Cobra847 Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 Nicholas Dackard Founder & Lead Artist Heatblur Simulations https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/
TomOnSteam Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 Kind of ironic that he runs a company called Valve when soon he's going to need one in his heart. It's a shame he isn't a innovative with his health as he is with technology. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cockpit Spectator Mode
mattebubben Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 Like RagnarDa said (lead Viggen programmer BTW :) ) -- it's a combination of a few things. 1) It's a very reasonable assumption that they would have been able to be used without any issues or with minimal modifications to the system. It's likely that any export partners would have done this. Sweden simply didn't purchase any as far as we can tell. 2) In the sim, using our collimated VID display at highspeed with unzoomed Mavericks is very difficult. It was likely far easier in real life as the screenspace on a 1920x1080 monitor pales in comparison. Thus, using early mavericks will be for purists and the hardcore. :) wich AGM-65 variants are you going to include? Just the RB 75, 75T and a AGM-65B? or are you going to add any of the later more advanced models with IR seekers etc? (i kinda say stick with the A/B variants)
theOden Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 As a purist I will go with the AGM-65A when I dress in a green overall and a mopedhjälm when I will be flying this thing (an old yellow JOFA helmet won't cut it, right?). Like matte, I would also like to hear if the 75T will be included? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
MBot Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 The AGM-65A was very seeker limited and could only be used from very close range. Probably a lot closer than most DCS players are accustomed for Mavericks. Though I understand that the limitations of our monitors will make this even more difficult. I am looking forward to trying it out myself and appreciate that we will have the choice between zoomed and unzoomed. Gameplay wise this perhaps causes the incentive to use keep using the Rb05 even if the Rb75 is available. Use the Rb75 for pinpoint accuracy at the cost of close (lock on) range or use the Rb05 at longer ranges with the reduced accuracy inherit to its guidance design.
JaNk0 Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 As a purist I will go with the AGM-65A when I dress in a green overall and a mopedhjälm when I will be flying this thing (an old yellow JOFA helmet won't cut it, right?). Like matte, I would also like to hear if the 75T will be included? aaah the famous JOFA helmet [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Retu81 Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 All this talk about a about a Soviet invasion makes me think of a story (a true one) that a friend of mine told me. In 1989 he was a 2nd Lieutenant in the Royal Swedish Airforce and trained new recruits. In every exercise there were talks about "enemy from the East", "when the Russians arrive" and "when the Soviets attack". At one point a recruit got a bit annoyed (probably because of his personal political beliefs) and shouted "there is always talk about the enemy attacking from the east. The enemy might as well come from the west?!?". A seasoned Major replied: "Of course soldier! They can attack from the west. But it will be a helluva detour for them!". We also had the same story in Finnish Defence Forces, except in our version the enemy would be doing a flanking maneuver. That was a true story as well. :smilewink:
theOden Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 Haha JaNk0, correct and spot on :) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Goblin Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 The flare lights on the tail end of the missile and you guide it with the keyboard or by using a modifier on your joystick (e.g. you hold down a button and then your joystick controls the missile. I can't remember if the controller is progressive or on/off, but when I tried the Rb05 sim the instructor told me that they taught pilots to "pulse" the controller. I.e. giving short steering commands, and wait for the result. The missile control surfaces was powered by compressed gas (I think it was), which only allowed for a given number of control inputs. It felt as if I just as easily could've used buttons to steer the missile.
BravoYankee4 Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 I can't remember if the controller is progressive or on/off, but when I tried the Rb05 sim the instructor told me that they taught pilots to "pulse" the controller. I.e. giving short steering commands, and wait for the result. The missile control surfaces was powered by compressed gas (I think it was), which only allowed for a given number of control inputs. It felt as if I just as easily could've used buttons to steer the missile. So it is a digitial joystick (with 4 switches) then? Makes sense since that would allow a much simpler data transmission protocol.
MiG21bisFishbedL Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 Kind of ironic that he runs a company called Valve when soon he's going to need one in his heart. It's a shame he isn't a innovative with his health as he is with technology. Actually, if you've seen recent images of him, he's lost quite a bit of weight. Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!
Luzifer Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 So it is a digitial joystick (with 4 switches) then? Makes sense since that would allow a much simpler data transmission protocol. Given that the instructor specifically said they taught the pilots to use it like a digital stick it probably isn't.
Hook47 Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 Finding out the BK 90 is confirmed, along with zooming Mavericks made my week!!! Finding out there is still no known date for release announcement then promptly unmade my week :( But I'm still excited!
dartuil Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 Viggen and Hornet are the only planes im waiting in 2016 I dont care any others one announced Im in LN. i7 2600k -- Noctua NH-D14--Asrock Z75 Pro3--ASUS GTX970 Strix --16Go Ripjaws X 1333--Thermaltake Smart M650--CoolerMaster Silencio 652S--AOC E2752VQ-- Sandisk Extreme II 480GB--Saitek X-52 Pro --SAITEK PZ35 Pedals
Hook47 Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 I think the Viggen has actually become my most anticipated plane of 2016. I honestly think I want it more than the F-14, and tied with the F-18C. I never would have thought that back when it was (sort of) announced, but it has really grabbed me and it is a freaking awesome airframe that honestly fills a hole in our sim aircraft line up!
theOden Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 I'm totally with you Ramsey. I've put the 18C on ignore since a few months back pretty much all that bolser some interest now is this and the F-14. Guess I've been leathernecked too. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Hummingbird Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 The Viggen is OK for me, but nothing comes close to the excitement I have for the F-14 module, I've been waiting for a fully fletched simulation of that thing since forever! Also now I really hope they're doing the F-4E Phantom, that would probably be the module I'd be the 2nd most excited for, perhaps tied with a EE Lightning or F-8 Crusader. The MiG-21 needs a true contemporary adversary, ideally one it actually fought against.
mattebubben Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 The Viggen is OK for me, but nothing comes close to the excitement I have for the F-14 module, I've been waiting for a fully fletched simulation of that thing since forever! Also now I really hope they're doing the F-4E Phantom, that would probably be the module I'd be the 2nd most excited for, perhaps tied with a EE Lightning or F-8 Crusader. The MiG-21 needs a true contemporary adversary, ideally one it actually fought against. Well we have the F-5E comming pretty soon. And thats a true Contemporary Adversary to the Mig-21.
Muppetlord Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 Agreed. I've always wanted the F-14 since I started DCS a couple of years ago. I remember there being rumors of IRIS simulation working on one for DCS. But then it became official...and from LN as well. Couldn't have wished for anything else. But the F-4 is my number two on the wishlist. (Love them two-seaters) :)
WinterH Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 I'm also in the boat of "more interested in Viggen than F-14" from day one :). Wishlist: F-4E Block 53 +, MiG-27K, Su-17M3 or M4, AH-1F or W circa 80s or early 90s, J35 Draken, Kfir C7, Mirage III/V DCS-Dismounts Script
Hummingbird Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 Well we have the F-5E comming pretty soon. And thats a true Contemporary Adversary to the Mig-21. Just not a very interesting one... for most at least, that I do dare say. The F-4E or F-8E would be a lot more interesting adversaries, and also a better match considering the top speeds. But of course the main reason they are more interesting is that these three aircraft fought each other in the 20th century's third most famous conflict, one that hasn't been well represented in the flight sim universe yet. A lot of people are craving a Vietnam war flight sim experience, and I think Leatherneck are the perfect candidates for delivering this.
mattebubben Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 the F-5E fought in Vietnam aswell. Just not By american pilots (Flown by south vietnam the last 3 years) It also fought in the Iran-Iraq war against the mig-21. And the F-5E is a clsoer match to the Mig-21 then the F-4E is. The Mig-21 and F-5E have very comparable top speeds at low altitude. Its only at high altitudes that the Mig-21 is significantly faster. And the F-8 is also not mach 2 capable. And is not alot faster then the F-5E is. And the F-5E likley have more kills against the Mig-21 then the F-8 does. But sorry for getting off topic lets focus on the Viggen again.
Hummingbird Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 (edited) I'm not sure why you would say that the F-5E is a closer match to the MiG-21Bis than the F-4E, if anything the F-4E & MiG-21Bis closely match each other in more areas of performance. For one the MiG-21Bis outstrips the F-5E not only in speed but also in climb rate, where'as by comparison the F-4E is quite close in both. In terms of turn rate the F-4E is only slightly better than the MiG-21Bis, where'as the F-5E will best both of them quite readily in a turn fight. (Remember this aint no 50 lbs/sq.ft. F-13 we have ingame, it's a 78 lbs/sq.ft. Bis) Only real similiarity between the F-5E and MiG-21Bis I see is the size, they are both small and thus hard to spot. Other than that they differ quite a lot in terms of performance. Edited February 21, 2016 by Hummingbird
mattebubben Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 F-5E is closer to the Mig-21 in size maneuverability overall preformance aswell as philosophy. They are both small low cost combat aircraft where the tech is not the most important point and they are both dogfighters with alot of priority to close range / gun combat. While the F-4 is a large lumbering aircraft where the tech was deemed to be enough to win any battle. It is more expensive and relies more on weapons in combat then it does agillity. It was not a dogfighter in the same way and only got the gun because i twas realised it was needed but its no gun fighter. Comparing the F-4E and a mig-21 is like comparing a F-14 with a Mig-23. As sure they fought eachother and are of comparable timeframes but they are very much different aircraft with different priorities. In that regard the F-5E and Mig-21 are closer. the F-8 is also more comparable with the mig-21 then the F-4 is. When i talk about comparing them its not just Flight preformance on paper etc. Its how they were designed and what they were designed to do. And thats why the F-5 is more comparable with the mig-21 then the F-4 is. the F-4 and Mig-21 are still very much adversaries and they are evenly matched depending on the tactics used. But as aircraft they are not as comparable just like a F-15 and Su-27 are more comparable aircraft then a F-16 and Su-27 even though they can have comparable performances in combat terms. But lets return to the Viggen =P. There are F-4 phantom threads and F-5E threads aswell as mig-21 threads where this kind of discussion is more suited =P.
Recommended Posts