Jump to content

bies

Members
  • Content Count

    706
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by bies

  1. Is that true? Do you have this charts? What is more F-15C would have to deal with additional mass of the airframe. I mean i would like F-15C engines to be more powerful than common figures for uninstalled thrust, but it's hard to believe. I would be really glad to be proven wrong.
  2. F-15C with PW229 would have Streak Eagle performance! It could rival Eurofighter in acceleration, though i'm not sure it would supercruise, it was aerodynamic concept of late 1960s. And even then it was a little bit conservative compared to even more impressive North American project with blended body aerodynamic configuration. I read "F-15 Eagle Engaged" by Doug Dildy USAF F-15 pilot. He said first F-15A had the most impressive kinematic performance having lighter airframe than "C" and famous VMAX switch still working increasing thrust to whooping 27,000lb per en
  3. I thought I'm the only one disappointed it's not classic analog, manual AH-64A with less electronic gizmos but better flight performance. And far more interesting history. BTW @Alpenwolfthanks for fantastic job you are doing here!
  4. Having both Viggen and Tomcat I'm more that sure whatever you do it's going to be absolutely fantastic, Heatblur's work ethic, honesty and passion are unparalleled. Thanks for your work!
  5. Do not compare War Thunder to DCS in DCS forum, it's not allowed according to Forum Rules and honestly i see a good reason for that. Go to Chit-Chat section with that. WT topic in this thread is over.
  6. What means not using the systems in case of AV-8B? "Pinky promise" i won't use nose FLIR sensor, i won't turn on FLIR on HUD, i won't use NVG - even if I got confused in the dark, i won't use digital moving map - even if I got lost, won't use full engine power, just restrict myself to let's say 95% RPM. "Pinky promise" i won't. It would be ridiculous. Even A-6E SWIP differed a lot less from 1980s A-6E TRAM than digital post 1991 AV-8B than Cold War AV-8.
  7. That's what I'm talking about the whole time: some people care about realism or historical accuracy and some not. And all have right to do so, we are all different. 2017 AV-8B in 1990 scenario is absolutely ridiculous. Just a small hint: in 1990 and earlier AV-8 didn't have nose FLIR sensor, didn't have FLIR integrated HUD, didn't have NVG provision, didn't have digital moving map, didn't have new more powerful engine etc. Pre 1991 it was an aircraft with totally different capabilities. MiG-15 in WW2 scenario would be more realistic than our digital AV-8B in Cold W
  8. So you should prefer TRAM then. Classic TRAM fit 1980 to 1997. It's 17 years. SWIP fit 1991-1997. It's 6 years. And TRAM was always majority of the Intruder fleet. How many SWIP aircrafts ever served? 40 planes?
  9. It seems only Viggen has this problem. All other modules from this period are pure Cold War and nobody is forced to /pretend/ - MiG-21bis, F-14A-94GR and -135GR, F-5E, C-101, UH-1H, Mirage, MiG-19, L-39. Also all modules@Berserkmentioned: - are pure Cold War and no one is forced to /pretend/. Viggen may be the only one and that's why people ask how to make Cold War AJ-37 out of it. I can only repeat: some people want to sacrifice more realism and historical accuracy and some would like to stay on more realistic and historic
  10. Probably because 1990s SWIP with new Integrated Missile Panel, new AN/ALR-67A(V) RWR, new warning lights and new fuzing panel would be: unrealistic and non-historical at Cold War / 1980s servers like Alpenwolf or BlueFlag and singleplayer missions at the same time completely outdated and also unrealistic and non-historical at 2000s JSOW/AMRAAM servers and singleplayer missions. Are this few 1990s upgrades and ability to use by far the most boring weapon in it's arsenal - SLAM worth ruining realism and historical accuracy in nearly all scenarios in both SP and MP?
  11. No, it's simply not true. TRAM could, in 1990s, only drop SLAM but it needed SWIP wingman to guide them. And in 1980s this weapon didn't exist. It was not "one guy" Francesco "Paco" Chierici was A-6 veteran and he new what he was talking about. Desert Storm wasn't high threat environment after Iraq being unable to attack Intruders with any fighters and it's C&C and most of air defence being previously destroyed by Tomahawks, F-117s, Apaches and B-52s. Hight threat environment which "Paco" described was symmetrical enemy with numerous capable inte
  12. That's right. MiG-25 was designed as high altitude interceptor but it doesn't mean it couldn't perform air combat at all. Especially upgraded "PD" from 1979-1980 which had different radar able to look down (which was important considering MiG-25 typical operational altitude). MiG-25 with it's altitude/speed performance and huge R-40 missiles could utilize interesting tactic, obviously not squeezing Gs. Plus it had nearly identical cockpit as MiG-21 so everyone having Bis would feel familiar. And with analog avionics and manual fligh control it would be challe
  13. And let's be honest, Cold War 1980s A-6E making low level strike - without having standoff weapon, performing terrain fallowing flight, at bad weather or at night, avoiding enemy radars and interceptors, deep over enemy terrain, cooperating with navigator to be at specific point and orientation over the target, maneuvering to fit on a small weapon envelope and manually aim and drop unguided bombs using FLIR and radar, dodging AAA fire, seeing your bomb explosions all around you and targets being shredded to pieces. Then running for your life trying to lose possible pursuers in dark narrow cany
  14. Exactly, their 3rd party A-7E has been officially announced by ED. In Desert Storm 9 out of 11 A-6E squadrons used exclusively TRAM and 2 used SWIP together with TRAM. Yes Desert Storm was the last operation A-6 and A-7 were able to operate in high threat environment - but only after most Iraq air defense had been mostly paralyzed and destroyed by Navy Tomahawks, Army AH-64s, USAF B-52s, RAF Tornadoes and USAF F-117s and under total undisputed air dominance. And only task A-6 performed at first night was to release decoy drones from long range.
  15. SWIP could do low level strike in high threat environment under one condition - going back in time at least a decade. Real life A-6 pilot stated SWIP can't do that because it was not survivable when it became operational and it's mission disappeared. Or maybe i didn't understand you and you are just proposing using 1990s SWIP in 1980s just restricting it's weapon? But the last sentence is absolutely not correct - TRAM and SWIP didn't serve in the same amount of conflicts. Not even close. A-6E TRAM served in all US Navy engagement since 1980.
  16. Yes, that's exactly my point and that's why I woul like to see a Cold Ear Intruder when it shined and has it's purpose. Standoff weapon was what killed A-6. In era of standoff weapon every aircraft, even the smallest and lightest fighter could do exactly the same as heavy specialsed attack aircrafts. Why in 1990s sending slow and heavy intruder with i.e. SLAM if small fast Hornet can do exactly the same plus it can perform air combat at the same time, plus it will not restrict carrier space for specialised attack aircrafts. That's why navy retired them, time of low level penetra
  17. Absolutely yes. Soviet maps will considerably increase the realism and atmosphere of the Mi-24 - Soviet helicopter.
  18. Two things about MiG-17, first it would be whole lot faster to make than any module made from scratch because ED already has MiG-15, plus MiG-17 is very simple plane. Second, now it would lack context but as soon as some other Vietnam era plane will be in DCS, like F-8 Crusader, MiG-17 will be the easiest and fastest (and most realistic) way to make Vietnam era RED counterpart.
  19. He asked about "Mid-Cold War / Viet Nam era planes (1955 -1975)" "Su-24MK" entered production in 1988, 2 years before the end of the Cold War. First basic variant Su-24 with "Puma" navigation system, "Orbita" computer and shorter fuselage entered service in 1975 after official trials. That being said I would love to have Su-24M from late Cold War 1980s when it's mission was all weather low level penetration strike against NATO targets and forces in East Germany. Just Like Tornado IDS and F-111F for NATO. In those days this kind of aircrafts still had their ver
  20. I played Sonalyst's Dangerous Waters a lot. I would be definitely interested, but yes, this had to be made as 3rd party module since ED wouldn't have any spare time or experience to make it. It had P-3C Orion land based anti submarine aircraft, SH-60 Seahawk naval based anti submarine helicopter and naval assets. ----- To be honest P-3C and SH-60 would be interesting even by their own assuming submarine aspect would be present in DCS, hunting Soviet submarines to protect carrier group with i.e. F-14A, A-6E and A-7E on board.
  21. Phantom, Draken, first MiG-25P without look down radar became operational at the very end of 1960s so this one for sure And at this moment I realized I would take any plane from this era, F-105, A-5, A-6, F-8, A-7, MiG-23, Su-7, Mirage III, Tu-22, B-58, F-111...
  22. F-104A or C for pure performance + vulcan gun MiG-17 for maneuverability F4D Skyray for high alt performance and early carrier operations MiG-21F-13 with bubble canopy F8A Crusader last of the gunfighters
  23. A-10A you have in FC3 was definitely from 1970/1980s Germany. Full fidelity A-10C is way more modern, post Cold War, it represents about 2005 standard, but if this is not an issue for you it's a great module. High quality modules from your dad's service period are F-14A, MiG-21bis, Mirage 2000, AJS-37 Viggen is also close. Each of this is great module with very good community opinion. You can't go wrong with any of this since they all represent level of technology forcing pilots to do many things manually and all of them have their unique quirks. There is also
  24. bies

    Submarines

    I would also like to see some submarine warfare but it's too complicated. In "Red Storm Rising" or Sonalysts submarine PC simulator "Dangerous Waters" with P-3C Orion and MH-60R Seahawk hunting the submarines was really interesting. I doubt ED has spare time needed to code something like that, submarine warfare would need to be fairy complex to be interesting.
×
×
  • Create New...