Jump to content

Tiger II for 2.7


Mizzy

Recommended Posts

Persian Gulf is too modern for Iraq war, anyway. The Dubai shoreline was nothing like that in the 80s, nevermind the skyline. PG, as it is, is a 2010+ map, suitable only for the new A-10 and the Harrier (which, for some bizarre reason, was modeled as a 2010s variant). Dubai in particular exploded in 2000s, here's how it was in the 80s:

717be971082eb7c2348fa87b08a1e04b.jpg


Edited by Dragon1-1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the DCS paradox: if you want to simulate something accurately, if it's military related you can do it only if it's at least 15 years old, while for cities and landscapes you can be current.

Thus, you fly 15-20 years old airplanes in a 2020 scenery.

Why not to choose a 20 years old scenery? This should be asked to ED.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'm not interested in changing the variant of the F-5E, though preferably, it should be accurate to something in particular rather than a hybrid.

 

I'm mostly interested in correcting bugs, especially major ones like the engine bug, and the RWR search mode bug.

 

Past that, a graphical rework of the interior and exterior (especially concerning graphical representation of damage), and a major improvement to the RADAR, as well as implementing missing functionality to the RWR.


Edited by Northstar98
  • Like 5

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/27/2021 at 5:13 AM, nessuno0505 said:

This is the DCS paradox: if you want to simulate something accurately, if it's military related you can do it only if it's at least 15 years old, while for cities and landscapes you can be current.

Thus, you fly 15-20 years old airplanes in a 2020 scenery.

Why not to choose a 20 years old scenery? This should be asked to ED.

Why would you ask this? The real only difference would be a population change which means some neighborhoods would still be parking lots or wooded areas. I've lived in neighborhoods that have remained basically unchanged but expanded on in 150+ years.  in NYC alone its remain fairly unchanged in the last 50 years save for the WTC neighborhood. Kinda pointless.

Intel 13900k @ 5.8ghz | 64gb GSkill Trident Z | MSI z790 Meg ACE| Zotac RTX4090 | Asus 1000w psu | Slaw RX Viper 2 pedals | VKB Gunfighter Mk3 MCE Ultimate + STECS/ Virpil MongoosT50+ MongoosT50CM | K-51 Collective + custom AH64D TEDAC | HP Reverb G2 | Windows 11 Pro | |Samsung Odyssey G9 | Next Level Racing Flight Seat Pro

The Boeing MQ-25A Sting Ray = Dirt Devil with wings
 My wallpaper and skins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/27/2021 at 11:07 AM, Dragon1-1 said:

Persian Gulf is too modern for Iraq war, anyway. The Dubai shoreline was nothing like that in the 80s, nevermind the skyline. PG, as it is, is a 2010+ map, suitable only for the new A-10 and the Harrier (which, for some bizarre reason, was modeled as a 2010s variant). Dubai in particular exploded in 2000s, here's how it was in the 80s:

717be971082eb7c2348fa87b08a1e04b.jpg

 

 

 

 

So what would be even the point of PG map if it doesn't represent the region during practically the only serious military conflict? Fictional scenarios only? Strange choice.

It would be like: let's make a Vietnam map. But you know what, WW2 era or year 2000...


Edited by kseremak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fictional, although Iran is currently doing great at providing a fodder for such scenarios, like what Baltic Dragon is doing with his Hormuz series. It doesn't take much to imagine the region will blow up one of these days. I'd definitely prefer a more Gulf War focused map, but we have the one with a fancy post-2010 Dubai.

 

7 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

Why would you ask this? The real only difference would be a population change which means some neighborhoods would still be parking lots or wooded areas. I've lived in neighborhoods that have remained basically unchanged but expanded on in 150+ years.  in NYC alone its remain fairly unchanged in the last 50 years save for the WTC neighborhood. Kinda pointless.

In some places, like Caucasus, what you say is true (in fact, it's about the correct timeframe for our modules). In PG, the most prominent part of the map was utterly transformed in recent years. Syria is a mixed bag, most of the countryside hasn't changed, big cities have some recent landmarks, not to mention they expanded in the recent years, as well. Airports and airbases are the big ones, those in Caucasus region are stuck in post-Soviet state (as they indeed were in mid-2000s), while in other maps there might be significant changes. I'm not familiar with the history of those regions enough to identify the changes off the top of my head, but if you know what to look for, you can likely find many examples (of course, it's easier to overlook if the changes are not as egregious as Dubai's expansion).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/28/2021 at 6:40 PM, kseremak said:

 

 

 

So what would be even the point of PG map if it doesn't represent the region during practically the only serious military conflict? Fictional scenarios only? Strange choice.

It would be like: let's make a Vietnam map. But you know what, WW2 era or year 2000...

 

Some of us ask what's the point of a PG map that doesn't have Iraq or Kuwait. Or a Caucuses map without the Crimea, OR Northern Turkey. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RustBelt said:

Some of us ask what's the point of a PG map that doesn't have Iraq or Kuwait. Or a Caucuses map without the Crimea, OR Northern Turkey. 


Haven’t you seen the many missions for those Maps that are already on User’s Files? ... seems plenty of mission designers can come up with interesting missions in spite those areas not being on the map. 😇

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Baltic Pirate said:

F5 is pretty good as it is. It could however use a VHF NAV and ILS receiver with FD needles on the ADI and or a GPS navigator. I would wager the Brazilian would require extensive work if not a totally new model.

It could also do with a face lift and use the graphical enhancements of 2.7 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

also needs a GPU-5/A 😙

  • Like 1

Intel 13900k @ 5.8ghz | 64gb GSkill Trident Z | MSI z790 Meg ACE| Zotac RTX4090 | Asus 1000w psu | Slaw RX Viper 2 pedals | VKB Gunfighter Mk3 MCE Ultimate + STECS/ Virpil MongoosT50+ MongoosT50CM | K-51 Collective + custom AH64D TEDAC | HP Reverb G2 | Windows 11 Pro | |Samsung Odyssey G9 | Next Level Racing Flight Seat Pro

The Boeing MQ-25A Sting Ray = Dirt Devil with wings
 My wallpaper and skins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Baltic Pirate said:

F5 is pretty good as it is. It could however use a VHF NAV and ILS receiver with FD needles on the ADI and or a GPS navigator. I would wager the Brazilian would require extensive work if not a totally new model.

Why? Its TACAN/ILS with needles works fine for any weather that this bird would EVER actually launch into

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pmiceli said:

Why? Its TACAN/ILS with needles works fine for any weather that this bird would EVER actually launch into

You say TACAN ILS needles. For some reason I've not been able to get the ILS to work, if t has it. They are both distinctly different systems. I'll have to do some research the F5 has something hidden in it. But as far as I know, it has TACAN and ADF and that's it.  If it had a VHF NAV (like ILS), that be located on the right side pedestal and the NAVIGATION MODE SELECTOR would have the additional VHF option. One has precision approach system in the Mig-21 that is the one you would most likely face. You could always do a PAR approach if you have a live controller working with you. A TACAN approach procedure is at best comparable to a VOR approach with associated high minima of 800-1000ft and a 2000m visibility requirement.

 

It is also not the weather you launch, it is the weather you recover, be that after take off or after mission. I fly in real life so I tend to take weather into account with DCS flying and with more dynamic weather options available, I would say that it be certainly worth the consideration. Just to add for a CAT1 ILS your minima would be a DH of 200ft and visibility 750m. That is certainly weather one would launch into.


Edited by Baltic Pirate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Baltic Pirate said:

You say TACAN ILS needles. For some reason I've not been able to get the ILS to work, if t has it. They are both distinctly different systems. I'll have to do some research the F5 has something hidden in it. But as far as I know, it has TACAN and ADF and that's it.  If it had a VHF NAV (like ILS), that be located on the right side pedestal and the NAVIGATION MODE SELECTOR would have the additional VHF option. One has precision approach system in the Mig-21 that is the one you would most likely face. You could always do a PAR approach if you have a live controller working with you. A TACAN approach procedure is at best comparable to a VOR approach with associated high minima of 800-1000ft and a 2000m visibility requirement.

 

It is also not the weather you launch, it is the weather you recover, be that after take off or after mission. I fly in real life so I tend to take weather into account with DCS flying and with more dynamic weather options available, I would say that it be certainly worth the consideration. Just to add for a CAT1 ILS your minima would be a DH of 200ft and visibility 750m. That is certainly weather one would launch into.

 

You don't need a flight director for Cat I minima. And in DCS you don't really need an ILS.

 

Its pretty easy to just do TACAN down to those minima. You have DME. Hold the descent rate for a 3 degree glideslope.

 

A much bigger problem is the lack of compatible NAVAIDS in the maps for the aircraft flying there.

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pmiceli said:

You don't need a flight director for Cat I minima. And in DCS you don't really need an ILS.

 

Its pretty easy to just do TACAN down to those minima. You have DME. Hold the descent rate for a 3 degree glideslope.

 

A much bigger problem is the lack of compatible NAVAIDS in the maps for the aircraft flying there.

 

I don't have a horse in this race beyond wishing the F-5 would get an uplift too, but you can literally throw a tacan down anywhere in the map editor.   Or just set a vehicle to transmit in a way that lets you direction find off of it.  Unless you mean something else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Fenin said:

 

I don't have a horse in this race beyond wishing the F-5 would get an uplift too, but you can literally throw a tacan down anywhere in the map editor.   Or just set a vehicle to transmit in a way that lets you direction find off of it.  Unless you mean something else?

Sure, I can do that but it doesn't seem to be a priority for the servers operators where I fly.

 

So, in lieu of trying to convince server operators to place NAVAIDS, having them built into the map would be nice. 

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, pmiceli said:

Sure, I can do that but it doesn't seem to be a priority for the servers operators where I fly.

 

So, in lieu of trying to convince server operators to place NAVAIDS, having them built into the map would be nice. 

The DCS Community largely balks at pretend situations (funny that.)  I agree with you, I think you should understand that.  I firmly believe every airfield should have the option to have these things set up at a buttons press.  

 

The reality is that this situation will never, ever, happen.  The 'purists' would call for blood, no matter what reason you have for wanting a tacan at a russian airbase by default.  Your only hope is to be a loud enough voice that the mission maker sees the sense of it.  Especially when the answer from official sources will almost definitely be to use the system in game already to deal with the problem.  

 

Mostly unrelated to this topic but the DCS community needs some SERIOUS mission making guides.  Someone with an internet connection way better than my own and the time to do it to sit down and create hilariously in depth guides on all the things you can do.  The documentation is there, but reading manuals is a hot take, even around these parts.

 

Back on topic, pls gib prettier F-5E textures.  I guess.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, pmiceli said:

You don't need a flight director for Cat I minima. And in DCS you don't really need an ILS.

 

Its pretty easy to just do TACAN down to those minima. You have DME. Hold the descent rate for a 3 degree glideslope.

 

A much bigger problem is the lack of compatible NAVAIDS in the maps for the aircraft flying there.

No. FD is not required for CAT I approach by regulator on certain civilian ops  (For us it is mandatory when flown with AP), but it is really nice to have. You don't need the NDB either but it is useful. Come to think of it, neither do you really need the TACAN receiver, but again it is useful. I find the addition of an ILS receiver also a useful addition.

 

ILS is something many or most later F5's came with as standard including our current model. Funny enough some models like the F-16 and Jf-17 got it as well as the ICLS on F-18, Av-8B AWLS etc. So why not add the feature.

 

 As for NAV's well as they say, you can place NAV's around. However you can place these where you want on the map.

 

Thread was about what people want for the F5 if that there would be mods. ILS is what I would like to see regardless oh how much you like it or dislike the idea. Otherwise perhaps the improved radar display allowing it to be used as a TV for AGM-65's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about just fixing the RWR?!?

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

AKA Venturi

 

 

"You can tell a bomber pilot by the spread across his rear, and by the ring around his eye, you can tell a bombadier; You can tell a navigator by his maps and charts and such, and you can tell a fighter pilot - but you can't tell him much!" -523 TFS Fighter Pilots Song Book

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A nice update from ED that we could expect is an update on the APQ-159 Radar and display, this would allow us to use AGM-65B Maverick on the F-5E.
APQ-159 Radar Display has two integrated modes :
- Television mode where it would display the seeker picture from the AGM-65.
- Radar mode where it should be the same as the one we currently have in game.

Thank's to mattebubben.
More informations on this topic : 

 

0959107-v20-16.png

image_2021-08-08_194505.png


Edited by Wolf4Pm
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...