SharkWizard

Antarctica would be magnificent. There would also be no need to include any proper airports since we could just make our own airports on the ice-sheet as per video:

Is the F-106A completely missing from this thread?

Aerospatiale Dauphin of course. Which for some mysterious reason is missing from the list.

Actually the Bison is a 21-93

My humble suggestion for a GIUK-gap map. Includes two military airbases: Keflavík and Kinloss? (or is it Lossiemouth) afaik. Loads of runways and ocean real estate.

It was un-cancelled when they got a go ahead from the appropriate government ministries to model some newer avionics.

Well it turned out that Blackshark 3 is happening after all. So its not a surprise they'd delay properly starting on the 29 a bit until after its finished. At least we got a bit of love with the 2,7 patch such as waypoints and better dampers. Also the fact BS3 is happening bodes well, since if its ok by the Russian military/government to publish it they might be inclined to ok more and better MiG-29 versions. Maybe even the original MiG-29K itself? I wish at least.

TacView is currently what you should be using. Some servers allow you to view your own recorded data 10 minutes after depicted events occurred. Other servers offer their own Tacview recordings online.

The most advanced NATO MiG-29 is the Slovakian MiG-29AS I believe. There are a number of shots from 29AS cockpits online such as this one The G is basically as we can tell from its FC3 version just barely modified.

Absolutely nice picture of this incredibly attractive plane. My wallpaper is a drawing/painting of a K from a similar aspect used by the chinese plastic model kit company Trumpeter on their MiG-29K plastic model kit.

Completely agree even if its slightly slower, heavier and less maneuverable. Best looking plane and also my wallpaper

MiG-29M 9.15 is such a beauty. Would be so nice if we had a ff (or even fc3) model of the plane in DCS. There is no chance of course. With a quadruplex analog fbw pitch control channel with no mechanical backups and triplex FBW roll and yaw control channels with mechanical backup it certainly would be a very different beast to fly compared to the 9.12 and 9.13 we got already. Unstable in pitch control like the Flanker and improved fuel economy to boost. Apparently it had a tv camera inside its IRST as well and could guide missiles to 4 targets at once. I'm guessing similarly how the 9.13S can launch R-77s at 2 targets in the special mode, feel free to correct me. Its trump card though must have been the advanced air to ground munitions. I read once a bomber squadron got issued MiG-29As expecting theyd get the M as soon as it got into production. Of course they never got them (same as DCS pilots).

I believe it was a simple flight model, predecessor of the Flaming Cliffs simple flight models which we had on the FC3 planes until they were improved with the current much much more advanced and complicated (to make/understand/program) flight model. I suspect if the current 29 flight model was modified with a dash of more lift and drag and a (8G max before things started to break) it would be far more accurate than the 2.5 model. Additionally the 2.5 MiG-29K (which was supposed to be the original 1980s version of course) had the cockpit of the 9.12 or 9.13 instead of the actual original MiG-29K cockpit of which there is a beautiful 3d rendition posted on these very forums.

So this is the thread I should have posted the F-102A, F-106A. Didn't notice the Korean War tag there. Also MiG-25. That plane would be nice to have in order to "jump" over the opposition and blow up their Awacs with 4xR-40s jump over them again and land to get more R-40s. Might be risky in case of an opposing F-15 amraam carrier on the way. But still it would be an enjoyable enterprise. Then of course Draken, finnish forest dwelling variant naturally.

I'd say F-102A F-106A Fast, nimble and interesting™ missiles

Don't forget that some of the stick movements are from the dampers which not only affect the flight surfaces but move the stick as well so the pilot can feel where the surfaces are moving. Something which we don't have in DCS (the damper effected stick movement).

Interestingly enough we could have western sources for (all the) data on the standard Soviet 9.12 (non-9.12A or 9.12B) since Slovakia apparently bought a few of those (soviet 9.12) from Russia in the 90s. Additionally the US bought quite a few (soviet) 9.13 from Moldova in the 90s. Maybe this has all been mentioned already in this topic but I didn't notice.

Now thats an extremely Finnish Draken

Hope I'm on the correct section of the forums. I just noticed L-39 was not discounted while many much newer modules were. Was that intentional?

Interesting. Then the situation is going to get worse for the FC3 9.12 pilot because I fully expect ED to fix those problems eventually. Still just pressing the ecm button(s) is simpler than notching using the SPO-15. So just maybe it may improve overall SA for the 9.12 pilot?

Yes I completely agree and but I also expect DCS to get more realistic in this field as time passes. And if the Talisman can give a 9.12 pilot a slightly better chance to get into visual range against 4+ generation fighters even if its radar is completely out of action I expect it would/could improve its chances in the online AMRAAM shootouts. Because at least nowadays those jamming F/A-18s online mess up my radar/home-on-jamming tactics completely. I however expect the biggest question is whether its too legally ambiguous for ED. (Another thing I have wondered about is whether there were any in-flight refuelling mods ever made available to the basic 9.12. I thought the Belorussians had also made such kits, but it turns out I was wrong since I was recalling the -29BM. If there were any it could be an excuse for ED to include it as an option.)

Well, it has an IRST for those cases it can't burn through the jamming.

I wonder if ED could have the Belarussian Talisman ECM (available as an bolt-on upgrade to the 9.12) included as a possible loadout with the F-F 29. As always with ECM, the capabilities of the Talisman would need to be guessed by ED, but it might slightly even out the playing field for those interested in taking the 9.12 into those online AMRAAM festivals. Or maybe it would violate some laws to include it?

Personally I find it very enjoyable to go up against the deluge of AMRAAMs either online or in single player with slightly inferior equipment such as either R-77s or 27s. Defeating your "enemy" with inferior weapons is very satisfying (and when it goes wrong its not that bad ). That said wouldn't even a modern Su-35 with R-77-1s or R-27s still be considerably disadvantaged against the most modern 4+ gen AMRAAM carriers anyway?

Absolutely love these large tape instruments that were introduced to the plane quite early on I believe. (btw quite a lot of the F-106 manuals can be found at https://www.f-106deltadart.com/manuals_documents.htm)