Kula66

I know fixed wing are different, but I read in some F-15 book of a pilot on a transatlatic flight having to turn around and kneel on his seat to pee because he couldn't do it sitting ...

Well, I was very cynical and would be very happy to be proven wrong! Lets hope they use it as an opportunity to pilot some technologies for DCS:The Fighters!

I know what you mean, you get that first shot off after burn-through, beam to defeat the return shot, loose him during the wild manouvering to dodge the r-77 and than a mad panic trying to re-acquire while knowing he has you locked! Its what I love about LO over BS ... it can still make me sweat!

Widle, Yes I've read that doc sometime ago ... the thing is we just don't know. Interesting info sure. These studies often have an agenda - look at the BAe studies on how effective the Typhoon is v other a/c. There are also vast numbers of variables. Also, modern missiles (currently classified ones) are alot smarter than earlier 120A/B ... look at the IIR stuff. So much of this stuff is secret, for all we know the F-22s are ending production early because a super A2A UAV has been developed!

Agreed ... I just hope they spend as much time on the radar, missile and seeker modelling as on the a/c themselves. It is no good having a lovely BVR fighter a/c if the missiles are as broken as in LO.

Ok, best guess of smart people ... I can live with that ;)

No, they are designed to produce less drag and as such probably less turning ability. Less drag = more range and more energy at a given range allowing greater ability to manouvre. To counter this the R-77 has a larger diameter motor, which will push up the weight etc etc. Western designs tend to be conservative and no one is saying Russian designs are not ground breaking or innovative (there are dozens of examples in other military fields - SSNs, tanks, TV, SAMs, ASMs etc). However, Western designs have proven to work very well in recent combat - although they have not been matched against the latest Russian designs. But, many of those advanced Russian designs are only in serivice in small numbers or no longer operatign at all!

Ok, I didn't explain this well - if a plane is flying at 10k' and scans a volume of sky from say 5k' to 15k' - would it use doppler across the whole volume or be smart enough only to use doppler on the parts of the scan below it. If it used doppler on the whole scan, as I suspect, because it is in doppler mode, you could just as easily beam the rader from a point at 14k', ie. above the radar as below it, at 6k'. This doesn't seem to be how it works in LO where above = no doppler and beaming doesn't work and below = doppler and beaming does work. Re: missiles, the very low drag of AMRAAM vR-77 needs to be considered - those potato mashers must be very draggy, especially when turning.

I used to fly alot online but it just got so frustrating trying to fly the textbook Eagle profile, on high looking down! From what I understand you should have at least double the missile range in RL! The mechanics of notching, does it really only work low to high? I uderstand the way it works, but does radar use doppler on lower targets and not on higher ones (given that this can all happen in a single series of successive scans) or doppler all the time. If the latter is the case, then you should be able to notch a radar even if the radar is lower than the target. This doesn't seem to be the case.

I hate to think this is true (never tested it myself) - the opposite of RL. Interesting stuff Yoda .. I really hope they get it right next time!

I've probably downed most of the USAF tanker fleet ... not been caught yet :)

If that tanker starts his turn, after you've been trying to connect for 10mins, just as you are about to connect ... give him a load of 20mm. He deserved it!

Agreed - shame really, that used to look stunning ...

Interesting article ... not just 'Wow the F-22 will trump all". Why is it that people have such a hard time beliving that the F-22 is such a massive leap in technology? Like the F-15 over the Mig-21. The other side will catch up, probably faster than last time. All those IRBMs raining down on vulnerable bases, VHF radars, IRST sensors, volleys of AAMs, limited numbers of F-22s (especially given recent events) spread over multiple simultaneous conflicts, long transit distances, vulnerable tanker assets and the US carriers only fielding the barely comparible F-18E ... certainly an interesting scenario. If some emerging technology does crack the stealth shield, the USAF assets are going to be awefully vulnerable. But hey, China is a major trading partner, her future is dependant on world markets.

On a £/hr basis it is probably the best money I have ever spent! It has its faults - some major like missile modelling, but I still sit there thinking what a great sim this is visually, even low down and on current h/w you can crank all the graphics up and get good FPS. Shame self shadow no longer works - video driver problem from what I can gather. I've gone back to LO after getting board with BS ... highly recommended.

AAMs ... if they, and their associated systems and sub-systems, can be modelled right - that would be just fantastic!

An ok read ... makes you realise the incredible workload on a modern attack helicopter pilot. I really wonder how a single seater can manage it all.

IMHO, with 4GB of RAM, even Vista would be hardly touching your swap file ... unless you have a memory leak somewhere that is.

As far as I know, they are scapped/being scrapped - certainly no longer in UK service. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/07/harrier_jet/

Ahhh ... if only. I guess ED are putting off the difficult task of implementing BVR missiles ... although the terrain modelling and AI need need alot of work for more CAS systems IMHO.

I use: MIY /I 3 Spotlightdown ^ Spotlightup /O 3 KU-31Shkvalslewdown ^ KU-31Shkvalslewup MIX /I 3 Spotlightleft ^ Spotlightright /O 3 KU-31Shkvalslewleft ^ KU-31Shkvalslewright And in the macro file: KU-31Shkvalslewup = ; KU-31Shkvalslewdown = . KU-31Shkvalslewleft = , KU-31Shkvalslewright = / Spotlightleft = /P KD(RCTL ,) /R KU(, RCTL) Rem {RCTL ,} Spotlightright = /P KD(RCTL /) /R KU(/ RCTL) Rem {RCTL /} Spotlightup = /P KD(RCTL ;) /R KU(; RCTL) Rem {RCTL ;} Spotlightdown = /P KD(RCTL .) /R KU(. RCTL) Rem {RCTL .} Hope this helps.

Get your missiles in the air ... even if the proability of hit is low - launch as soon as you burn through the jamming. If you are in the Eagle you have 8 to play with. Try and manoeuver to take them on 1 v 1 ... keep your speed above 350kts so you can turn. Remember, if this is v the AI, it cheats, chaff/flares/jammers are poorly modelled and unfortunately, missile modelling is also flawed ... need to wait for fast movers in DCS!

Despite being very suspicious of StarForce (and hating the whole DRM concept) and having a laptop with loads of odd drivers, odd hardware, virtual CDs ... no problems and no unaccountable transactions on my credit card so far!

Tanks can't have thick armour everywhere and on the engine deck and turret top they are thin enough for a decent 30mm to get through easily. The 30mm in the BS, while not as good as a A-10s, is certainly more powerful than the M230 in the Apaches. From the front or even side - no chance. I've had resonable success with firing Vikhrs in pairs (singles have little effect) which seems odd - in GW1 TOWs had little trouble with T-72s and a Vikhr is twice the weight, so I would guess has at least comparible armour penetration. I guess this is down the the simple damage model for ground vehicles - I guess we need an Advanced Vehcile Damage Model - AVDM ;)

They may allow field replacement of the armour package - these things are now very modular. The front of the turrent still doesn't look like a real 2A5 ...