Bozon

That is perfect. In 30 min you have time to RTB, get a new plane, and come back to see your bombs explode… In MP what is most likely to happen is that by the time your delayed bombs finally detonate, the target will already be destroyed by someone with instantaneous fuses.

Haha a Klingon Bird-of-prey mod for DCS would be hilarious

If DCS had the option to remove the outer cannons this would have helped a lot in using the A8 as a fighter. Less firepower sure, but you still have the same guns as the Dora, which is enough.

What a marvelous collection of mustaches! Was it a requirement in the Iraqi Airforce?

The trimmers have been significantly improved in a recent patch and now I can trim the Mossie well enough to have a few seconds “hands off” for inspecting F10 and looking around for recognizable land marks. I did a few compass-map-watch low altitude navigation in MP and it was great fun. Arriving at 240-260 mph, after 20+ minutes of tree tops navigation, pull up blindly by time measurement from the last land-mark and have the target right-there where you expect it is so satisfying. The work load however was crazy because at such low altitude I still had to get hand on and correct the plane every few seconds. Trim is good enough when you have a least a good few hundred feet under you - it is easier to spot landmarks from higher up and you don’t CFIT. If you try to do this any lower or near valley walls you need more time to spot the landmarks and minor trim inaccuracies and the natural swing of the plane may kill you. An AI pilot just needs to be good enough so I can let him hold the plane straight for 30 seconds, after I verified that the path ahead is clear from obstacles, while I measure things on F10 and take my head out to zoom-view landmarks to recognize them.

Voted Super Ferlon for a cold war era heavy helicopter, plus it could land on water Missing from the list is the SA330 Puma, though it is more of a medium heli - a very popular helicopter that saw a lot of action in various conflicts, plus it is commonly used in 1980’s Hollywood as a Mi-8 stand-in…

Don’t use it then. To be sure, clear all key bindings for this function.

If ED fear of exploiting the AI pilot for “press A to straighten up the plane” or as an auto-trim, then this could be solved by: 1. AI pilot engages only under limitations, reasonably close to “straight and level” state, and the player in the starboard seat (may do so automatically when you switch seats - make it a “special” option) 2. AI pilot is limited in its control inputs, thus the plane must be reasonably trimmed before AI takes control - the AI pilot will not trim the plane, but rather fly it to the best of its ability with the current trim state. 3. when you jump back into the pilot seat, AI pilot instantly return control to you.

I am barely familiar with the A-4 and had time for only 2 quick sorties - was great fun! Had only minimal key bindings, I don’t know how to drop flares/chaff, I don’t know how to operate the inertial nav system, so flew WWII style by azimuth from fixed points and counting “Mississippis” and dive bombed like a Neanderthal Thank you Alpenwolf for giving the Scooter a chance. Loved it! Now I need to learn it properly.

Since we don’t have a timer watch in the game, if I pause the game I also have to pause the watch. I find this a lot less immersive or fun than the possible of an AI that can keep straight & level while I play navigator. This is not fake autopilot - this is an AI crewman for the solo players.

The inability to operate some switches from the pilot seat is a completely unnecessary “feature” - it contributes nothing to immersion when you fly solo. I understand that some locations in the cockpit are in reality beyond the pilot’s reach. However, jumping into the observer’s seat to manipulate them, is that really any more realistic? Allow us to manipulate everything from the pilot seat, especially via key bindings. When I mouse-click stuff in the cockpit I jump into the observer’s seat anyway because the pilot does not have a clean line of sight to most of them.

The low PRF is to reduce the range umbiguity. The radar sends multiple pulses before the signals return - when you get a return signal it is not always easy to tell if this is the 1st pulse returning from a far target or the 2nd pulse returning from a closer target, etc for the rest of the pulses in the train. The higher the PRF and the longer the train the more confusing this gets. Since MTI keeps all the returned pulses in a processing cycle and does not filter them out before the MTI processing, it can't handle a significant amount of this confusion, thus the PRF must be kept low enough. Velocity is still measured via the doppler effect and quite accurately, except that the effect is not measured on the modulation within the pulse - instead, it is measured on the intervals between the pulses. The doppler effect compresses the time differences between the returned pulses (vs. the transmitted pulses) when the target is moving towards you. The MTI uses a train of pulses so the speed is measured over multiple intervals which increases the accuracy. Due to signal processing reasons this is not done by marking the "start" of a pulse and measuring the time to the "start" of the next pulse (the definition of which get umbiguous), but instead measuring the shift in the modulation phases of the two pulses. The meaning is the same.

It should be able to measure closure speed. MTI gets the speed of the target by detecting it over a train of several pulses and measuring the change of time intervals between the pulses in the series (actually measuring phase change). This allows the radar to reject targets that move at the same speed as the ground (relative to the radar). However the radar needs to be able to detect pulses over the background in order to measure their phase. So against the ground background MTI mostly achieves a reduction in false detections than an increase in true detections.

Not sure why you say that. We will have F-4, F-8, A-6 and probably the A-7 before an A-1 would be ready, plus Mig 21 (variant is off, but no biggie), Mig 19, Mig 17 (in progress) on the red side. One can also add the UH-1H and community A-4E to that list. For Korea we have the F-86 & Mig15, that is not much but still A-1 will be another step. On the other hand for WWII Pacific we only have the F4U while TBF was normally mixed with F6F, F4F and SBD which were not announced yet, not to mention any adversaries with red meatballs on them.

It is not a WWII plane - it is a cold war Korea/nam plane, which will see usage on the cold war servers. TBF/M is pure WWII, so no real era overlap.

This is way cooler than an A-10. I’d buy this

The FB.VI have no business above 10,000 feet. IRL almost all of its action happened below 5,000 feet unless they were cruising above clouds. At sea level it was up there with the fastest fighters up until late 1944 when 109K and FW-190D started to show up… oh wait, these are the ones you will face in DCS… oops. There is some uncertainty as to the supposed deck speed of the FB.VI - it depends whether it has Merlin 23 or 25, whether it has multi-stubs or saxophone exhausts, and whether it has flame dumping exhaust shrouds. Also, individual airframes have a bit of a variance between them. Ours is supposed to be the fastest configuration, however no test data for this exact configuration exists (that I know of) - some extrapolation is required and that means some uncertainty. DCS FB.VI is currently at the very bottom of the uncertainty range with 340 mph. The upper estimates go as high as 355 mph, so the gray zone is not entirely negligible. In terms of power loading (mass to horse power ratio), the FB.VI is on par with planes like the FW190A8 and P-47D. It is not under powered. In terms of wing loading it is also quite similar to these planes. So, at least until it gets quite slow and induced drag dominates, it should be able to sustain turns with them. It could initially, but after some patches it now can’t.

If he can’t make +18 boost check the calibration of the throttle axis, full forward may not equal 100% throttle in the game - use alt+enter to show the controls overlay. However, if the plane can’t take off with +12 boost then there is a problem. I too resort to +18 to get airborne even when light. With a heavy load even that is not always enough to clear the trees after the end of the runway. IIRC, one of the tutorial vids teaches to take off at +12 boost and this is what I used to do with the 1st EA version. At +12 she used to easily get off the ground before running out of runway.

I’d love to see various derivatives of the Cayuse, especially the Tow totting MD-500 Defender. Why buy AH-1 Cobra when you can get 3 of these cuties for the same price

What did the real navigators use for timing? Wrist watch? Hand held watch/timer? This could be something that you “bring up” to the screen and bring down like the clipboard. Our navigator needs his navigation tools. while on the subject, I really hope that something is planned for our navigator in future development. He should be able to draw lines on the map, take measurements of azimuth/distance, etc. F10 does not support marking paths and notes. edit: and this should work online as well!

True, the amount of work to create a new variant will depend on which. What is behind what I wrote is that I don’t know if an upgrade package will sell very well by itself- if giving current owners another variant that is not too dissimilar from Bis is not too much work, then this could be an incentive for them to purchase the upgrade, and this would still be less than making a full module from scratch (I hope). If Mag3 makes a full stand alone module for an earlier Mig21 I would be interested and likely buy it, but I am not sure I can say the same about an upgrade to the current Bis.

It is not just the ground steering. She barely gets into the air after a long takeoff run. Compared with previous patches, it feels like the Mosquito lost 3 feet of length from each wing. Turn performance is affected as well. I don’t know if it’s wrong, I don’t know if it is right - it is just worse than before.

If the upgrade included an additional earlier Mig-21 variant then it is worth half of a full model price. Mag3 need to break even with the upgrade vs. current module owners. The profit will come from sales of the module to DCS players who do not own it yet and into the future to new players, as the module will be up to the new standards.

“Suppression” does not necessarily means destroying the AA gun/crew. Real people duck when they are sprayed by 20mm or a bunch of 0.5s barrels - the AI gunners are zealots with balls of steel and keep shooting until their last breath. Coastal command used strafing Beaufighters/Mosquitoes as part of their combined tactics. The strafers went in 1st and raked the decks along the length of the ship. Beyond the immediate effect of making the gunners duck for cover, this started fires and injured some crew. The defenders were then more busy with putting out the fires and dragging injured crew below decks, and less busy shooting back at the rocket totters that were immediately following. ”Suppression” can be implemented by making the gun stop firing for a brief time when “near hits” are recorded, even if they do not do direct damage. This means that the bullets/shells have another “fear” explosion radius that is larger their normal damage explosion radius.

In 1989 a Syrian pilot defected with his Mig-23 to Israel. I don’t know if that was ML, or MLA variant or another. The Israelis tested that Mig-23 is a series of flights alongside an F-16A. While the acceleration of the Mig was impressive, out pacing the F-16, in every other respect it was concluded that the Mig was not designed to dog fight. It was considered inferior to the F-16A and a better match to the F-4E and Mirage III. Already 8 years earlier during the 1st Lebanon war, the Mig-23 (again, I dont know the exact variants) proved to be no match to the Israeli F-16A/B and F-15C in actual dogfights. The 23 was a good 1970s plane but it’s not like it was a generation leap in performance - more like a moderate increment. It will be a great match for the coming Mirage F.1. I know some people think the Mig-23 was a hot plane and that the MLA variant somehow turned it into a monster, but it just doesn’t have the record to back this up.