Merrek
-
Posts
6 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Merrek
-
-
Ordered, paid, waiting... My first Virpil product. Next year, I will be adding some throttle from them to mix it up with the control panel.
-
BuzzU - agreed. But I believe that real Hog pilots don't have a huge "Warthog" sign on their sticks...
I haven't flown the Viper in F4 because of my inferior hardware as a kid and it is only now that my career allows me to work only few days a week so that I have the proper time to look into all the procedures, tactics, etc. even with some quality family life.
I really liked the Digital Integration's F-16: Fighting Falcon. About 40 or so training missions at Nellis AFB on every type of munitions, I loved that. Especially loft bombing.
And the F-16: Aggressor is a bit of a misunderstood undervalued product. Well, compared to DCS they all seem extremely arcade-like of course. But the Aggressor had very interesting types of weapons - 5 variants of the AIM-9, 4 variants of the AIM-7, Mavericks, Harpoons, Penguins... It even boasted a fuel/air bomb! Now that was a proper beast. Tried that once, never used cluster bombs afterwards. The almost non-existent storyline was interesting in a sense that you were a mercenary pilot getting paid in dollars. Something like the "Kadre" squad in TopGun: Fire at Will.
-
Hi Snake, interesting, I haven't heard about that one. But it seems even more expensive than the Viper add-on from TM. Maybe in a few years when and if the TM's solution gets obsolete or worn out. Good to know it works also with the TM magnetic base. Right now I am thinking of getting some quality replica of the F-16's throttle. Definitely this year.
-
Hi guys,
I don't agree the new TM marketing is for the gullible. Those people don't play DCS. Although I agree that the reviewers (Wags included) somehow tend to "omit" the simple fact that it is the same old Warthog stick, I think you might be missing a point.
I have actually ordered one of them new magnetic bases and the rebranded "Viper" stick. By the time you read it, I will have it plugged in instead of my trusted Defender Cobra M5 (23 buttons + hat for 35 euros, you can't beat that).
Now why did I do it? Of course I'd done research and swiftly realized it is the same stick. Hence, I don't think TM can rip people off on this. However, my reasons are very simple.
F-16 is my childhood dream. I flew DI's F-16 Fighting Falcon (the original CD actually exploded in a more modern 52x CD-ROM mechanic, which the Mythbusters claim impossible), then F-16: Aggressor, never had a hardware for the Falcon 4.0 as a kid, later on played LOMAC and finally now, when I'm over 30, ED came with their F-16 module for DCS which I'd played for about a year before.
Maybe some of you had goosebumps as myself, when after 2 hours of trying on the 5th or 6th attempt, I finally completed the proper starting procedure in this amazing bird and got to the skies. My first high-fidelity module.
I had dreamt about the F-16 FLCS joystick (only saw 2 pictures of that in magazines) and the Cougar, which is now obsolete without upgrades.
To the point - for years now I have hated the fact, that the best TM stick is the Warthog replica. I don't need left and right throttle. And I most certainly don't want the Warthog word written anywhere. Call me stupid, I respect that plane, its gun and durability, but I never liked it and I just couldn't fly an F-16 with a Hog stick, even if the difference was purely cosmetic.
So I guess, I am TM's perfect target group. Every single piece of flying hardware I bought separately after weeks of planning and reassuring I will play that game and enjoy my investment. TrackIR was a total game changer. And I expect no less from the "Viper" stick.
Since the money isn't an issue, I will gladly pay extra for that 10-year logo and a box saying F-16C Viper. Only to fool myself I'm not flying the Hog stick. Yes, I could've had the same functionality for 2/3 of the price. However, I don't ever want to deal with the Hog and I just couldn't look at it every time I play DCS.
I felt compelled to write this here as nobody had mentioned this point before. Functionality is one thing - branding, logos and names are another. I work in digital marketing and know exactly how and why TM got the money out of me. Both sides happy. Good deal. Don't make too much fun of me, please.
Cheers, mates.
DCS MiG-29A
in DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum
Posted
Didn't think we'd live to see the day. Finally the beloved MiG-29 coming to DCS in full fidelity.
Personally, I don't care about clickable cockpits, I use Virpil control panels #1 and 2, there is hardly any FC3 functionality I hadn't mapped using them panels. But I do care about the precise modelling of all the sensors and systems. Really can't wait to experience it.
Hopefully we'll get the Lazur thing for intercepts, which should be included also in the MiG-23. And let's also hope, they'll model the original MiG the way it worked according to US comparison tests with MiG-29G vs western planes. Real-life MiG-29 should outturn an F-16 (by a negligible 0.2 deg/s, but it counts) and outclimb an F-15 going 70 degrees up from the same initial speed.
Forget about the inferior missiles, primitive BVR, useless HDD (heads down display), analog switches and dials, 5-minute fuel capacity, etc. It's the on-par performance against western counterparts while being much cheaper to build and operate (although the engines need to be changed periodically). In a way, it did succeed in its original mission. To be a front-line defender against F-15 and F-16 before AMRAAM.
Also, don't pay attention to kill/loss ratios. Who flew those MiGs? 3rd world countries? Questionable pilot training? MiG against MiG? What does that do for the k/l ratio, huh? All the MiGs (not just 29) have terrible record because it's usually USA/Israel against inferior air force or 3rd world countries fighting each other.