Jump to content

Dee-Jay

Members
  • Content Count

    373
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dee-Jay

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 01/01/1980

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    Falcon4 BMS
    Rise Of Flight
    Space Shuttle Mission 2007
    DCS UH-1 (Good!) / SA342 Gazelle (Baaad!) & F-16C (hopefully will worth the investment someday!?)
  • Location
    https://www.benchmarksims.org
  • Interests
    Flight simulation / Astronomy / DJing
  • Occupation
    https://youtu.be/YEaXo-IJfV0
  • Website
    https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/member.php?135-Dee-Jay

Recent Profile Visitors

3068 profile views
  1. Tell me in MP which airbase and maybe someday (?) I could visit you during one possible stopover and joint exercise. ...
  2. Not surprising. 30Kts is very high speed for taxing. Do no turn above 10-15Kts. And I am speaking about slight tuns. For more reduce speed below 10Kts.
  3. It is incredible guys ... after all those posts you still do not understand!? The USAF F-16C Blk50 can "carry" 4 HARM (technically, it is not the problem you can attach the missiles on pylons 4/7, it can be done for static displays for instance ... and the documentation is in accordance with this) ... but ... - USAF F-16C Blk50 are not wired to allow the use of them. (They are attached and that's it => dead weight). - USAF F-16C Blk50 are not certified to launch them (and, we are not 100% sure for now, but regular USAF F-16C Blk50 are maybe even not certified to fly wi
  4. Mirage 2000 ... In France we have C,B, -5, D and N models ... Other nations have also Mirage 2000, -9, EG, -5EBA ... etc ... Those are not the same planes. Each are VERY different. RAZBAM is simulating (rather correctly) the Mirage 2000C. F-16C/MLU looks the same, but blocks and tapes updates makes them VERY different also. They are not the same jet fighters. Question is: Is DCS F-16 going to be an USAF F-16C Blk50 simulation or not?
  5. I bet on that one also. AFAIK, It is the only document they could refer to in order to went on their conclusion. As simple as this.
  6. "Be careful" to such kind of shortcut Furiz. Basically you are right. But ... It is easy to know, by discussing "off line", if a member of a forum if reliable or not. Or at least in good faith. VERY easy actually. The "counter example" it also true ... sometimes : an "SME" is not always that much right as we could think. Most of the time, for good reasons. For example, let take a pilot, he do not know everything about his plane. And on many cases, a engine specialist or a crew chief ... will have more reliable info. and even sometimes a "simple" passionate because some ppl read all
  7. A flight certification is not a matter of peace time vs war time. It is not allowed to fly with. Period. @RandomToten: "Display" is not necessarily for "public" (regular civilian) and can be (quite often BTW) for high rank authorities or industrial representatives. Live ordnance are not dangerous for public. Much less than an hydrazine leak. Are they actually true live missiles (?) We see an orange ring. Aren't they actually bronze color? ... I don't see what point you are trying to prove ... (?) ... you won't prove anythin
  8. Yes absolutely, it could be a live missile (but I must admit that I don't see well on your picture). I would even say that, if test conducted was about the 4/7 perfo and flight test, it shall better be a "live" missile to get the exact weight and GC than is real conditions. But as you know, it still do not tells us if they ever been launched from that station, even from test Edwards test a/c. (But I humbly think that at least those one were modified to allow the launch/jett test. Or at least jettison test, but this is only a personal guess with not a single clues).
  9. Yep confirmed! ... That is good news, it helps a lot conditions for formation flight. Thank you Bignewy for info and correction.
  10. Sorry ... I went a bit too fast ... It is ok with MK-20, but if your 1st post is showing CBU-87/97, then no, it is "not possible" (at least, not allowed). According to the docs, you can have CBU-87/97 on a TER pylon mounted on stat 4/6 only when carrying an AGM-88 (or nothing) on 3/7. Otherwise, if you want a full CBU-87/97, it is 8 maximum (2 + 2 + 2 + 2). On your picture , (on the F-16) the "6" and "5" should not by there.
  11. If I am not wrong (it could depends on the munition type, to me what we see on the pic above are MK-20), the configuration shown on your 1st post is possible. However, you won't fly much more than 20min. And if you'd like a chance to react to any SAM or AA threat, either you jettison your stores, or you accept the punishment. EDIT: Limitations would be: 550KIAS / M0.95 maximum ... +4/-1Gs maximum.
  12. It is also possible that even test airframes were not wired either and were only used for in flight aerodynamics tests (?) ... so far *we* (I) don't really know. On the picture, IIRC color code, both missiles on 4&6 have no rocket motor, and only one has a warhead (of seeker) ... Honestly I do not remember the color code (IIRC, blue is practice, brown is live), and marked sections (I think it is rocket motor, warhead, seeker). I've found this but I am no sure it applies to missiles (?) https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/4-30-13/appf.
  13. I think that opening/closing rates are still off. (IIRC, should be roughly around 2s - 3s to open and about 6s to close (on ground). But I must admit that i didn't checked the very last update.
  14. Don't use NWS above 50Kts ... even with cautious. For turns, limit your speed at about 5-10Kts (no need to check your INS to get a speed, do it simply visually, about the speed of a man walking or driving bicycle).
  15. I do confirm that in the plane, time it has to be in Zulu. If not synced on Zulu time, some systems should not work properly.
×
×
  • Create New...