Kongamato

The 80´s F-5E is a simple but difficult plane. You have to do everything by hand. You want to know where are you flying? You have to use the TACAN or the compass, your eyes and a map. You want to fly at night or all weather? You can't. There is not even ILS. You want an autopilot? Nope. You want to know where your bombs are going to hit? You have to use tables of depression of the reticle, angles of dive, altitudes and speeds. And, if your angle, altitud or speed is not the correct one in a 10%, your bombs are going to hit half a mile away from the target. Your radar is crap, totally blind when is looking down, and you only have two not full aspect sidewinders. Against the F/A-18 or the Tomcat, the 80´s f-5E is a sitting duck 20 miles before the merge. The verision of the F-5E simulated in DCS is actually an advanced trainer and "sparring" for the USAF, not a real fighter. It wasn´t meant to survive against real enemies in a real war. Of course, you can have fun against Mig-19 and 21, and against modern fighters if you don´t allow them to have missiles. That´s all.

The F-5N could be accurately simulated. It´s not the F-35 or the F-22, with all the systems being "Top Secret". It´s the same plane with INS, a newer (but 20 years old) radar and some others avionics. And the F-5N is actually used by the NAVY and USMC against the Tomcats and Hornets in real life training, not the F-5E.

As far as I know, there are no plans of updating the 80´s F-5E to a more advanced real life model, as the F-5N "Adversary", at present in service with the US NAVY and Marine Corps, but I would like to know if there would be interest in the comunity for this model. It could be a payware update for the people that already have the F-5E (without losing the F-5E, obviously, you would have the F-5E and F-5N), and people that doesn´t have it could choose to buy the F-5E, the F-5N, or both for a discount. It would be mostly an update of the avionics: INS and a better radar AN/APG-69 among other things. Wouldn't it be an amazing and realist sparring for the Hornet and the Tomcat? Tigers could fight with the new radar (the one designed for the F-20) and avionics "mano a mano" with Hornets and Tomcats, and not only take off to be massacred by them. Also, there would be INS and ILS, so the plane would be "Night and All weather" and not only a "Day fighter". And foru sure, that update would revitalize the interes of the comunity in this great bird and would not be a work as long an difficult as a brand new plane. https://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=1100&ct=1&tid=1050

It´s an important bug IMO, since the rotatory knobs are the most dificult to use with the mouse (it´s not a single "click" like to push a button or a switch) and it´s a good idea to map the most important rotatorys in your HOTAS or keyboard. I´m eager to see this specific but solved :thumbup:

Yes, not an attractive place to fly. Even the desert of Nevada is more interesting. I assume they will make also the Sea Harrier, Mirage, Super Etendar, the HMS Invencible and other planes and ships of that war to recreate the famous aeronaval combats. If not, this map is going to be a fiasco.

The Mirage F-1 is one of the most elegant and "sexy" designs of a plane ever build. Her lines are beautiful. And it was a huge success in sales, used in four continents and several wars. It's a very attractive plane, and I don´t know why is not a popular fighter in simulators. As far as I know, there isn´t a good Mirage F-1 for any modern or older flight simulator. I actually brought the C-101 in order of supporting AVIODEV with the F-1 and I hope they finishes that trainer soon to start working in the F-1.

OK. Too bad.

It seems that the F/A-18 is going to have a funcional IFF. It´s possible to upgrade the F-5E to have its IFF funcional too, and not only dummy knobs?

Muchas gracias. Francamente, ED debería dar algún tipo de recompensa, aunque fuese simbólica, a la gente que hace este tipo de trabajo. Les abre el mercado de los simuladores a personas que no saben inglés o ruso, que son muchas.

Has it happened in real life? Has a C-101 broken the wings in flight in Spain or any other country? Probably it would not be difficult to know, but I think it has not happened. As far as I know, if according the G-meter the structural G limits of the plane are exceeded at any moment during a flight, the plane gets grounded until revised and repaired if neccesary to prevent exactly that kind of accident.

La serie más instructiva de todo el canal. Vídeos de tutoriales de los aviones hay a patadas en español, pero vídeos del editor de misiones, visto en profundidad y en español, son los únicos que conozco. Eso si, siempre me quedo con las ganas de que cargues la misión. A ver si haces misiones completas, y luego las vuelas, para que veamos como funciona todo.

No,they are not. At least, the modules I have. There are checklist for some planes made by users of the modules that can be downloaded in the section "User Files", but most of the oficial manuals are not "printer friendly".

It would be easier if there were a pinter friendly version. Also, you don't have to print everything. For example, you don't need to print the history of the plane. Just the parts that you use more, like the checklist, emergency procedures, tables, etc.

Thanks a lot :thumbup:

I have a tablet, but I want to have some parts of the manuals, as the tables of performances and checklist and normal and emergency procedures in paper among other things, in order of using it in a kneeboard as real life pilots during the cold war and OVER ALL, because I wear glasses and is easier to me to read it in paper than in a small screen in a tablet.

He´s not trying to "help me". I already know everything he says with that condescendent tone of "1st 30 seconds of searching". He's being arrogant and condescending. And indeed it's costumer service to make customer's life easy and not force them to spend too much money in printing a manual, or too much time in redone the manual in order of printing it. I still have in my bookshelf the books of older simulators as FLANKER 2, F/A-18 KOREA, MIG ALLEY, etc together with the CD. During the 90´s the devs provided printed manuals with their products. Now, since no more they sell physical products, they don't do it. It´s OK, I don't complain. The business model changes. But since right now, the manuals are just downloable and the devs save the cost and trouble of making a physical book, it would be nice if they would provide a printer-friendly version. It´s not a crazy idea, I think. :huh:

It is as simple as, when possible, making a version of the manuals with images like that one Specially since devs no longer provide printed manuals, as they used to do during the 90`s, for example with the SSI FLANKER 2.0

It is called CUSTOMER SERVICE, dude. And stop f**** patronizing me, dude. Do you think you are doing some kind of favor to ED or the 3er. parties coming here to to talk to other people in a condescendent tone? HELL NO, DUDE.

Of course I can print the manuals B&W. And with all big all those big images full of black, the big logos, watermarks, etc, I can expend a full cartridge of black ink, that's 20 Euros. There are modules cheaper than that in DCS. And of course I can spend hours pasing from PDF to Doc the document, removing images and re-making the layout. But if the devs were so kind to release a friendly-printer version of the manuals, we all would not have to do that. It's called "costumer service". If you are not interested in printing your manuals or you have open bar in printer ink, good for you. But I don't enter in other threads that ask for things that I´m not interested to say: "devs, don't do what that guy is asking for".

There is a difference between some features classified, like the range of the AMRAAM or certain radar modes, and MOST of the features classified including performances. The A-10C, the F/A-18C, the F-14B or the "Day" Harrier are realistic simulations with some specific bits that are conjectures, because they are older planes or even no more are in service. The sistems and performances of the F/A-18E, the Eurofighter, Rafale, Grippen, Su-35, etc. would be easily 80% conjectures.

Aunque el no-combate del vídeo no es muy divertido, supongo que sí es realista, y que en la vida real un avión de ataque, encima sin misiles, intentaría quitarse de encima a un caza como el M2000 antes que ir al cruce con él.

Most of the features of the F/A-18F are clasified. It would be imposible to make a realistic DCS-level simulation of that plane for the lack of information. Same situation with the F-22, the Eurofighter, Rafale, Grippen, Su-35...

I like those luxury manuals of DCS and 3er. parties with a lot of colorful images. They are great if you read them in a tablet or the computer. But printer ink is expensive. If you want to print those manuals, it cost more than the plane itself. It would be great if, in addition to those full color manuals, there were a print-friendly version in black and white, without the non-essential images and without watermarks, big logos, etc. It would be specilly important with the checklist, emergence procedures, performance tables, etc. I think it would not be a big amount of work. Actually, I´m pretty sure that the first version of those manuals is like that, and all the non-essential images, logos, frames, etc. is added subsequently.

Me parecen ambos excelentes argumentos para NO invertir más dinero en productos de ED o 3er. parties. Está claro que, depues de lo del Hawk, existe la posibilidad (no sé, ni sabemos ninguno de nosotros, si grande o pequeña, porque no conocemos las finanzas de las empresas) de que estos productos se conviertan en vaporware dejando tirados a miles de usuarios que hemos invertido cientos de euros en software, y en el hardware para usarlo (hay gente que hoy mismo se está cambiando de tarjeta gráfica para el Tomcat, por ejemplo), y cientos de horas en estudiarnos manuales para aprender. Y si según Silver Dragon, ni siquiera existe la posibilidad de que alguien se ponga del lado den consumidor y "libere" esos productos para seguir usándolos en la hipotesis de ese escenario, pues estamos arreglados. Francamente, no sé si con vuestros comentarios queréis ayudar a ED y los 3er. parties o hundirlos... :huh::music_whistling:

A mi no me interesa lo que dices tú, y me aguanto. Este es un foro público. Si no te gustan mis comentarios, no los leas. Pero no vayas de administrador del foro diciendo a los demás lo que pueden o no pueden decir. Y ese tonito sobrado de "Ya se te ha dicho..." como si fueses el maestro echando la bronca al niño tontito, te lo guardas para quien te lo consienta.