Bremspropeller

@IvanK did you get the chance to ask the devs about the TROP?

Other aircraft had a similar installation, though. Like the libyan EDs or some export C models (Marocco, Jordan? and Equador come to mind). Might have been a different doppler system, compared to the other users, though. The capability-difference between Cs and Es gets pretty mushy with the late model Cs. Isn't the iraqi BAZ-AR similar to the MARTEL and ARMAT?, though? After all, there are different MARTEL versions, aren't there? I think the BAZ-AR uses the same basic misslie-airframe. Sensors and motor might be different. BTW: Saw you on LimaKilo last night. Glad your machine is up and running again!

I think it's just the tone. They fixed a Sidewinder tone-bug during the last patch and it might be related. Unless you can *shoot* a SW after de-selecting them...

Define what "gaining some speed" is. You're probably running into an out of trim situation, hence the nose coming up upon acceleration. When going slow to fast, you'll first need to trim down a lot and then hitting transonic, trim up again. The F1 is a high wing loading, low aspect ratio aircraft. Whenever you're pulling the stick, your initial response will be an increased AoA, some mush and eventually a turn. Smoothen your inputs or learn to live with this characteristic.

I'd prefer the AZ, though

Curves might actually make it worse, as the NWS is lagging significantly behinnd the input, so you're bound to use more than necessary on your second correction, leading to a gator-roll in the dirt if you don't manage to get up or get her stopped in time. I haven't found a conclusive fix other than using the killswitch for the NWS or trying very hard at anticipating the aircraft-reaction during my inputs.

They could implement all kinds of Sidewinder versions. Preferably with the correct dimensions.

Still ongoing. The skin looks normal on the AI F1CZ, but has issues with an overly dark tail/ ventral fins in the shadow: F1CZ - all's well. F1CE.

In the 80s, REDFOR didn't have Fox 3s that they'd just throw at you to make you do things. Times have changed. For the threat back in the day and it's mission, two Fox 1s was perfectly fine on the M2k.

If you run the numbers in your mind, it's not that phantastic as it might seem at first glance. Let's assume an empty weight of 14t and a L/Dmax of 8 for a clean jet - that's slightly conservative of the wiki numbers for an F-4E. That'll give us a push-force required of about 1.75t to keep level flight. Now, if we assume less than level flight, things get relatively believable quickly. Not accounting for additional windmilling drag here, but it's entirely possible to push somebody around, especially if it's just stretching the glide.

I'm not sure the IRST was used for a long time or used consistently. You don't read that mch about it and it was most probably a spares issue on the boat. RedFlash 211 (a Juliet) at the ramp without an IRST Red Flash 205 with the IRST clearly uninstalled. Check out the RHAW antenna on the intake. Just like the jet above. Red Flash 211 and 206 with IRST (housings at least). Both are Juliets. Note the different radome colours. Possibly pre-modification, as neither have RHAW antennae on the intake. Again Red Flash 211 - seems like the jet at the boat has a different BuNo. Superheat 213 (should be a Project Shoehorn "Echo") with IRST Superheat 201 - no IRST The F-8D was the earliest version with the IRST. Not 100% sure if that was a retrofit during production when preparing for the Echo or if the Deltas came with IRST right from the start. The Phillippines Air Force Deltas certainly had them retained, while many Hotels (upgraded Deltas) had them taken off: Superheat 202 without an IRST after being converted into a Hotel. Same jet: 205 207 Old Nick 460 (a Delta) with the IRST: Old Nick 105 (a Hotel) with the IRST taken off: Old Nick 101 with... ...and without the IRST (same jet). Batter Up 116 (Hotel) without the IRST (MIG-KILLER) Two Dallas Hunters Hotels with the IRST: A Superheats jet without the IRST, but with a wing-pylon, which became a thing with the Hotel. ...and with IRST... https://www.airliners.net/photo/USA-Navy/Vought-F-8H-Crusader/2476840/L I think one can conclude, that the IRSTs may or may not be installed in the fighters that had the capability (Delta/ Hotel and Echo/ Juliet). It's also clear, that if they didn't have the IRST, it was taken off the jet, instead of the jet never having it.

No. Both are fighters. The photo version looked different. VFP-63 was the RAG for all the Crusaders when VF-124 transitioned to Tomcats. They flew both, their operational photo ships, as well as some fighters. The east coast RAG (VF-174) had become the A-7 RAG in the late 60s. BTW: This photo-bird is a "late" RF-8G It not only has the vental fins for improved high speed stability, but also the two afterburner cooling scoops that became neccessary, when they were upgraded with the -420 motor (same as in the later Juliets and some Hotels). Must have een a hell of a fun ride!

That map would be kinda cool - especially since the Azores could act as ASW base. To fly those babies:

It's a long way, walking into Thailand from Laos. Some heroic measures bourne out of desparation were performed*, tanker-crews not getting a fraction of credit of what would have been due. Also, there's no intake downstream of the dorsal AAR receptacle in the Air Force F-4. Also² jet fuel doesn't ignite on sparks just like that. Fuel vapor mixed with air at the correct ratio, however, does. We need buddy-refuelling mechanics. ___ *e.g. "Pardo's Push"

I do have a C-160 for MSFS and it's fun, but it doesn't come close to flying a C-160 tanker in a COOP with a couple of fighter-buddies on my wing, flying an attack mission into some far off airfield in a country you'd have trouble finding on a map (Armée de l'Air in Chad). Or dropping paras into a hot LZ far behind enemy lines (SAAF in Angola). Flying logistical support to some FARP/ airstrip somewhere in the bush, unloading choppers which then could be used to scout the area or FAC-A fighters. Evacuating folks from some place for some reason, under fire. Finding people in a boat in distress out on the sea, dropping emergency supplies. Then there's ELINT sub-versions of transports. There's a royal duckton of fun activities to be experienced in transport-category aircraft in DCS.

Both are VFP-63 jets, though. VFP-63 was a photo recce unit, flying recce-birds into the early 80s. The fighter-models were used for training, as VF-124 (the west coast Gator RAG) transitioned to Tomcats in 1972 and VFP-63 took over the RAG role.

+1 Lots of interesting things to do with those. Hopefully we'll see some fleshing out there. And recce!

Thanks, eh!

+1 confirmed in the CE with JULIs. Haven't tried the EE or the other Sidewinders yet.

A coop-option would be awesome!

^No. We should have an EQ6 with Exocets and other fancy bells and whistles insted.

Catch him and he'll tell you all about SAM city.

+1

The transmission of flight control commands purely via electrical signals is what defines FBW. The "flight control computer" is just an evolutionary step that came into being with relaxed stability and special and more sythetic flight control laws (like g-command, pitch-rate or AoA-command and roll-rate command). We can dicuss about where an AFCS or Stab Aug and a flight control computer transition from one the other, but that discussion is fairly moot in my opinion. The Mirage F1, for example, is FBW in pitch and yaw only, where it's mechanical controls are de-clutched in the normal flight mode, but can be re-engaged for mechanical control. Similar flight-control architectures (FBW primary with a mechanical back-up) were used for other early iterations of FBW aircraft. Such as the Vigilante. Or the Avro Vulcan. Or Concorde.

"Ferry range" and "combat patrol" are mutually exclusive for starters, but if people insist on using wiki data that's just copied from another inaccurate source, then they're bound to be let down by reality. I just about ran the F-14A on my wing out of fuel on a 200NM+ attack mission with a similar bombload two days ago, flying the F1EE myself. It's all a matter of using at least correct'ish profiles. In the F1 that means cruising high and fast (+30kft and above M0.85).