Pyroflash

Yeah, I lied, by the way. Turns out my HOTAS profile had curves set that I forgot about.

My warthog hits 96% right on the detents with no curve.

ECM is bad. You know it, we know it, they know it. The entire ECM model needs an overhaul, but until that happens, the system is unrealistically exploitable. The warmup time was implemented to prevent ECM 'blinking', which was used in order to force other people's RADAR to break lock. It is a temporary balancing fix in order to prevent unrealistic exploitation of an UNREALISTIC IMPLEMENTATION of a system. When ED gets around to a proper implementation of ECM, I have no doubt that this will change. If you have knowledge about a particular system and can provide concrete, written documentation, I have never known ED to willingly refuse this sort of help. :)

Unfortunately that all we have though. ED isn't a DICE class studio here. They have a limited budget and staff, and everything has to fit within their business constraints. Edit: well, everyone has to fit their business within operating constraints. ED's just happen to be a tad tighter, that's all.

All I'm saying is that, Inside 4 miles, good luck trying to evade an AMRAAM. You don't have to hardlock him either. If you are visual, you always have the option of mad dogging him. Using flood mode introduces a number of other issues that could prove detrimental to your survival or combat efficacy. The real question is, though, what is the best weapon for the job? Do you sortie out every time expecting to use flood mode? Or, are you the survival pack rat type of guy who packs away a dozen tricks just because a situation may arise where one of those is useful? When I sortie out in an F-15C, I don't carry any sparrows. The reason being is that they aren't nearly as useful as an AIM-120 for the type of tactics being used. I don't expect to get within visual range of someone. I certainly don't expect to get into visual range of someone without them seeing me. If I get caught in a visual scenario (< 5nm), the AIM-9M works plenty well. Nine times out of ten though, I am only there in the first place because something has gone horribly wrong with the engagement. Having a tactically useless missile only increases the chance that I am in that sort of situation. It is sort of like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Of course, I am not discounting the fun factor of potentially snagging someone with a shot like that. For the times it works right, it is pretty glorious to watch.

Currently possible with some config edits only, but it is a pretty bad implementation, and is completely scripted. The Su-27S AFM will be coming "soon", and that will have the full dynamic implementation.

This is the only reason. Executing proper tactics that don't necessitate the need for you to get into a fight untargeted will put you in a better position almost all of the time. For these situations, you are now carrying at least one missile that could be an AIM-120C, but isn't.

On the web site main page under open beta downloads. It will be a completely separate DCS: World and module install from the main installation though.

You mean to tell me that the A-10C isn't a tank sim? :D In all seriousness though, a proper tank acting in a simulated combined arms setting is something that I've wanted for a very long time. ArmA comes close to it, but the lack of actual simulation in its vehicles doesn't really do it for me.

I actually.. Wouldn't mind this as a module. It would bring a significantly unique aircraft to the game. Can't say that I would really complain.

Well, they have missiles with their warheads removed. I guess you could hit a vital area with one of those.

Light scattering. You can also see the same effect when looking at the sun through alto stratus clouds.

Thanks!

Yes, you need to be maneuvering, not just notching. That doesn't work very well against heaters. Also, it will reduce energy available, but engine heat is the really big killer here. Make sure your throttle is cut to idle, and take into account the second or so it will take for your engine to actually spool down. Another important factor is actually acquiring the missile launch. With AIM-9's, you have to kind of learn to expect it, but the Russian missiles create a huge plume of white smoke that can be seen from quite some distance. Preemptive flares is also not a bad option if you have enough. At ~4 nm, you don't have a lot of time to do anything, so reaction time and precision is key here.

Sorry, I was referring to the shape of the thing, not its aerodynamic functionality. Essentially, there are two compartments forward on the MiG-29's LERX. The rearward one is used for the radar warning equipment, but I have no idea what the forward one usually houses.

Out of the blue question. Does anyone know what the front dogtooth on the LERX is used for (The rear is used for the RHAW) in the MiG-29A?

Sorry to get your hopes up, but the summer date was only for more information. Knowing ED, it will probably be released soon after, but there really isn't any concrete information on supposed release dates.

Earliest update on the Charlie hornet expected this summer some time. Who knows on the Echo, maybe we will get an update earlier, but knowing the complexity of the bird, probably later. Right now we actually know a little more about the Echo than the Charlie. Coretex was a bit more.. ah.. open with its higher level design decisions.

Also, "bought" isn't always cut and dry. The original management team may or may not still have a lot of rights when it comes down to how to manage the company. I'd advise everybody to stop freaking out and wait and see what happens in the long term. It's not a bad idea to make accusations and point questions with the intent of getting some answers to some obviously troubling fears, but blind accusations aren't productive.

Worse than the Turkish jet.

The seekers and related missile systems need some work. A lot of work. Aircraft systems, however, are unlikely to change until DCS versions of these aircraft come out. At any rate, do you know or understand what criteria are required for a given system to generate a launch warning? It probably isn't as simple as this game would lead you to believe. The situation is as good as it is probably going to get without some pretty descriptive information that no one is likely to get their hands on. Real aircraft might not even have launch warnings depending on the platform or weapon being employed.

What were RAF pilots doing in the Pacific?

I'd much rather see them re-do other, newer maps with the new tech than simply bring out the old ones though. That being said, if it is just a matter of a simple copy & paste, I wouldn't be opposed to having more room to play.

except that the engine and flight model may not be so separate.