Is it worth to buy it now ?

[b0bl00i]

14 hours ago, wilbur81 said:

Sounds about right, then. The Viper is highly touted for everything except it's low speed handling. There are other areas of improvement coming for the Viper's FM for sure... but I wouldn't expect a whole lot of slow speed performance... just like the silly Hornet drivers that enter the merge at 500 kts...

 

Yeah but it's a little bit too much of a brick at even moderately slow speeds.. and it's bleeding speed like a brick too. I don't know, perhaps I'm just used to that other sim but in DCS..it's impossible to win a bfm against the hornet, guns only if equally skilled pilots fly the viper and the hornet. The way the viper builds Gs is to slow in my opinion, and top of that, the G-modelling sucks,.. blackout at 9gs way to quickly. I read the requirements is 30 seconds of 9Gs in the centrifuge.. our viper pilot dude blacks out at 8 for a few seconds.

 

[wilbur81]

5 minutes ago, b0bl00i said:

 

Yeah but it's a little bit too much of a brick at even moderately slow speeds.. and it's bleeding speed like a brick too. I don't know, perhaps I'm just used to that other sim but in DCS..it's impossible to win a bfm against the hornet, guns only if equally skilled pilots fly the viper and the hornet. The way the viper builds Gs is to slow in my opinion, and top of that, the G-modelling sucks,.. blackout at 9gs way to quickly. I read the requirements is 30 seconds of 9Gs in the centrifuge.. our viper pilot dude blacks out at 8 for a few seconds.

 

Agreed on the 9G problem... though I'd bet ALL my money that DCS's Viper is going to be closer to reality in its FM and performance than that other Viper sim. My guess is that a lot of our Viper FM complaints here stem from folks who've come to believe that the other Viper sim is canon when it comes to the jet's performance...but ED's work is or will be much closer to reality I do believe...but it is still VERY early access. 

[b0bl00i]

4 minutes ago, wilbur81 said:

Agreed on the 9G problem... though I'd bet ALL my money that DCS's Viper is going to be closer to reality in its FM and performance than that other Viper sim. My guess is that a lot of our Viper FM complaints here stem from folks who've come to believe that the other Viper sim is canon when it comes to the jet's performance...but ED's work is or will be much closer to reality I do believe...but it is still VERY early access. 

 

Yeah I agree with you! I hope ED makes a real homerun with the Viper. It's my favorite plane even though it's not finished and I have quite a few in DCS already. I just want the pace to improve.. it's hard to wait.

 

[wilbur81]

28 minutes ago, b0bl00i said:

 

Yeah I agree with you! I hope ED makes a real homerun with the Viper. It's my favorite plane even though it's not finished and I have quite a few in DCS already. I just want the pace to improve.. it's hard to wait.

 

indeed 

[Harlikwin]

TBH, ED really needs to get down to the basics on the Viper and fix the various performance issues before adding more and more crap like JDAM's.

 

Viper over speeding needs to be fixed

Viper drag with actual weapons mounted needs to be fixed/addressed

As others have mentioned the G onset rate thing needs fixing as does the pilot blacking out.

More basic functionality needs to be added for the nav system and stuff like the DTC

Radar range/modes needs to get looked at and fixed relative to stuff like the hornet, I mean the whole radar modeling needs a buch of work.

 

[sublime]

On 4/30/2021 at 10:39 AM, Harlikwin said:

 

Yeah, I have the charts... But doing 1.4 on the deck with a decent DI is currently possible, since I chase down basically anything and everything on the deck in the Viper. As is exceeding VNE (800 under 30k) with no ill effects (hey look I can do 9002kn, no problems!). And well, thats wrong... Mostly the Viper didn't fly over 600 with any reasonable load down low. 

I'm personally more annoyed with the eye of sauron radar we have on it, especially after the hornet got adjusted. No way an APG-68v5 outranges an APG-73 or APG-63, which is currently the case. And I'll be on Deka to fix the Jeff radar once the Vipers gets "fixed" too. ED needs to be more consistent in what they change and how. Its just like the whole missile fiasco, adjust one, and it breaks the rest.

 

 

 

I'm curious how do you think the Jeff's radar should be functioning to make it more realistic? I don't know much about the jf radar

[Harlikwin]

2 hours ago, sublime said:

I'm curious how do you think the Jeff's radar should be functioning to make it more realistic? I don't know much about the jf radar

 

Mainly things like detection range is too good relative to other better radars, and then things like notch "resistance" is out of whack again relative to other radars. Frankly the KJL-7 should be about on par with APG-68, or the RDI from the mirage, and thats being generous since both of those radars have larger antennas which all things being equal is the primary determinant of performance. Currently the KJL-7 is outranging both the APG-73 and APG-63 in game, both of which are far larger radars which means, bigger dish, more power, more cooling, etc etc. The answer from deka is a non-technical "its newer therefore better" unfortunately fighter radars are not iphones, and pretty well known physics determines performance. I've even heard some breathlessly stupid comments like "they improved the output power so it got better" when power scales with the 4th root in the range equation, i.e. even doubling your power gets you very little performance gain. 

 

So in 2.5.6 the jeff was a bit better, but the hornet radar got more realistic parameters in 2.7. The viper radar also needs a serious nerf and ED does also need to add the longer range modes to it which have their share of actual problems. Plus the APG-63 is underperforming, maybe the flanker radars too. 

[TobiasA]

vor 21 Stunden schrieb Harlikwin:

 

Mainly things like detection range is too good relative to other better radars, and then things like notch "resistance" is out of whack again relative to other radars. Frankly the KJL-7 should be about on par with APG-68, or the RDI from the mirage, and thats being generous since both of those radars have larger antennas which all things being equal is the primary determinant of performance. Currently the KJL-7 is outranging both the APG-73 and APG-63 in game, both of which are far larger radars which means, bigger dish, more power, more cooling, etc etc. The answer from deka is a non-technical "its newer therefore better" unfortunately fighter radars are not iphones, and pretty well known physics determines performance. I've even heard some breathlessly stupid comments like "they improved the output power so it got better" when power scales with the 4th root in the range equation, i.e. even doubling your power gets you very little performance gain. 

 

So in 2.5.6 the jeff was a bit better, but the hornet radar got more realistic parameters in 2.7. The viper radar also needs a serious nerf and ED does also need to add the longer range modes to it which have their share of actual problems. Plus the APG-63 is underperforming, maybe the flanker radars too. 

 

Given the AN/APG-68 has a detection range of about 56nm against a 5.5m² target its performance against the 5.5m² Su-27 is not too far off. 10% more RCS would equal about ~65nm and we have 77. However, I think the numbers are for the V5 and we have the V7 in the Blk50/52, the V7 having a roughly 10% plus in range compared with the V5 so it would be more or less on point. It is difficult to find numbers, and given the fact that the V9 has a 30% higher detection range on the same size, apparently size is an important factor but not the only thing determinating the detection range. The V7 would be fair, given that the US upgraded all the older blocks afaik.
It is all classified though.
If you have any reliable numbers about the radar range, I'd be interested. I didn't find much, and what I found, supports the current numbers in DCS or show the DCS radar slightly overperforming by about 10% detection range.
However, literally all the sources show the F15C with AN/APG-63 is underperforming, the Flanker radar probably sucks IRL because of its age... But those are FC3.
Can't say anything about the hornet, but the AN/APG-73 is probably slightly worse given the fact it is older afaik.

I expect a slight decrease in the F-16's radar, they will probably model the V5 to have less gap to other comparable fighters. They could also just say it's the V7 and we would be fine, dunno how they decide.

Again, you probably will not find numbers anywhere. It is highly classified for a reason.

[Harlikwin]

1 hour ago, TobiasA said:

 

Given the AN/APG-68 has a detection range of about 56nm against a 5.5m² target its performance against the 5.5m² Su-27 is not too far off. 10% more RCS would equal about ~65nm and we have 77. However, I think the numbers are for the V5 and we have the V7 in the Blk50/52, the V7 having a roughly 10% plus in range compared with the V5 so it would be more or less on point. It is difficult to find numbers, and given the fact that the V9 has a 30% higher detection range on the same size, apparently size is an important factor but not the only thing determinating the detection range. The V7 would be fair, given that the US upgraded all the older blocks afaik.
It is all classified though.
If you have any reliable numbers about the radar range, I'd be interested. I didn't find much, and what I found, supports the current numbers in DCS or show the DCS radar slightly overperforming by about 10% detection range.
However, literally all the sources show the F15C with AN/APG-63 is underperforming, the Flanker radar probably sucks IRL because of its age... But those are FC3.
Can't say anything about the hornet, but the AN/APG-73 is probably slightly worse given the fact it is older afaik.

I expect a slight decrease in the F-16's radar, they will probably model the V5 to have less gap to other comparable fighters. They could also just say it's the V7 and we would be fine, dunno how they decide.

Again, you probably will not find numbers anywhere. It is highly classified for a reason.

 

Nut sure I follow your point about the 56nm range being the same as a 77nm range? Both targets are 5.5m2. And I do think about 50 ish miles is probably a reasonable number for the viper. 

 

So using textbook radar physics tell me how a radar with a larger dish, larger power output, more cooling, and probably about equal processing capability (call this the noise paramater) is gonna be worse? I mean you can throw this into the radar equation with some reasonable numbers, but the APG73 RUGII etc, latest greatest early 2000's era is what we have. Compared to APG68 of same general era?

 

My main point about the jeff radar which is a bit worse than the vipers 77 in 2.5.6 should probably get toned down if the viper gets adjusted to 50ish. I mean its a budget fighter radar, and at best only a few years "newer", and one of the very first home grown chinese designs. The radar that it was supposedly developed from has brochure ranges that are half what deka and the internet is claiming. Janes a few years back had it pretty close to russian radar. 

Edited June 7, 2021 by Harlikwin

[TobiasA]

vor 19 Stunden schrieb Harlikwin:

 

Nut sure I follow your point about the 56nm range being the same as a 77nm range? Both targets are 5.5m2. And I do think about 50 ish miles is probably a reasonable number for the viper. 

 

So using textbook radar physics tell me how a radar with a larger dish, larger power output, more cooling, and probably about equal processing capability (call this the noise paramater) is gonna be worse? I mean you can throw this into the radar equation with some reasonable numbers, but the APG73 RUGII etc, latest greatest early 2000's era is what we have. Compared to APG68 of same general era?

 

My main point about the jeff radar which is a bit worse than the vipers 77 in 2.5.6 should probably get toned down if the viper gets adjusted to 50ish. I mean its a budget fighter radar, and at best only a few years "newer", and one of the very first home grown chinese designs. The radar that it was supposedly developed from has brochure ranges that are half what deka and the internet is claiming. Janes a few years back had it pretty close to russian radar. 

 

It is like I said: 56nm for a 5m² target is a number I could find, which is probably for the V5. Given 10% more RCS (5.5 for the Su-27) + another 10% more for the V7 would bring us somewhere there.
However, there is little to no data about it... I'd say a 50-ish range is realistic.
 

[Harlikwin]

3 minutes ago, TobiasA said:

It is like I said: 56nm for a 5m² target is a number I could find, which is probably for the V5. Given 10% more RCS (5.5 for the Su-27) + another 10% more for the V7 would bring us somewhere there.
However, there is little to no data about it... I'd say a 50-ish range is realistic.
 

 

LOL. RCS doesn't scale with detection range like that. Again its like with the fourth root. Unless you are talking about a 100m RCS vs like 1m its not a huge factor. 5 vs 5.5 is the same thing.

 

 

[TobiasA]

vor 33 Minuten schrieb Harlikwin:

 

LOL. RCS doesn't scale with detection range like that. Again its like with the fourth root. Unless you are talking about a 100m RCS vs like 1m its not a huge factor. 5 vs 5.5 is the same thing.

 

 

 

Hmm... Yes, you are right since it is the area that receives a specific power of a wave that decreases by a power of 2 with range. The effect should be neglible then, which would give a detection range of about said 55-60nm for the V5 and 60-65nm for the V7.

[Harlikwin]

51 minutes ago, TobiasA said:

 

Hmm... Yes, you are right since it is the area that receives a specific power of a wave that decreases by a power of 2 with range. The effect should be neglible then, which would give a detection range of about said 55-60nm for the V5 and 60-65nm for the V7.

 both ways

[TobiasA]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb Harlikwin:

 both ways

Of course.

 

I'm just curious if they will give us the V7 or reduce to the numbers of the V5. Or if said numbers are for the V7....

[Harlikwin]

1 minute ago, TobiasA said:

Of course.

 

I'm just curious if they will give us the V7 or reduce to the numbers of the V5. Or if said numbers are for the V7....

 

V5 is correct for the viper we have.

I'll not that the viper is also missing its longer range radar modes currently. so maybe that 77 number is some abstraction to "represent" those modes.

[Beirut]

Damn these free trial periods! I'm back into the F-16 again. 

 

I bought it on Steam weeks ago and returned it because it didn't give me those warm fuzzy feelings - and because I hadn't used it for more than two-hours - but now that there is a two-week trial, as opposed to Steam's two-hour trial, I find myself feeling the fuzzies with the Viper. How annoying. Love the speed and the visibility, though I wish the canopy had markings like in Falcon4, but there is no denying it's a helluva cool plane. 

 

 

I still see the Hornet and Harrier as my A2G planes with Mavericks and JDAMS and such, but for high speed hit & runs with dumb bombs, this thing is a bee-yatch! And of course there is the A2A, which I do little of, but I might get into it more. If the present sale moves to Steam, the Viper might be a keeper. 

 

You gotta love having a DCS hangar full of cool planes.