Jump to content

Birko

Members
  • Posts

    309
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Birko

  1. I'll try this fix next chance I have, thank you! I do hope it is fixed officially (alongside some external lights being giant squares) in due course.
  2. Glad to hear that they're doing the Hind next. I'm no heli pilot, but I couldn't pass up the 24. It's like the MiG-21 of choppers.
  3. Zone 3, is all I can say to explain myself. I usually last maybe 20 minutes, for example, in the 'offensive counter air' instant action mission, although that could be longer and I just use time compression a bit too much. And that's with an external tank, but I think A/A combat is the worst thing for range and fuel consumption. Flying at a good mach at a good alt helps, but I tend to fly M1.7 pretty much there and back which in retrospect can't help :joystick:
  4. We all knew it had to be :pilotfly:
  5. It's always nice to have the option there. My computer is pretty low spec and MSAA is definitely more than it can handle, but with SSAA 1.5x and nvidia FXAA it looks pretty good and still keeps my fps around 30.
  6. The interior is coming together nicely! I'll keep my eye on this one.
  7. It's not a game breaking bug, by the time you've had to launch your canopy across Georgia the game's already up! Thank you, we appreciate the immense work that must go into the Viggen.
  8. Ah, the little fuel gauge tie? I've always managed to run a bit below that, it doesn't account for the many kilometres I usually end up gliding back to base with all the (beautiful, by the way) something's gone wrong lights blaring at me. Is the M0.8) supposed to say M0.8? :P So if I understand correctly, the fuel needed calculation is based on: •Current consumption -up to mach 0.8- for current leg •Consumption at planned speeds and assuming sea level for other waypoints •Extra margin for landing approach, and reroute to L2 if there's an L2 •Extra 10% if you want (and I probably do at this rate) Thanks for the help, it's a learning curve as with all modules and great work on the Viggen I'm loving it!
  9. Great input, thanks! Also can't say I'm a physicist, but I think at transonic speeds a shockwave builds that increases drag, probably? I agree with you about the economic mach never exceeding about 0.9 because of transonic effects (at least not before the Viggen's ceiling) so you'd have to go slower (in true speed) at higher altitudes to keep subsonic thus reducing your range. I'll leave this here for other Vig pilots to read and hopefully keep their tanks from drying up, or for someone to correct me on :pilotfly:
  10. Using an online calculator (temperatures and pressures can vary, so with both of these points in mind this is very much to be taken with a pinch of salt) I got the true speeds of the 'economical' mach numbers at the altitudes the chart on page 173 gives. 0m mach 0.55≈675kph 3000m mach 0.66≈780kph 6000m mach 0.76≈865kph 9000m mach 0.87≈950kph 10000m mach 0.9≈970kph The general consensus seems to be the higher, the better. I know the engine doesn't die until something like 15000m so it'd be great to have data going up to these altitudes too, although if higher altitudes aren't covered in the manual, it's safe to assume those altitudes aren't economical?
  11. Thank you for bringing up the manual! I haven't thoroughly read through it since I first bought the Viggen and had completely overlooked the chart with the economic air speeds. I wonder if the mach numbers it gives at the different altitudes are all roughly the same true speed, I'll try and figure out which altitude/mach mix gives the longest range, at least on paper. That's a sentiment I can relate to all too much. Thanks!
  12. Does anyone have, or know where to look for, data on what sort of mach number or IAS and altitude gets you the longest range out of the Viggen? I'm guilty of running the tanks dry on too many occasions now :doh:
  13. Great to hear it'll be upon us soon! It's just a very cool aircraft in general but it'll compliment the Viggen well. I'm optimistic about Heatblur's goal of complimenting their modules with AI aircraft and maps. A soundtrack wasn't even necessary for the F-14 but you won't hear me complaining about it ;) There are many DCS modules I enjoy and work great by themselves, but are just missing the right dance partner or the right ballroom if anyone knows what I mean.
  14. I had something similar happen whilst crash landing in some Georgian field, where I jettisoned the canopy- and in the internal view it was gone, but in the external view the canopy was still attached. No screenshots or tracks or anything though.
  15. It seems the Russians have developed technology to levitate debris from bombed planes, presumably so the parts don't get lost and they can reuse them?
  16. If you want a British bird with the speed to take on or evade the Germans, wait for the Mossie FB Mk VI :pilotfly: Not that it has the manoeuvrability of a Spit, but it doesn't fly like a brick either- and think of the significant A/G capability it'd add to the allies in DCS. The Spit has its role in MP, low alt turn fighting and maybe a little fighter bombing, it just doesn't excel against the adversaries it faces beyond that role. Flying with buddies is always definitely a help!
  17. It seems heatblur's thing is cool fast 60/70s-introduced jets, DCS: Heatblur MiG-25? Guess technically the AJS-37 is 90s but still xD We actually ordered a few when TSR-2 cancelled, but cancelled this too and went on to co-develop the Tornado. :pilotfly:
  18. I absolutely love the Spit, and the IX was a great model in terms of improvement and relevant in terms of numbers built so I'm very happy for it to have come to DCS. It did great in dogfights that were on its own terms- with allied air superiority, generally greater numbers, and where the enemy were forced into engagements. In multiplayer, with it's inferior speed, it will never catch a 190 or 109 if the pilots know to keep their energy up and to not try and turn fight a spit especially at low alt. I love the spitfire, I enjoy the campaigns and making my own missions, but can see why a spitfire would have a disadvantage in multiplayer (and I have barely touched MP). As DCS is a simulation I'd be against unrealistic FM changes, though someone more familiar with MP could suggest ideas or changes to MP missions that would favour a spit to the point of balance?
  19. There's a hole in your left wing!
  20. I've managed to reproduce this with the A-10C, Bf 109, F-15C and F/A-18C too, all on the Caucasus map, so it seems likely just an issue with DCS itself. Sorry for the bother!
  21. Hi, so I was playing an instant action mission for the Viggen and I found that the aircraft's reflection in the water is too big. Not sure if a DCS bug generally or just the Viggen because I've only noticed it with the Viggen so far- but that could just be me. Otherwise enjoying the module very much, in fact this still quite amused me when I saw it! Pictures attached (hopefully, I'm new to this)
  22. With them soon leaving RAF service, there is a hole in my heart that could be filled...
  23. I'm thinking it'll be an Aardvark or flyable Draken or Intruder, but a man can dream of his EE Lightning
  24. If the Viggen is anything to go by, then I'm really looking forward to the Cat. Maybe I should refer to the manual this time around? Good work everyone at heatblur, and thank you for keeping us all in the loop!
×
×
  • Create New...