S. Low

I think I’m as excited about the afterburner gate keybind as I am about the A model lol. Thanks fellas

IMO reddit is doo doo. But ya'll do what you want.

If you don’t have any of the maps yet I’d get the Persian Gulf map (and maybe an A10C campaign if there’s any good ones) that way you can get a bunch of good use out of the FC3 and A10C before moving on. All of the high fidelity modules take a lot of time. Focus on one for a bit imo.

The flight sim hobby has never been better and it continues to reach new levels of awesome. I continue to find it amazing that we get to fly high fidelity modern military aircraft. Gripes and nitpicks aside, ED is one of my favorite brands in general. Just gave them some more of my money yesterday.

The Harrier, Viggen, and F-14 are third party products though. Seems unreasonable.

If there's a technical reason for it I'd love to hear it. Always heard it was just because it looked cooler (which it does).

So you're saying when I'm coming in fast and high and I slam on that DLC for like 10 seconds straight................

I double-checked, craned my neck to both sides to inspect the stick in full forward position as closely as I could and checked video. Either I was wrong from the beginning or you did adjust it. I'll eat crow, sorry for the criticism!

Obviously I'm joking a bit, but also a bit serious. I am curious though why guns aren't put on a turret/gimbal system? I just assume it's because guns are considered knives and not needed to be focused on.

Just a thought I had, I'm obviously no expert. Hypothetically here, say western aircraft advance the stealth tech to a point that no radar can pick them up. And then eastern aircraft find a way to match the stealth tech. BVR and Fox 3 combat would seem to fall by the wayside, returning the fight to 5nm-ish Fox 2 fight. Hypothetically, say both sides further develop engine exhaust and masking technology to reduce the heat signature, coupled with flares, coupled with perhaps a laser defense system, and Fox 2 combat would seem to as well fall by the wayside. If radars and other trackers can't outpace the stealth tech, EW, countermeasures, and the IR defenses, all that's left is guns with snake sights or gyro sights on stealthy 150 million dollar aircraft. Then instead of fixed forward firing guns, we'd get guns on a gimbal or some sort of a turret system so you don't have to do all the difficult geometry to get into a control position. Just have a back seater shoot the turret/gimbal. Or an AI for that matter. And then to defend against guns, far future aircraft, while still being stealthy and packed with anti IR equipment, will have to have large engines and large surfaces to accomodate the huge steal plates covering the jet to armor it against 20 or 30 mm cannon fire. They'll have to have vectored thrust and additional thrusters to help with maneuverability. They'll also eventually have 2 cockpit canopies, one normal glass and one armored that uses a camera system like the F-35 to view outside so you have this flying tank gun platform. And then we move into space flight and voila, The Rocinante from the Expanse. *sips vodka*

A certain ww2 sim has just released some information on their new g-force simulation that is in final beta test to be released very soon. It's some of what I've said in here, but much more scientific sounding than myself. Tolerance for rapid g-onset increased. Tolerance for sustained gs increased. Pilot fatigues fairly quickly. I think that's the gist. Go read if curious. Hopefully we can get something like that here.

OP's ideas are interesting, and so are the discussions I've read through here. I'm primarily a singleplayer guy who is basically biding time until the apache and blackhawk helos are released I'm looking to get the F-16 soon. I'd buy new modules if they interested me, not so much for the cohesion. So.. I'm not sure what to contribute to help OP's theory or ED make informed strategic business decisions. I also don't see why all of OP's ideas can't be achieved currently with server restrictions. Will I play online? I'll compete in any future FoH charity tournaments for sure. I'd play online if the g force simulation was better. Would I buy newer jets like f-35 (not saying its possible, just hypothetical)? Yes. Would I also buy cool cold war stuff like F-4 Phantom? Yes. Is my brain at capacity for complicated jets? Absolutely. I'm currently focused on the M-2000. I still love the hornet and tomcat, but I don't want to commit to them OVER the mirage. And then when the apache gets released, I'll probably give up on mastering the modern jets entirely so I can re-insert all the old apache knowledge into my cobwebby brain. Primarily I want a cohesive campaign experience. Dynamic campaign with an ah-64, and I want a blackhawk for troop transport missions and coast guard type missions in awful weather. I think my desires can fit into OP's vision of a cohesive DCS so it sounds fine to me.

I'd buy it again for the pure joy of it. It fits like a glove. If I ever decide to play online against people flying like arcade with constant over-g and hauling around 47 fox 3s, I'd probably still enjoy flying the Mirage even if I were losing a lot simply because it's interesting.

Tell that to HB. They think their lights are bright and just dandy

I'm not a pilot so I can't describe what is truly accurate sound heard from the airframe and landing gear upon landing on either runway or boat. But since we cannot feel the heavy impact of landing on the boat, we should have enough audio cue to let our senses know that we've hit the deck. Recently released flight sim has really good audio of landing gear hitting the runway. I'm hopeful we can see some better landing gear and airframe stress audio upon landing.

Keep practicing the hover, OP. It comes with time. Look out ahead of the cockpit at a fixed point. It helps. Trying to watch the instruments or the ground beside you makes it more difficult. I don’t know the physiological reason why, but it leads to PIO. Same with aerial refueling and staring at the basket

Well they would probably have to pick one real-world (average) fighter pilot's fitness capability and have it modeled after that person.

I'm merely giving starting point ideas. I've heard that pulling 9gs in a flight makes you feel like, at the end of the flight, you went through a very serious workout and you need to recover from it. So you could be right that there's a need for per flight cumulative effect. Sounds good to me. Putting that level of realism in would force us all to fly correctly, rather than flying these realistic jets like arcade jets because of the lack of g-force modeling.

Helos are pointless? Damn, I’ve been wasting all my time playing Huey as my primary module. Thanks for letting me know. Lol

F

F-14 pilot on stream just said he wouldn't pull 12g in his tomcat. Lol :P

I remember this time that a friend of mine who does clerical office work scoffed at me about how we do or don't do certain things in a machine shop. She publicly embarrassed herself without even knowing it.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the over-g was likely in the 7.5 - 8.5 area, not the 12gs you guys probably pull constantly online.

The tournament rules have a .5g buffer. The real limit is 7.5 according to these guys. I'm just relaying info.

Ok some ideas for pilot fatigue: increase pilot tolerance for rapid g onset so we aren’t blacking out so easily in that regard. Then set staged limits for g tolerance: 30 seconds total every 15 minutes at 9g, then 7g is max before blackout occurs, etc Staggered recovery too, so if you do like 90 seconds of 7.5 g after exhausting your 9 g tolerance then it takes longer to recover up to full strength. Something like this to simulate human exhaustion. Maybe even reduce head camera movement speed at 7.5+ gs? And then with airframes, have a set of structural failures that happen randomly when airframe is over g’ed. One or two Bent ailerons, bent or broken rudder, etc. Something to give an immediate consequence for exceeding g limit. Perhaps make it 70% nothing happens, then 30% it’s one of those airframe failures