Varioss
-
Posts
29 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Varioss
-
-
Surprised no one made a wish list post for this variant yet so here it goes.
The MF2000 is the ultimate variant of F1, which would make it on-par and even superior to the M2K we have in game. The upgrade program took place almost 20 years ago and since Moroccan army is looking to replace it's fleet soon with F-16 block 72/F-35 we could expect some more information/manuals about the plane to pop-up soon.
This is not an suggestion to add right now but rather what we could get as a some kind of mid-life update after the modules comes out of EA.
More information on the variant:https://www.timesaerospace.aero/news/defence/mirage-upgrade-augments-new-fighter-force
-
3
-
-
3 hours ago, admiki said:
Yes, he should be, yes, he isn't.
It's WIP, it's a known problem.
Interestingly enough, he is quite able to get me into hover without killing us, so maybe try to change how you do things until George gets fixed?
Did you ever try to make george hover in any combat load configuration + in a mountains? No matter how careful you are with the altitude changes he will pitch up too much when transiting from 40 tas to 0 tas, and in doing so he will put the heli in vrs.
-
1
-
-
44 minutes ago, BubiHUN said:
tracks doesnt work
Not sure what you are talking about, they work fine.
Here you can see george going to hover mode, puts it in vrs and kills us.-
5
-
2
-
-
In the peak hours all the popular servers are full all the time and getting in is incredibly hard, we should have the option to just refresh the player count of currently selected server instead of having to refresh all the servers.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:
Says the “participation trophy” generation
What are you even on about? This is not an competition. I assure you nobody cares that you can ARR. Why are you turning everything into a dick measuring contest to show how better you are then everybody else? Again, superiority complex much?
-
3
-
-
33 minutes ago, ST0RM said:
Some people just want the easy way through life. And then shout down the ones who oppose them. Sure hope that ED sees one of their employees badgering another on their opposing opinion, and deals with him accordingly.
And some people are stuck in the past refusing to let go of outdated ways of thinking. shrug
-
31 minutes ago, shagrat said:
We should hope ED does implement it in a way that it's flexible enough, so everyone can enjoy, the style of simulation he likes.
I don't want to take the realism SharpeXB likes away, by no means! I want to add an option to help others to enjoy maybe better learn stuff.
We are not here to decide how others should enjoy their favorite simulation, that was a major point, I made.
Yes that's what I mean. Everybody should play like they want. I can feel a lot of servers will turn that option off and it won't change anything.
-
5 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:
It affects my DCS experience because the effort to create something like this takes time away from other development priorities. I’d rather have a dynamic campaign or Vulkan API or multi core support or literally any other feature in DCS. Otherwise I really wouldn’t care about this feature as long as it was mission/server controlled. And I don’t see why DCS needs this since AAR isn’t required to play the game.
No it won't affect it. A engineer responsible for vulkan won't be assigned to do automatic ARR. A person responsible for the core mechanics is gonna do that. It's clear you have no idea how software development works. I sure hope it's gonna get implemented without the ability to block it so people like you will complain more.
-
28 minutes ago, ST0RM said:
And always individuals like yourself that cant do something, so they cry foul and call the ones who can, names.
When did I say I can't ARR? I support people that won't learn it and don't have the means to learn it. And yes I will call out people who's opinions are just plain wrong and limits other to what they themselves think is the "right way to do X".
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:
The thing is if you have a job or a sport or any accomplishment that requires effort you can understand what learning AAR requires. Just apply that to the game. I’m sure the vast majority of players here can drive a car or ride a bicycle. If you can do that you can AAR. It’s not impossible.
No you still don't understand the core issue. We know how to learn ARR it's just some people don't have the time to put in or they can't even do that.
-
2
-
-
19 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:
Games require skill and practice. If you want a form of entertainment that doesn’t require that, watch a movie. If this isn’t important why are you continuing the discussion?
Well it's clear you are stuck in past century when nobody thought about accessibility. Why do you hate others so much as to limit what they can do? Why can't you just ignore this thread never turn the option on and live on?
-
11 hours ago, SharpeXB said:
If this isn’t as important as “real life” then why bother at all?
It’s literally a game. It’s not important, you are larping.
11 hours ago, SharpeXB said:Flying with a keyboard is nuts though and doesn’t merit consideration.
On what basis do you say that? Do you have data saying “only 0,5% of players play on keyboard?" Dcs allows it so why shouldn’t it be considered.
9 hours ago, ST0RM said:Btw, I have done both. Both as a receiver and as the tanker. It's work and took a lot of..... sim time, until I got it.
Wow, and?
It’s not real life it’s a video game, no differences between war thunder. There is a simulator mode and arcade mode and for some reason the users are not complying?It is a elitsm and I have no idea why you think it’s not… No wait you are from military it all makes sense kek, It’s always the military people complaining about giving everybody fair chance. Superiority complex much?
-
12 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:
I think it’s amusing on these threads that people who can’t AAR seem to think they can invent a way to teach something they haven’t learned to do themselves.
And the value of practice (the only thing that works) is completely ignored…I’m curious how many people here learned to play a sport, studied for a test, played a musical instrument etc. and figured that this skill or learning would only take a few hours. Most skilled tasks require weeks or months of practice, not hours. Put in that sort of time at this and you’ll get it.
The skill you provided are actually useful real life skills not an skill in video game. Don't compare 2 different things.
2 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:The ability to effortlessly AAR would have an impact on the gameplay dynamic. Mainly every player running around on full burner. Most servers want to calm down the action by enforcing cold starts, limited weapons and fuel for good reason. So an “easy auto” AAR setting would need to be mission/server controlled. Not everyone wants Air-Quake style action.
Most servers are like that already so it won't change anything.
-
Every time a thread like this appear it goes like this:
The author thinks that he has a great idea that would improve the game accessibility. Then the larpers come and say stuff like "In real life you don't have any assists" orOn 10/3/2022 at 6:10 PM, ST0RM said:I dont see any learning from a system that does the work for you. AAR is a skill
I disagree completely, all modern games try to be as accessible as possible and dcs has no features like that.
On 10/3/2022 at 8:53 PM, MAXsenna said:It just requires practice, and patience
Some people can't just spend so much time to polish one small skill. And there is tons of valid reasons like lack of time or health conditions. Whether it's ADHD or an illnesses that limit our motor skills like Parkinson.In a previous thread regarding this topic somebody used the argument of "There is no disabled people in military and they shouldn't play dcs either" kinda funny since Wags is working in ED.
What about people flying on keyboard and game pads? Not everybody has full simpits with virpils and other expensive gear. A lot of people fly with simple sticks that lack the precision to refuel.
I personally don't care about following procedures in dcs, I land straight in without doing patterns nor fly the ball correctly. Does it affect you all? No. So how would automatic ARR destroy your fun? It's ridiculous.
The argument of "It would take ED too much time and would slow down the development". Do you really think this lowly of ED that a simple feature like that would cause other features to be delayed in any meaningful way?
Let's look at an example: We are on a public server with 1 tanker. Somebody is "trying" to refuel but he isn't that proficient and it takes him long time to hook up and even if he succeeds he gets disconnected soon. There is a person waiting to refuel but he can't, he is pissed and if he is unlucky enough he runs out of fuel and crashes. Let's assume the worst case he crashes into the tanker and nobody can refuel for some time and everybody is pissed.
Now with the automatic refuelling, he gets near tanker, he instantly gets hooked up refuels and is gone in 2-3 minutes and everybody is happy. Do you know he has auto AAR? No you don't. It increases everybody's fun in multiplayer environment.I am sure this is a case of silent majority, the loud ones are the one that sit on forum 24/7 and complain about every feature. While the majority of DCS doesn't use forums, and probably would use this feature. I really hope NineLine or BigNewy will finally notice that we need features like that and pass it to the developers.
-
3
-
1
-
-
Is there any possibilities for devs to move the autostart sequence from .dll files to .lua like in newer modules ex. Mirage F1?
I would love to optimize the AutoStart since the current one is way too long.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, SUBS17 said:
A real Fighter Pilot would use the correct ordnance to use against a ground target. A real R60 would not hit a ground target if missile over ride were used. A better weapon is a gun and that is why they are there.
My man single-handedly destroyed the Soviet Air Force by saying they are not real pilots since they used the r-60.
4 hours ago, SUBS17 said:That looks as though it is going to miss.
Even if it’s gonna miss it would overpressure non-armoured target like that since it seems it would hit closely. You literally have a picture of sidewinder doing it but you still put finger into your ears and go “LaLaLa I am not listening to you, missiles can’t do it”.
5 hours ago, Get_Lo said:This is the greatest forum ive read all week
Every post I made on this forum turns into a <profanity>storm… I think I will post some more
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, SUBS17 said:
What you are suggesting has no place in DCS it is quite simply unrealistic. The explosive in missiles has an explosive charge, a booster and a detonator with the R60 it has more than 1. All aircraft modelled in DCS that carry Air to Air weapons have a missile over ride try reading the manual. If you're using that button you are doing something wrong.
3 hours ago, SUBS17 said:You will not find anything on the internet about a lot of the technical side of the missile. It would unrealistic to model a missile the way being described with it locking onto and killing vehicles or being used without a FIRING SOLUTION.
Do you actually have problems with reading?? It's "Military and Aviation" Sub-Forum. I don't care about how it's simulated in DCS neither do I care about the technical side of the missile. I asked about "REAL LIFE USAGE OF IT" and sources for it. Also Wags literally said they are gonna add that functionality later in the Early Access of the Hind. I have never met more insane person on an internet forum. Re-read the entire thread and if you still think you are right then just don't answer anymore. (Or do answer as I have a great laugh reading the bs you write :D)
-
1
-
-
16 hours ago, SUBS17 said:
You are arguing over an R60 missile being used against tanks, my replies are detailed yours are not. For tanks it requires a particular type of shaped charge, an R60's is not for that purpose. It is just a cannon ball without a firing solution. It looks for aircraft not vehicles with the seeker.
I have never said anything about tanks... I said ground targets. And second I asked for a source about a known usage of the missile. So if you won't post any you can just stop posting anything. You won't help anybody with your bs explanations.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, SUBS17 said:
The fuse requires a FIRING SOLUTION in order to arm and if it does not all that the OVERIDE would do is fire the rocket motor. The fuse requires a missile lock in order to know the target distance and explode. There are SAFETY CIRCUITS inside the missile to prevent the warhead exploding by accident and that is what stops you the person with an R60 getting the rocket to explode if it hits a tank. There are versions of the missile that have an Air to Ground fuse like you see on some movies. It is like an Aim 9 for Air to Ground those use Laser guidance in order to hit targets and have a different shaped charge. So it is not a heat seeker but looks the same as an Aim 9 and has a different warhead. But you will not see those here.
It's quite incredible, I've never seen a person that thinks they know so much when in reality then know nothing. You have 4.6k posts + your account is 18 years so you'd assume you read quite a bit about different technologies but no... You just spew lies. I wish the mods would filter out messages like that to avoid confusing new members not that knowledgeable in the topic
-
3
-
-
3 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:
It's probably in some dusty Russian manual, hopefully ED will update the English one for the Hind with the info. It is a rather essential feature of an IR missile system (particularly an oldie like an R-60), and I don't know of any other switch that could serve that role.
As far as targeting goes, the R-60 really doesn't have a way of knowing if the target is on the ground, nor does it have a reason to care. Russians do like flexibility in their hardware, even today they sometimes use their SAMs as rocket artillery, or their anti-ship missiles to (inaccurately, but still) attack ground-based targets. I think air to ground capability was an intended feature of the R-60, even if it's not its main role.
I went in game and found out 2 things:
- The tooltip. It's seems to indeed be a switch to specify the ground targets and not that the aircraft is in the air
- After setting it to GND position I could still lock on target and fire so it's 100% not some kind of safety/caging switch.
I feel like there is no difference in the fuzing in 2 modes. Maybe it's something that's not yet implemented.
-
11 hours ago, SUBS17 said:
Ground Switch is that a WEIGHT ON WHEELS OVERIDE to Launch the R60?
11 hours ago, SUBS17 said:The SEEKER only looks for Air targets, there are some Anti Tank missiles that can hit air targets but not the other way around with Air to Air missiles. The SEEKER looks for the aircraft shape, it would not actually spot a tank. It would not fly accurately enough to hit a ground target. The explosive in an R60 would damage or destroy a soft skinned vehicle but it would not hit one as it needs MISSILE LOCK TO ARM THE FUSE or else it becomes a CANNON BALL and not EXPLODE! You need to IN REAL LIFE to use MISSILE OVERIDE unlike DCS WITH ALL AIR TO AIR MISSILES in order for your MISSILE in a real aircraft including AIM 9 to LAUNCH WITHOUT MISSILE LOCK! I hope that clears it up, are you going to go to the range and try it with a real Mi24?
Even if you need people to SCREAM to you irl due to your deafness that comes with your age you don't need to do that in the internet. Also it seems soviet's r-60s were decades ahead of it's times with that "shape locking" and only AIM-9X caught up to it... I wonder why they replaced it with r-73 if it was so ahed of it's times...
19 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:It might well refer to the the helicopter being on the ground, not the target. Most aircraft that carry heaters have some sort of lockout to prevent them from activating the seeker on the ground, and a switch to override that lockout in case the missile needs to be ground tested. I don't know if that's what it does, but it seems likely.
I looked further a bit and it indeed may be to cage the seeker on the ground. Shame there seems to be 0 sources backing that capabilities up.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, SUBS17 said:
The only difference is the motor, it is not designed for Ground Targets. I do not think that the SEEKER would lock onto a ground target. The R60 and the Stinger are very good missiles but it would not hit a ground target because of the SEEKER. UNLOCKED it would go up and then down and not accurately hit anything.
I did not ask if you "think" it's possible. It is possible and I asked for sources for that. If you aren't 100% sure about something maybe it would be the best if you didn't respond at all.
3 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:You won't find manuals for R-60 air to ground use because the R-60 was designed as an AA missile. You can, however, find anecdote, because they were used that way, sort of. Specifically, the story I heard was about the R-60 being used as a very ghetto TGP against Taliban in Afghan, who drove their trucks at night with lights off. So, since the Hind had no night vision equipment, so they took an R-60 on one of the pylons and flew along the routes listening for a tone change, indicating something hot on the ground. This was told to me by someone else on another forum, so I don't have any better source. I also don't know what they did afterwards, but presumably they dropped a parachute flare and hit the Taliban with rockets and gun. I don't think they actually shot their R-60 at them.
Early IR AAMs can be used against ground targets simply by locking something on the ground and firing. They'll go straight to target and hit it. Their warhead was too small to actually do much damage in such a situation, but a soft-skinned vehicle would be destroyed.
I assumed since there is a "ground" switch in the Mi-24 there could be some mention in the manuals about what it does. I am also looking for other sources like magazines that may talked about it.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, SUBS17 said:
R-60 is for aircraft only it is a Stinger missile.
This is just wrong. Not sure what you mean by "Stinger missile", it's an russian missile that predates the stinger. But R-60 has an Infrared seeker it doesn't matter if the target is a ground vehicle or an aircraft. If it sees a heat-signature you can shoot at it. Mi-24 even has ground option on the A2A panel.
-
6
-
-
Hello,
I am looking for any kind of manuals, books, videos or any other source (preferably official soviet ones) that talks about usage of R-60/R-60M missiles on Mi-24 (or other soviet airplanes/helicopters) against ground targets. Sources in russians are okay.Thanks for all responses.
Better navigation features (read my explanation)
in DCS: CH-47F
Posted
Those are already in game for long time, the NS430 can use them. Here a point in game and the corresponding in real life https://opennav.com/waypoint/RU/NIRGA. Unfortunatly I can't find anywhere what AIRAC cycle it uses so I assume it's outdated by many years.