Jump to content

Invisibull

Members
  • Posts

    550
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Invisibull

  1. Same here.  Our squadron hasn't used the Marianas map hardly at all due to this bug that you've found an excellent workaround for, and the not so great performance of the map in general.  Thx a bunch. 

  2. Xeno, I got impatient!  Interesting results so far.  If I fly directly toward SP, and fire harms when SAM is 10nm away, harms immediately make a sharp turn and will kill SAM.  If I however, fly toward SAM and fire on it with SP 10 miles away, harms will fly right over SAM toward WP.   Just tried from 12nm and they made same sharp turn (90d).  See smoke plumes.   OK, just tried from 15 miles and another hit!    image.pngimage.png

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  3. On 8/15/2021 at 11:41 AM, BIGNEWY said:

    The colours are very WIP and were not even meant to be in this build.

    Note that the colours used depend on the year and if an MLU jet. Based on SME feedback, it is not accurate for our particular Viper. As always, we continue to investigate to find the most accurate information.

     

    thanks

    Thx Can't ask for more. 

  4. 8 hours ago, Eaglewings said:

    I think the choice of color on the FCR is so limited to what they really are in the F-16 ED is implementing. I am pretty sure Ed will do it as it is in the real aircraft.
     

    I'd be fine with keeping the proper color, just expressed in an easier to see way.  Perhaps more contrast on the scope or something? 

    7 hours ago, WHOGX5 said:

    The main issue is that the MFD brightness in the DCS F-16 is incredibly weak. The MFDs always look dim during daytime. If purple symbology would be invisible during daytime like it is in DCS, it would never have made it into the real F-16. And simply changing the colour of the symbology would be an incredibly lazy and unrealistic workaround.

    Agree totally.  As I said in another response, I don't actually need there to be a different color, just need to be able to see the contact after Fox3. 

  5. I understand from another post that the new FCR symbology is a work in progress.  That being the case, I would hope another color could be used to represent a bandit that's been fired on in RWS.  The shade of purple being used now makes the contact all but disappear from my scope due to lack of contrast with B scope's black background.

     

    Thx 

    • Like 2
  6. On 7/30/2021 at 12:57 AM, Eagle7907 said:

    Bookmarked. Thanks for making this.

     

    You're welcome!

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

     

    On 7/29/2021 at 7:27 PM, 504Blade said:

    Thanks for the mission, ill fire this up tomorrow and take a look 👍🏻

     

    My pleasure

  7. Hi Folks!

     

    This training mission will allow you to create a randomized bandit environment over Syria, which you'll find useful in practicing your BVR skills either alone or with your friends.  The 23rd is also on the lookout for active Viper drivers who want to fly the Viper by the book and can spare 2-4 hrs a week.  Come by our Discord and say hi if you're interested.  https://discord.gg/Py4ckB3zAT

     

    Thx and Enjoy!,

    Invisibull 

     

    Update: I've included a BVR trainer (Sv1), which will include only 1 and 2 ship flights to fly against.  This is definitely more appropriate for those wanting to do this practice offline by themselves.  Also, added to the bandit possibilities are now Iranian F-14A's and Chinese J-17's.  Your comments are much appreciated and will help me to make further improvements. 

     

    VIPER BVR TRAINER_v3.2.miz

    VIPER BVR TRAINER_Sv1.miz

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 4
  8. Hi All, The 23rd Fighting Hawks, a DCS Viper squadron, is re-forming and we're looking for people to fill the ranks.  We're a bit on the hardcore side to the point that we're developing SOP's directly from the f-16 Multicommand handbooks vol's 3 and 5.

     

    The ultimate goal of this squadron is to make new friends, learn and have fun by way of having immersive, and realistic multi-flight missions done by the book as much as is possible in a sim.

     

    If you're a pleasant person, mature (in manner not necessarily in age), love the Viper and have 2 or so hours a week to give to your passion (addiction) then you should definitely stop by our discord and join in the fun.

    https://discord.gg/Py4ckB3zAT

  9. 2 hours ago, Yo-Yo said:

    And you forgot to mention that even at the same IAS CLmax at low altitude is way more due to Mach number difference. So, the load factor available at low altitude and 9 km will be significantly different even at equal IAS.

    Hi Yo-Yo,  I'm definitely not trying to suggest that flight characteristics shouldn't change for the worse as altitude increases, because I know they do, no matter which air frame we're discussing.  What I'm arguing is that to my understanding, these characteristics, i.e., roll rate, handling in a turn, etc,  should not be degrading to the level they are in the current build  based on the flight testing data i've provided and anecdotal evidence (not as compelling I'd agree, but still worthy of examination).

     

    Thx for your response.    

  10. hi Grafspee,

     

    In his book, Johnson (27 kill ACE) discusses in more than a few places how his P-47 handled at high altitude.  He specifically talks about how nothing rolls better and about how up there, he's able to maneuver sharply when it's required.  When I'm up at 30K, the Jug doesn't roll very well at all and seems to really struggle in the turn beyond what Johnson gives the sense of in his book. 

     

    Then there's this:


     

    Quote

     

    K.   High Altitude Trials

           Several flights were made over 30,000 ft. and no objectionable characteristics were noticed. The airplane performs and handles very similar to the way it does at lower altitudes. Sufficient heat from the engine and heater keep the pilot comfortable.

     

    http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p47-26167.html

     

    This is obviously not the case with our Jug. Not yet anyway. 

  11. After reading "Thunderbolt!: The P-47," Fighter Ace, Robert Johnson's autobiography, I'm more sure than ever that high altitude handling of the Jug is way off.  In his book, Johnson goes into detail about how the Jug flew when as high as Angels 35, and none of it squares with what we have right now.   

  12. 1 hour ago, pmiceli said:

    Any airplane flying above 30K handles like crap. Everything is relative so the other guys have having an equally difficult time of it.

     

     Thx for your reply.  Mustang handles way better up there imo.   As I said above, I can't imagine a premier high alt plane being quite that unstable flying where it was designed to fly.   I get that the air is thinner and that I should expect things to be a bit more bouncy, and that's fine, but it's the degree of instability that leaves me questioning the FM in that regimen.  Thx again.

  13. Hey Guys,

     

    Just wondering if how the Jug handles at 30K and higher is anywhere close to release state.  Seems to me that the P-47's purpose, especially early on, was to dominate at high altitude against German fighters. That being the case, I simply can't imagine pilots spending hours on bomber escort missions in what, at this point in development, feels a lot like riding a piece of cork bobbing around in rough seas. 

     

    Any thoughts would be appreciated.

×
×
  • Create New...