Jump to content

Rick50

Members
  • Posts

    1384
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Rick50

  1. Recently I saw a headline about a nation giving up on the NH-90 and ordering... UH-60 variants https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/norway-is-done-with-its-unreliable-nh90-helicopters-wants-500m-back That's... disappointing. I thought it was basically a proven item... complex systems don't always live up to their own hype. Or own specs. Or owner/operator expectations. Then again, in the real world, behind the scenes could be coruption motivations... buying a small fleet of helicopters is a LOT of money, and there are margins for significant bribes/kickbacks for a handful of people. Not saying that's what's going on here, but having seen so many examples of aircraft purchases, big govt purchases that resulted from kickbacks being uncovered, it makes me ask questions. As for DCS modules, there's no doubt that we can use a medium/heavy lift heli, more utility helos, more Euro helos. Maybe EH-101 Merlin?
  2. Well that's good to hear! I guess we'll just have to be patient and not expect any news. One day sometime in future, maybe we'll suddenly hear the Kiowa Warrior is about to be released... a youtube trailer, influencers doing tutorials and demo missions... I mean, given the choice, I'd rather eventually get a good working module to fly, than get a bunch of screenshots and vids that never result in a module release. I personally don't see ANY advantage for a dev to tell the public about a module subject more than 3 months before release. Well maybe except getting good and enough SME's, sure. But screenshots, details of scope, updates, I just don't see any upside to the dev team. Maybe instead we should make a database of SME's for dev teams to refer to?
  3. The enemy is clearly Palpatine's Empire, Terran Garrison... the scout force before invasion... I mean, why else fly through the canyon, to manually hit a 2 meter exhaust port? "Use Force, Mav" - Goose ghost
  4. Dunno about pure size, but it'd be a few green pixels and all blue for the rest!
  5. Far from an expert in Phantoms or British variants, but from what I've learned on this forum, there was some deep differences. The nose gear on Royal Navy Phantoms extended WAY higher than USN models, almost to the point of looking comical. Some Brit Phantoms were basically nearly USAF models. But others featured a totally different engine, that produced a different power curve, so a lower top speed, but greater power at useable dogfighting speeds, better acceleration. That different engine needed substantial changes in size and geometry to the fuselage. Many Brit Phantoms featured a rectangular EW fairing on top of the tail, never seen in any other country. Think some had a different radar set and different radio too. Basically, it was still a Phantom... but a unique "cousin from across the pond" that spoke the same language but with a different accent and weird slang we'd never heard before! The same but different.
  6. Sometimes life takes a bad turn, sometimes permanently. Perhaps maybe this is an example of that. Nowadays with instant communication and soc med, it seems that as a society we are getting much poorer at dealing wth ambiguity... and waiting patiently too it seems!! Which is made funnier since more than a decade ago, we wouldn't have any of these reactions, because we probably wouldn't even know of a project being in dev in the first place!
  7. Might be a little early for that, considering that new map is not finished. I'm sure when it's done or close to done someone will figure this out for this thread topic, but it might be a bit of a wait!!
  8. Soooo... 10 minutes by Pagani on Autostrada ?
  9. I "THINK" i saw a yellow orange black paint for the Littlebird just like TC used to fly around in, getting Magnum into trouble! But I might be wrong, might have been for a different sim possibly? Vietnam paints based on the OH-6 Cayuse, but using this Littlebird mod: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3314815/
  10. Now would be a good time to dive and extend...
  11. But then that would require dialogue exposition... the public doesn't understand what Fox3 means. They don't understand much about radars, and chaff is unknown to most. Flares don't need that explanation because everyone knows about "heat seeking missiles" so dumping flares becomes self-explanatory.... and just looks super cool!! Another point is that these days, one new trend in missiles is to give additional seekers, so that you have two methods of terminal guidance, so that one decoy type doesn't ditch your million dollar missile, so the radar guideds get thermal seekers too. This is all early days, and there are significant packaging concerns, but that's the future trend, thus, flares and chaff at the same time is just now starting to make more sense.
  12. Well, I guess you get one point for partial originality! I say partial, because Xplane has Mars to fly around!! Not sure how you'll gain altitude with such small stubby wings of DCS modules though... remember, Mars only has 3% the atmosphere of Earth... True, but I think even ED is very much unsure when too!
  13. Ah, cool !! Well done for making a mod for another game! Well, I don't have DCS modding experience either, I did do a modest amount in FS2004, but nothing of deep significance. Basically I improved the way some freeware planes flew, closer to what I thought the real planes were capable of, when their start point was well away from the probable performance. I'd also look to see if there were features not included that I could add in myself. Basically learned by trial and error, along with examining and comparing the raw data sheets, what they called aircraft.cfg files, and tried to notice where some lines of code were excessively simple, or very detailed, or missing, or were default code lines from another aircraft that had little in common with the type being represented in this file folder (meaning, why does so much code feature EXACTLY the same as a B-747-400 GE, when the plane represented is a C-130 Hercules? Stuff like that. Nice screens and pics btw!
  14. In truth, there was many things that would be "low probability of survival" in that movie! WARNING: don't open the spoiler bar below, it contains SPOILERS!! But for a fun "rollercoaster movie" it wins!!
  15. Eh... Apache can do a few moves, but it can't dance like the Bo-105 can!!! And the Longbow D is more freight train than ballet dancer... the Bo-105 is more Cirque du Soleil performer, defying gravity as if doing so it's entire life!
  16. LOL!! That all sounds about right!! I think you are correct about the numbers the movie will produce... but I think you are wildly overestimating what Paramount will offer the family... I mean, 3% would be HUGE money for people not entitled to any of it, IMO. I'd expect Paramount to offer them $100k and a fancy SUV and "shut up about this and go away or we'll counter-sue you out of existence!". I bet Paramount was more likely to give that 3 million to Wounded Warriors or something, the PR benefit and showing that it's not about their own greed, but the principle of the situation! Look it would be different if the writer had produced a story and characters that really were like in the movie, sometimes studios have been horrible to writers, sometimes even outright stealing entire scripts and not paying a penny... requiring real lawsuits and real outcomes... but this? This is the guy who "trip and fall" on the sidewalk outside your store and demands cash money "or I'll SUE!!"... you give him $500 cash because it's WAY cheaper than calling your own attorney, even though you would win for sure. Call it a "Nuisance fee" or whatever!!!
  17. This isn't just the question... this is also the true answer to all your post's questions: it IS and was intended to be "unfinished" and "barebone". It was not meant to be a hardcore true representative of a specific Littlebird variant. It was intended to be a guide, a "blueprint" to be able for mod makers to make their own, and modify their own helis for DCS without modifying payware helis. I don't claim to know why the AH-6 was chosen, it might have been "just because cool and simple" (which is awesome in my book!) This was meant not to be hyper realistic to specific Littlebird airframes, but as an education tool and a fun mod to enjoy! Sure... the original mod maker, Nibbylot, might himself not have known a great deal about the real Littlebird details about it's fire control system... few people usually DO know such things unless they found the original systems manuals, or actually worked on or flew these aircraft. I don't know. But... just because it's done SOMETIMES in videos, doesn't mean it's ALWAYS done that way. It's quite likely that specific pilots and squadrons have different preferences, especially since smaller birds like this one carry so few actual rockets. And some pilots/squadrons will choose the firepower of double double!! Maybe that's historic, maybe it was just done that way for quickly completing the mod for us to enjoy. Maybe it never occured to Nibby that those two gatlings would ever be mounted to one airframe AT THE SAME TIME. Because honestly, to me it seems like a very poor choice to put both on at the same time: if you need one of those calibers, you don't need the other on the same flight. Put both on, and you are incurring a very heavy weight penalty by adding the extra gatlings, which are HEAVY. Then there is the ammo belts: with both carried in flight on a mission, you will inevitably have more of the wrong caliber when you wished you just carried more belts of one size! I suspect that photos of Littlebirds carrying the '134 and GAU-19 at the same time, are more for showing off at Defense conventions what kind of capabilities are available to customers, rather than a specific configuration that would actually be used for real operations. What I mean is, I'd know from previous operations and the upcomming mission profile, as to whether I'd need 7.62 or .50cal, or one rocket pod, or two. I'd know if it was better to carry Hellfires, or maybe APKWS. I'd do mission fuel calculations, and then figure out if I would have to compromise on ammo loadout... just ammo belts can, in some cases, have a DRASTIC effect on aircraft weight in combat! Also, remember that there are differences in models: an MD-530 is probably a different product from the Littlebird of SOAR 160. And the Boeing Littlebird of today being marketed, is a much upgraded unit from the Littlebirds of the past decades. Indeed the most modern versions don't even need pilots in them at all, able to be flown like a drone. That and SOAR 160's Littlebirds might have started as MD-500D's and/or OH-6 LOACH (maybe in the earliest days maybe?), but are VERY likely to have received a great many incremental upgrades over the last several decades of service. That said, this mod... is a mod. And was presented as a learning opportunity. So, if you are brave and adventurous, make a backup copy folder of the mod, and then start messing with the values in the mod, to see if you can get it to meet your own expectations! No one's stopping you, indeed I bet Nibbylot would approve!
  18. uh... did a quick reading of this... I'm no lawyer, or movie maker, or article writer... but a first glance seems to have a very weak foundation for a lawsuit to me. An article from 1983, that inspired the first movie? Somehow has legal IP for a movie a few years later, and then decades later?! Ehh... I mean, for a quick buck to settle out of court, sure, but beyond that, I'm certain that Paramount would send in all lawyers, pure firepower, to deny them a win. Next we'll learn that Fast an Furious, along with CARS are both being sued by the estate of Manuel Fangio, because car go vroom!!
  19. It's not "DCS realistic"... not even close. BUT... there was many instances that had MORE realism and "real world" than I expected from a hollywood rollercoster movie... just like the first one. And while it was cheezy at times, overall I enjoyed it for what it was, a recognition of the original and it's cultural impact, and just a fun ride after a sea of doom/gloom movies the last two years. In the end, I had more fun with it than I expected, was better than I expected! That said, leave your NATOPS manual at the door!
  20. So I was just thinking a bit about the notion of a map for Yugoslavia (Bosnia, Croatia and so on). When I was there in the mid-90's, a lot of people had run away, understandable considering the uncivil war an all... but also, I remember there didn't seem to be very many roads in the area I was in, and many of them were gravel roads not paved. Yet... from recent photos from visitors of the same area, and GoogleMaps picture imagery, it's become completely transformed with a LOT more fancy paved high speed highways, seemingly more built up areas... there seems to be a great deal "more" to the region, or at least parts of it. Why do I mention it? Because... well, the place has changed visually and practically, since that was a conflict area. What does everyone want out of such a map? Do you want to recreate the 1990's ? Or is a present day map what you all want? It's maybe not the most pressing question, but I do think it's important to ask, so that customers don't have a backlash to a poor dev team!
  21. So apparently the US Army has one "Iron Dome" system, and is deploying it to Guam right now... not sure about how many or few they might be buying. But deploying one already, probably shortly after the purchase/training period probably says something!
  22. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/germany-to-deliver-iris-t-slm-advanced-air-defense-system-to-ukraine
  23. Not exactly strictly on topic, but the people of Lithuania collect €5 million, crowdfunding a Bayraktar TB2 drone for Ukraine... I guess this relates somewhat considering that drones and SAM will be at odds against each other for the forseable future, drone networking Vs EW jamming, and energy beams such as laser defenses. So on the one hand, such defenses could make drone operations grounded due to very high losses of drone from comms dropout, leading to the need for manned aircraft to continue the fight. But on the other hand, manned systems would themselves be very vulnerable to comms and networking dropout too, but additionally putting the aircrew at higher risk. Limited voice radio, poor situational awareness page due to incomplete datalink, along with other effects, would severely compromise the effectiveness of an operation. As well as the massively greater cost of the manned fighter aircraft as compared to even fancy UCAV drones... One thing doesn't appear to happen in the near future though, I feel that airforces will want to keep a "man in the loop" for deciding to fire missiles at other aircraft. This may involve firing a BVR shot that is launched from say a "Loyal Wingman", but the launch decision, with all the relevant data, would come from the Viper/Raptor pilot or "GIB". As enemy EW jamming increases, then the pilot would have to only use onboard ordnance, and the Loyal Wingmen would just orbit on station until reaching Bingo, and then RTB by GPS waypoints, otherwise neutered for the mission.
×
×
  • Create New...