Jump to content

mungo13

Members
  • Posts

    112
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I did not question F1 vs. NATO fighters (while it is not fully off the interest as due to proliferation of the Mirage as well as other planes such encounters either happened or were possible in case of the conflict) but rather those "soft stats" i.e. Mirage vs. Mig-21/23. Not(!!!) complaining for your answer, just to clarify. When we talk about training - according to rather (locally) known pilot that was higher rank and even later display pilot from the former Czechoslovakia, annual flight time of the pilot was around 70 hours. Varying according to experience level, rank, branch of the aviation.
  2. As they are now in french shoes, I'd vote for Jaguar. Dedicated european classic Cold War Air-G round plane hardly hurts. Not everything has to be a fighter.
  3. I wonder about soft-properties especially in dogfight. I read about training dogfight F-104 against F-4, thus interceptor against very advanced and modern fighter - yet Starfighter was described as a nasty bird - they fought on vertical and due to their tiny frontal cross section, they were very hard to spot and keep in sight. Soviet planes are notorious for ugly cockpits with event those small transparent parts are littered with "something" to obstruct the view (I always "loved" i.e. their HUD cameras). Thus besides "thrust to weight" - any idea of the possible situational awareness, cockpit workload / level of automation etc.? How good was contemporary french ground control and pilot training compared to soviet standards?
  4. I understand Czech in passive mode on level close to native speaker and to me it is in original even a tiny bit more formal than the translation. As "ovladač" in original is like controller - and it suggests some device, rather than metal bar pivoting in a way that it flips all the breakers. You know, i.e. at school when we had to turn on/off many breakers in some control panel for the room, we simply took ruler or short wooden stick (handle of the small broom ...) or we used edge of the palm ... and we forgot to call it controller And if we did so - we did it in joking manner. I.e. when in school dormitory we had remote controller to switch channels on the old TV - yes, tip of the standard broom was this highly sophisticated device. For those who do not have this experience - imagine that strange feeling when you watch some american TV series from maybe 60/70-ies, where they drive cars with automatic transmission and watch color TV from chair with remote controller - while we got access to the serie(!) itself 20-30 years later finally watching it on color TV (shortly before we had standard B&W one) when you still had to go to it and press buttons on it to switch channels or tune the sound. And you drove car with manual shifting, no electrically controlled windows, no air conditioning. Thus memories and personal experience make such a parts just amusing. Anyway, I am looking forward the chance to run the Hind module, run the video on separate screen and trying to mimic the procedure. That is going to be an interesting test.
  5. Nice. Do you know who is the narrator for the video? That voice is absolutely "classic" but I haven't seen anybody in credits. When you look at the background for credits and font of the credits themselves and have "deja vu" from "evening fairy tales" for children - while video is about monstrous attack helicopter So hopefully we are going chance to leave the cockpit and make our own walkaround pre-flight check as it was done to have finally realistic sim module ... P.S. 3:33 Centralized control levers are used to enable all required section switches on the right and left rear switch panels I am sorry, I was unable to stop myself from laughing. That formal-voice hi-tech narrative while you are watching absolutely primitive DIY mechanical solution is more russian than stakan of vodka. For those who do not take the point (or - hopefully not - feel offended): I am sorry, I was born in Eastern block, I still remember some state propaganda as well as many homemade DIY solutions of something that was absolute standard in the West for a long time, thus I have maybe different impressions when watching videos like this. But it is also reason why I pre-ordered this beast despite I have little time for gaming.
  6. Some remarks: - flash seen on camera can be also attributed to the synchronization of the framerate of the camera to the firing cycles. If you take frames in between shots, you do not record muzzle flash at its peak, while gases flow from the breach might be more constant due to accumulation through the cover Also those might not be just gases from the breech but also from the gas system - depends where are venting points. But they seem to be below the cover Flash hinders at muzzles can also help if they are of the right design. I read about design that was compatible with even very old night-vision (very sensitive to strong outer light sources) sets as it caused sort of "stall" effect. Just to explain - that flash hinder was mounted either on LMG or some AR that was equipped with the night vision - GSh-23 and GSh-30-2 both use boxing system. According to the book by man (from former Czechoslovakia) that was involved in design of the automatic weapons and was teaching the subject at university, 23mm version has breeches connected by lever and sort of the crossed gas system - gases from firing barrel accelerates its own breech rearward but they are channeled behind opposing piston and accelerate it forward - and vice versa. GSh-30-2 uses some cogwheel system to link the breeches and classic gas system for each barrel. Both have fixed barrels. Breech parts are guided by specific grooves that accelerates them through the leverage and slows them down when necessary thus reducing the impulses from recoil (i.e. when breech is hard-stopped from full speed by some bumper, MG-42 works that way)
  7. It's already at least 2 years ago when I read article describing concerns of the US military regarding rising amount of solid equipment used by insurgents in Iraq and others - from body armor to night vision. Thus greatly reducing the equipment gap. Does DCS model use some advanced terminal ballistic modelling when it came to the firing against human body? Because flesh wound to the limb by stable AP round from 500 m is hardly as disabling as full velocity 5.56 NATO from point blank that tumbles and disintegrates upon impact. Even there, there are complains about insufficient disabling effects. When you look at battle reports i.e. from Afghanistan - battles raging for hours, hundreds of rounds fired by every single soldier - yet few one hit, or hurt or even killed. And even if - those total casualties are often caused by explosive ordnance from air and artillery support not small arms fire. So how to mimic infantry action in predominantly flight-sim game without killing CPU? As infantry would look after every cover to shield itself and try to flush its enemy with weight of the fire? So far I am OK when sims i.e. for cars/trucks use rather hit-point damage model than trying to use some hardcore realistic one - especially when rifle-caliber weapons are used. Anyway I've just pre-ordered Hind, so I'll see myself when it is out. I was always "fixed-wings guy", thus regardless that I have Mi-8 and Ka-50, I've never flown them but Hind is legend that served in our air forces - and I like those old-fashioned brutes.
  8. For some Afghanistan scenario that would be probably crazy, but with proliferation of the body armor - rifle rounds fired from hundreds of meters are already not that impressive. Even ordinary car is not inevitably disabled by a few rifle not even 12,7/.50 bullets unless they really hit i.e. engine compartment. I may be wrong but those gunpods were IRL good for really soft targets like some trucks (with question if unguided rockets are not far better option) or for suppressive fire - that is quite difficult to model in the game.
  9. :megalol::megalol::megalol: As well as I am pretty sure that when it comes to ergonomics, working space, outside view, dead angles, noise, vibrations and other adverse effects are part of the problem and its solution. Eric Brown is not the god almighty but it doesn't seem that he universally praised german cockpits. Btw. - I've made a quick look at him and Me-262 - he cites small cockpit to make it demanding job to perform some procedures i.e during starting of the engines.
  10. -well, first production Meteors were finished some time before Me-262 - getting brand new doesn't mean that is is not still more likely to fail. Besides i remember stories about those returning with damaged plane even not by any meaning by their fault to be sent back to propeller planes - for damaging precious weapon. :megalol: Well I have read similar claims about those german ones. Cramped, noisy and so on. When Einstein said: Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. he had not heard about flamewars about WW2 equipment Anyway - there is easy solution: me-262 jockeys every few flight would have to ask ground control after landing to go and do a factory repair of their turbines. With 1-2 day waiting period :thumbup: I can even imagine how those late-period german virtual pilots before every flight will toss dices to find out, how much fuel the got, how much ammo, which systems work and what is actual performance of their bird ...
  11. That would be rather Meteor - but it doesn't have potential to be such a bestseller. I just wonder how is anyone going to implement that 10-hour service interval for the engines. Well, after the war, those engines were found to be usable only for 4 hours of flight, than they required overhaul of the turbines. :smartass:
  12. That may explain why air forces that have older soviet planes and buy spare parts from Russia or let russian companies to make overhauls ends up with a garbage.
  13. And what makes them so good? After some first jets they have never faced properly equipped enemy. Now for years what they do is take their jets packed with up-to-date electronics, fly into the international airspace or worse: violate(!) airspace of the other countries to shoot stand-off munitions against countries with no effective air force and totally obsolete air defense weaponry. Your idea that russian or american pilot fighting jewish pilots would be immediately shot down is stupid at best. Russian one could be technologically handicapped to some extent (maybe) but Russia still have some effective and powerful weapons. And American? Are you so bravely going to take i.e. one-on-one fight against F-22 and be so sure to come out of the fight as victor and nothing else? P.S. you know, even Britain had been able to decimate native warriors in colonial wars most of the time and when the Great war started, there was some nasty change in the outcome of the events
  14. Hornet + Gulf map I had more plans and several planes on the list but as the time passed I realized that they are either unfinished, bugged, I already have similar plane(s) in my inventory or they are too autistic as they have no counterparts in the DCS inventory or for that type of plane it is better to play other simulator. Thus Harrier, Mig-19, F-16 and some propellers were removed from my shopping cart. Viggen is in the train for now if there is any sale on DCS or Steam in future. P.S. I also realized that M.2 NVME SSD disk is gaming-wise better investment than ~2 new modules while I have already several for which I have no time to play. :thumbup:
×
×
  • Create New...