Jump to content

Skysurfer

Members
  • Posts

    1050
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Skysurfer

  1. Any news on his front? I heard it was fairly close like two months ago...
  2. They are coming but who knows when at this point. Originally it was "later this winter" at the end of last year.
  3. Yeah, naval version given the Forrestal and A-6 only makes sense for the era. As well as having Jester AI.
  4. Yeah, I have mine on an axis on my CM2 throttle and have not noticed any difference - I have always been using them either full DOWN or UP and never in any position inbetween.
  5. Yeah if this is the serverside tacview then it's legit, if it's clientside then this is not what happened on the server.
  6. Ejection seat safety levers will now animate properly in exterior view and mirrors Not the case sadly. (and yes the lever is down behind me the imagine was limited by the forum upload size.)
  7. Yeah, I'm fine with presets for the time being as long as we can have the new fog and rain effects. Clouds moving with wind would also be quite nice.
  8. Yup, if anything the SD-10 is currently probably a little too good to be true and the AMRAAM (C model) probably not good enough in terms of CCM and notch resistence (MPRF anyone?). I have had several amraams just be beamed and fly past behind the target or simply notched sub 5nm, well within the kinetic NEZ. And it's not like there is footage of a 54C hit a highly maneuvering target doing a last ditch spli S maneuver (famous VF-11 firings). The publically confirmed Iranian data on the early 54A's is also rather solid (keep in mind those were probably even downgraded A's).
  9. Ok but what metric are you using to measure this? Mere anecdotal evidence? I have seen and flown in TACT matches and most the time people eat long range, 60+ nm Pheonixes on the first press because they don't know what they are doing. Either that or they don't expect max range shots. Same applies to your usual airquake servers, it's usually new or unexperienced people dying to the Phoenix who don't respect the range enough and only defend once they get a launch warning. Or don't defend at all even in some cases, thinking it's way too far to be a factor. And guess what, the F-14 was literally made for BVR and those BVR shots - it's literally where its advantage lies. Same can be said about the F-15 or Mig-31 (if we had one flyable). 16's and Hornets fill a completely different role and have their streghts elsewhere, namely in avionics and great SA.
  10. Additional LAU-7 launchers, the internals of the TCS are compeltely untextured - as well as some smaller model corrections here and there. And the wheel struts should have a metal shine to them, currently they are sort of beige and blend in with the rest of the strut.
  11. Well, I can agree in the sense that the missile code in DCS (which still stems from LOMAC days) is the main issue here and the issues get magnified by newer long range missiles even more. Nothing HB can really do there. If anything the Phoenix is still on the older API and bleeds way too much speed when lofting and de-lofting. The "silent" launches issue could not be realiably reproduced by HB and many others and needs proper evidence (video + tachview file) to make a solid case. You also shouldn't rely on RWR to see and defend a missile - not how it works IRL (since this is what you are tryint to simulate). I can notch Phoenixes and AMRAAMS in a Mig-21 if I have an AWACS/GCI bearing or even a radar lock - simply having SA and knowing where the bandit is goes a long way. DCS simply won't be a competitive or balanced paltform ever, even due to the fact that each 3rd party has different standards and most modules release in Early Access - if they came out almost 100% done with all subsystems, ECM and all the jazz implemented properly it would probably be a different story. I have mostly stepped away from PvP in DCS due to to ever changing nature of missiles and them breaking every other patch, which is simply annoying to say the least when it goes on for several years. If anything the AIM-54A/C should have better kinematics (due to smoother guidence and loft trajectories of the new API) and in the case of the C not go for chaff easily or almost at all. I can also agree with the fact that ECM effects on the Tomcat still are not implemented. This aspect should be a minimum requirement for all new DCS modules in my opinion and as primarily a Tomcat driver I want to be affected by ECM and have all the real life shortcomings of the AWG-9 and the plane itself. It's a challenge. Having SA in the Tomcat is nothing like in the Hornet where you literally have an early sensor fusion suite and all sorts of off-board data.
  12. Have Heatblur ever stuck to what they said in the past? I wouldn't be surprised if that new fancy Typhoon model is the reason why the Forrestal is delayed and Tomcat is still missing textures to this day. I'm not expecting a completely bug free module, that does not exist but there are various WIP areas rn. which they have aknowledged and features that are on the list.
  13. What does it matter? There is at least one unannounced module in the works and given the magnitude of this undertaking even if there were 3-4 other planes planned for the future we wouldn't see them for the enxt 5-10 years. And I think the Phoon might even still be pretty far away and not come out next year. Personally, I would *really* hope to see the Tomcat and Viggen both leave EA this year and tick all the marks as well as fix most major reported bugs and issues. There are still long ways to go with those modules before we even start talking about yet another in-house aircraft, no matter how shiny or highly demanded it might be.
  14. Also, with the LPI Captor-E voming there really is no real need for an IRST.
  15. I wish ED would rework and implement different rocket motor effects soon since having the same effect for every type of missile is kind of weird and very wrong.
  16. Zaslon is still a PD radar - the beam is just simply formed and steered electronically - freq. and beam agility and splitting like with an AESA doesn't really apply here. But yes, when it comes to the actual guidence methods and components of the R-33 it's one big speculation.
  17. Yeah that is just DCS missiles being all over the place, only a few being CFD'd and on the new API. It is what it is.
  18. Also, the Mig-31 has a fairly large RCS - so setting the target size to large might be a smart idea so your 54 can go active sooner. It's technically still a SARH vs ARH fight so you should be abe to win unless the R-33 somehow really has a ton more energy and speed.
  19. Don't barrel roll. You can crank and dive post TWS launch, abort at the MAR for the R-33, get into a notch then potentially snap-shot a 20nm Phoenix in Pulse STT and flow cold. Personally I hever really found the AI Mig-31's to be too big of an issue unless they changed something - the R-33 also should not be outranging a Phoenix like that by a substantial margin. Make use of your jammer as well. I will run some tests myself against AI and see what I can find then post the tacview here. So stay tuned I guess.
  20. Yeah, which doesn't really matter for DCS as every jet in DCS represents a perfect airframe with potentially an unlimited munitions stock, unless set otherwise in the mission.
  21. Jammer, off-angle press, turn in shoot, crank.
  22. So it will be updated/implemented before the Hornet leaves EA, confirm?
  23. Hello, in the past I saw Wags or another developer mention the ongoing work on a new pilot model for our Hornet with proper US NAVY flight gear and improved animations (similar to the HB Tomcat). Could someone from the ED team please confirm that this is still planned and being worked on, since there has been no more word on it ever since it was first mentioned. Thanks.
×
×
  • Create New...