying, eh? Artem in Kyiv is lying too and clearly pulled off the biggest secret in arms history? What's the seeker called then if we know everything about it and how does it work in terms of RF-bands and target accquisition? Clearly you know it for a fact.

What do you even mean by this? The 9X Block I we have in game also hugely underperforms and there is MORE than enough public data and research papers on the fundamentals of this particular and various other FPA HOBS missiles. What site are you refering to? I am in no way trying to limit russian weapons in DCS nor any development when it comes to more realistic missiles and flight dynamics in general. I just see silly people on here who think they know stuff they don't know. Why is this R-27 thing such a mystery? TLDR is, yes, we need an aerodynamics and guidence rework and no there are no upgraded versions in existence as of 2020, none. There are concepts and export variants that are trying to find funding and enough customers, which they haven't managed to far for some "reason" (which should be pretty obvious at this point). The very basics of the scientific method is to poke holes in a statement or theory, adhering to all the available data from all sources. Anyone claiming there are active R-27's with digital or AESA seekers are just trolls who want something to beat the AMRAAM in the multiplayer flying. I'm all for the R-27 receiving the same treatment as the AMRAAM and Sparrow but reality is, even if this narrows down the Pk gap between those two it'll still be vastly inferiour given the same launch parameters. Some people on here claim they know more about Tomcat engines than a former 4000 hour Tomcat pilot and member of the flight safety board. Funnily I see the exact same people spewing nonsense in here and various other threads, all based on their google search history.

That's literally so vague? No one is arguing that the PN guidence is correct in DCS, this, amongst a proper aerodynamics model based on CFD is much needed. However, unless you can show me a picture, report or first hand account of any active seeker (EP) versions being fielded in any notable numbers this, amongst other advertised variants are just proof of concept. There were tests conducted and it turned out to be shit, hence the pursuit in R-77-1 and subsequent variant development. There is liteally no evidence, neither from the manufacturer, nor from first hand accounts that the R-27 family got any notable upgrades since the 90's (surely not from the Ukrainian plant, which got shut down by now) - they simply don't have the money for it, based on their countries GDP. There is very little point is pursuing upgrades to a heavy, late 80's fox-1 design, while a much more promising platform, namely the R-77 and its modern variants are way more promising, especially when it comes to new AESA seekers and integration into the Su-57 (granted in ht next 5-10 years or so). What's the point in co-developing two active missiles if one of them is clearly the better choice? I know former engineers from the Artem plant in Kyiv, if you really insist I can maybe convince them to give you a general rundown on the production and general technology of this said missile. The R-27 these days is a cheap export fox-1, probably the best fox-1 you can get out there if you don't consider the R-33. It still doesn't change the fact that it is a fox-1 in 2020 and gets absolutely curbstomped by modern fox-3's, stealth, ECM, etc. The 27T/ET on the other hand can be dangerous, just as any other fox two if you don't see or expect it. It's seeker however is still the limiting factor, not being FPA, not having modern, digital processing for CM rejection. During adverse weather ops or in a look down scenario it can be very unreliable and have a poor seeker lockon range. So as always, it depends, especially if you factor in rather prominent MWS and DIRCM systems. As far as claims of those upgrades and modern seekers go, you should always take stuff on the internet with a grain of salt and try to diferentiate proof of concept from reality.

Did the cat have good brakes? As in, did they bite rather well on shore ops? In DCS it seems like I really dont have to use brakes ever, just put her down full aft stick and steer with the stabilators. Comes to a stop rather quickly. And by the way, do you happen to recall the pitch limit for a tailstrike? +/- the buffer ofc.

What information?

No. You could see them before, namely in 2.5.5, before the lighting "rework", same settings, same everything. Just adjust the brightness levels and call it a day.

?