mungo13
-
Posts
112 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mungo13
-
-
As they are now in french shoes, I'd vote for Jaguar. Dedicated european classic Cold War Air-G round plane hardly hurts. Not everything has to be a fighter.
-
3
-
-
I wonder about soft-properties especially in dogfight. I read about training dogfight F-104 against F-4, thus interceptor against very advanced and modern fighter - yet Starfighter was described as a nasty bird - they fought on vertical and due to their tiny frontal cross section, they were very hard to spot and keep in sight.
Soviet planes are notorious for ugly cockpits with event those small transparent parts are littered with "something" to obstruct the view (I always "loved" i.e. their HUD cameras). Thus besides "thrust to weight" - any idea of the possible situational awareness, cockpit workload / level of automation etc.?
How good was contemporary french ground control and pilot training compared to soviet standards?
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Morrov said:
The English translation honestly makes it sound way more "technical" than what the guy said, at least that's my impression (I don't speak Czech, but I do understand a fair chunk of it)
I understand Czech in passive mode on level close to native speaker and to me it is in original even a tiny bit more formal than the translation. As "ovladač" in original is like controller - and it suggests some device, rather than metal bar pivoting in a way that it flips all the breakers.
You know, i.e. at school when we had to turn on/off many breakers in some control panel for the room, we simply took ruler or short wooden stick (handle of the small broom ...) or we used edge of the palm ... and we forgot to call it controller
And if we did so - we did it in joking manner. I.e. when in school dormitory we had remote controller to switch channels on the old TV - yes, tip of the standard broom was this highly sophisticated device.
For those who do not have this experience - imagine that strange feeling when you watch some american TV series from maybe 60/70-ies, where they drive cars with automatic transmission and watch color TV from chair with remote controller - while we got access to the serie(!) itself 20-30 years later finally watching it on color TV (shortly before we had standard B&W one) when you still had to go to it and press buttons on it to switch channels or tune the sound. And you drove car with manual shifting, no electrically controlled windows, no air conditioning.
Thus memories and personal experience make such a parts just amusing.
Anyway, I am looking forward the chance to run the Hind module, run the video on separate screen and trying to mimic the procedure. That is going to be an interesting test.
-
2
-
-
Nice. Do you know who is the narrator for the video? That voice is absolutely "classic" but I haven't seen anybody in credits.
When you look at the background for credits and font of the credits themselves and have "deja vu" from "evening fairy tales" for children - while video is about monstrous attack helicopter
So hopefully we are going chance to leave the cockpit and make our own walkaround pre-flight check as it was done to have finally realistic sim module ...
P.S.
3:33
Centralized control levers are used to enable all required section switches on the right and left rear switch panels
I am sorry, I was unable to stop myself from laughing. That formal-voice hi-tech narrative while you are watching absolutely primitive DIY mechanical solution is more russian than stakan of vodka.
For those who do not take the point (or - hopefully not - feel offended): I am sorry, I was born in Eastern block, I still remember some state propaganda as well as many homemade DIY solutions of something that was absolute standard in the West for a long time, thus I have maybe different impressions when watching videos like this.
But it is also reason why I pre-ordered this beast despite I have little time for gaming.
-
Some remarks:
- flash seen on camera can be also attributed to the synchronization of the framerate of the camera to the firing cycles. If you take frames in between shots, you do not record muzzle flash at its peak, while gases flow from the breach might be more constant due to accumulation through the cover
Also those might not be just gases from the breech but also from the gas system - depends where are venting points. But they seem to be below the cover
Flash hinders at muzzles can also help if they are of the right design. I read about design that was compatible with even very old night-vision (very sensitive to strong outer light sources) sets as it caused sort of "stall" effect. Just to explain - that flash hinder was mounted either on LMG or some AR that was equipped with the night vision
- GSh-23 and GSh-30-2 both use boxing system. According to the book by man (from former Czechoslovakia) that was involved in design of the automatic weapons and was teaching the subject at university, 23mm version has breeches connected by lever and sort of the crossed gas system - gases from firing barrel accelerates its own breech rearward but they are channeled behind opposing piston and accelerate it forward - and vice versa.
GSh-30-2 uses some cogwheel system to link the breeches and classic gas system for each barrel.
Both have fixed barrels. Breech parts are guided by specific grooves that accelerates them through the leverage and slows them down when necessary thus reducing the impulses from recoil (i.e. when breech is hard-stopped from full speed by some bumper, MG-42 works that way)
-
3 hours ago, WinterH said:
It's already at least 2 years ago when I read article describing concerns of the US military regarding rising amount of solid equipment used by insurgents in Iraq and others - from body armor to night vision. Thus greatly reducing the equipment gap.
Does DCS model use some advanced terminal ballistic modelling when it came to the firing against human body? Because flesh wound to the limb by stable AP round from 500 m is hardly as disabling as full velocity 5.56 NATO from point blank that tumbles and disintegrates upon impact. Even there, there are complains about insufficient disabling effects.
When you look at battle reports i.e. from Afghanistan - battles raging for hours, hundreds of rounds fired by every single soldier - yet few one hit, or hurt or even killed. And even if - those total casualties are often caused by explosive ordnance from air and artillery support not small arms fire.
So how to mimic infantry action in predominantly flight-sim game without killing CPU? As infantry would look after every cover to shield itself and try to flush its enemy with weight of the fire?
So far I am OK when sims i.e. for cars/trucks use rather hit-point damage model than trying to use some hardcore realistic one - especially when rifle-caliber weapons are used.
Anyway I've just pre-ordered Hind, so I'll see myself when it is out. I was always "fixed-wings guy", thus regardless that I have Mi-8 and Ka-50, I've never flown them but Hind is legend that served in our air forces - and I like those old-fashioned brutes.
-
22 hours ago, WinterH said:
At least the way they are implemented in Mi-8, you need to choose either the 12.7 or 7.62s before you fire, you can't shoot all of them at the same time. which makes sense after all, trajectories would be fairly different, and recoil would be ludicrous I guess.
But yeah, the pod comes with 1 4 barreled 12.7mm YakB mounted centrally, and to its either side two GShG 4 barrel 7.62x54mm gatlings a well. A lot of dakka, yes, but they are "just" bullets in the end, and work against soft targets, with 12.7 being able to do a little against light armor too. Problem is, you need to get direct hits even against infantry. And from what I've tested a few months ago, infantry in DCS will merrily take between 4-6 7.62x54R before calling it the day. So in a helicopter that is equipped with GSh-30-2K, gunpods won't open up anything new tactically, and would be only for fun and novelty (not that there's anything wrong with that!)
For some Afghanistan scenario that would be probably crazy, but with proliferation of the body armor - rifle rounds fired from hundreds of meters are already not that impressive.
Even ordinary car is not inevitably disabled by a few rifle not even 12,7/.50 bullets unless they really hit i.e. engine compartment. I may be wrong but those gunpods were IRL good for really soft targets like some trucks (with question if unguided rockets are not far better option) or for suppressive fire - that is quite difficult to model in the game.
-
:megalol::megalol::megalol:When you quote someone to appear more intelligent than you actually are, you have to know the whole context from which that quotation is taken from. "As Albert Einstein once said to me: “Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity.” But what is much more widespread than the actual stupidity is the playing stupid, turning off your ear, not listening, not seeing." Gestalt Therapy Verbatim by Frederick S. Perls. So, as you can see, you fall into your own trap, as you clearly cannot understand what ergonomics is and what it implies.ROFL. When you try to judge the intelligence, please: It is good to start by not being faster in writing than reading and understanding. I am not sure whether you are at least aware, that many quotes became part of the cultural part of the language - that means they are not inevitably still complete and within original context. I am now pretty sure that you even missed the fact that this quote was used as a sort of a joke - and you missed the meaning. Sorry, next time I will add explanation.
As well as I am pretty sure that when it comes to ergonomics, working space, outside view, dead angles, noise, vibrations and other adverse effects are part of the problem and its solution.
Eric Brown is not the god almighty but it doesn't seem that he universally praised german cockpits. Btw. - I've made a quick look at him and Me-262 - he cites small cockpit to make it demanding job to perform some procedures i.e during starting of the engines.
-
No, the Me262 was first. But you are right concerning the missing potential, since Gloster Meteor was used to fight unmanned V-1 rockets? ;)
Afaik, engine service isnt modeled (thank god) and I can just hop in a brand new bird everytime I boot up the simulator. :lol:
-well, first production Meteors were finished some time before Me-262
- getting brand new doesn't mean that is is not still more likely to fail. Besides i remember stories about those returning with damaged plane even not by any meaning by their fault to be sent back to propeller planes - for damaging precious weapon. :megalol:
Well I have read similar claims about those german ones. Cramped, noisy and so on.You also cannot model bad ergonomics of all allied planes.. especially the Spit.When Einstein said: Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.
he had not heard about flamewars about WW2 equipment
Anyway - there is easy solution: me-262 jockeys every few flight would have to ask ground control after landing to go and do a factory repair of their turbines. With 1-2 day waiting period :thumbup:
I can even imagine how those late-period german virtual pilots before every flight will toss dices to find out, how much fuel the got, how much ammo, which systems work and what is actual performance of their bird ...
-
That would be rather Meteor - but it doesn't have potential to be such a bestseller.The devs just add late war period planes. And the Me262 fits perfectly and will be a really interesting module. The first real jet fighter. How could ED not introduce it to DCS? Are you even serious? ;)I just wonder how is anyone going to implement that 10-hour service interval for the engines.
Well, after the war, those engines were found to be usable only for 4 hours of flight, than they required overhaul of the turbines.
:smartass:
-
Chiz said they talked to the guys at Sukhoi IIRC, and part of the issue on the older planes docs aren't really too available, just cuz they got thrown out. Whether you believe that or not.
That may explain why air forces that have older soviet planes and buy spare parts from Russia or let russian companies to make overhauls ends up with a garbage.
-
Question sent about Gunfighter
-
no my answer is precise and targeted.
the best fighter pilots in the world are the Israelis I have no doubt.
this means that if a Russian pilot fights with an Israeli or an American pilot fights with an Israeli he would be immediately shot down.
we have recent evidence that the Israelis are expert pilots and in the past they shot down many mig.
And what makes them so good? After some first jets they have never faced properly equipped enemy. Now for years what they do is take their jets packed with up-to-date electronics, fly into the international airspace or worse: violate(!) airspace of the other countries to shoot stand-off munitions against countries with no effective air force and totally obsolete air defense weaponry.
Your idea that russian or american pilot fighting jewish pilots would be immediately shot down is stupid at best. Russian one could be technologically handicapped to some extent (maybe) but Russia still have some effective and powerful weapons. And American? Are you so bravely going to take i.e. one-on-one fight against F-22 and be so sure to come out of the fight as victor and nothing else?
P.S. you know, even Britain had been able to decimate native warriors in colonial wars most of the time and when the Great war started, there was some nasty change in the outcome of the events
-
Hornet + Gulf map
I had more plans and several planes on the list but as the time passed I realized that they are either unfinished, bugged, I already have similar plane(s) in my inventory or they are too autistic as they have no counterparts in the DCS inventory or for that type of plane it is better to play other simulator. Thus Harrier, Mig-19, F-16 and some propellers were removed from my shopping cart.
Viggen is in the train for now if there is any sale on DCS or Steam in future.
P.S. I also realized that M.2 NVME SSD disk is gaming-wise better investment than ~2 new modules while I have already several for which I have no time to play. :thumbup:
-
I was all set to go with the VKB Gunfighter MCG Pro, but then I cam up this review (apparently by you, Aurelius): http://jaytheskepticalengineer.com/fathering-and-hobbies/flight-simming/flight-sim-gear-reviews/vkb-gunfighter-mcg-pro-mk-ii/
Your review mentions that the grip is too large, even for your larger-than-average hands. My hand length (middle finger tip to first crease at wrist) iis 19.7 cm, which is 1.4 cm shorter than yours. Does that mean that I should avoid this grip? If so, would VKB have another better fitting grip that it still okay with its features? Or should I forget about VKB at this point?
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCA1B1sIvyGpeoJAcrUd99jQ
https://www.youtube.com/user/BrianMP5T
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvXXUrGCF3wV3bbZ6pFQ00g
https://www.youtube.com/user/ralfidude
Hope this works - up are several channels where are many reviews of the VKB, VIRPIL and some Warthog stuff. They comment on sizes, buttons, quality, properties of the bases etc. Many good videos.
So far I know only about Kosmosima (SCG) serie of grips as alternative in VKB list. F-14 one is very specific. Kosmosima should be smaller.
You can find review at least in Snake Eater Company videos - fairly detailed one as I remember. And as he made also review of the VKB MCG - you can have direct comparison by 1 person
-
May be very different for the various countries. Very old Il-2 Sturmovik had to abandon to make few flyable Pacific war classic birds as well as some aircraft carriers as Grumman(?) claimed copyright laws (that was the base of the story, later it was said that developers were maybe too scared and little bit cheated - I do not remember the whole story nor the details but that was part of the explanation why i.e. Avenger failed to make it into the game).How important is that licensing anyway? If i remember correct Razbam had no license for the Mirage 2000C and that's the reason it's called M-2000C in DCS and on the Shop. I can remember someone from Razbam saying something like "we know it's a Mirage, Daussault knows it's a Mirage but we can't call it Mirage...".Quite likely it may be based on what country your company resides in, what are the copyright laws of the country of origin, whether ownership is eager to strike you with claims and so on.
Thus if ED is russian company and russion officials wants to keep them from making full fidelity Flanker - they may use copyright hammer.
While foreign company may lack the chances to apply such a request in Russia. Or its own laws may say that it is to some extent public property.
They may also use the trick like M-2K - look into the world of the plastic scale kits - due to the copyright plague you buy "german passenger car" (VW Beetle) or Vietnam Thunder (F-105) or on the tyres you read Wpangler and so on. :thumbup:
As it was said - at the same time, licensing may give you access to the manufacturer's support. It may save you lot of work and research and you do not have to guesstimate and quarrel with the customers about fidelity: You can claim "based on data provided by manufacturer" - try to counter it unless you are former pilot of that bird. :)
-
Merkava III in the fictional skin of the BMP-1 :music_whistling:In the meantime you could use the Fw-190A-8 with a fictional skin :D -
I have just tried A-10C with some 80% fuel, full ammo, targetting pod, 4-6 bombs, 4 mavericks and 2 Sidewinders (I did not take notes, I just picked up loadout that looked good to not to fly empty plane nor to be ammunution train).
I was able to take off and land on the concrete airfield and the big ground strips. I did not test those small strips.
Let's say that I do not know correct rules for the landing and even during the landing I was looking for the control mapping for the brakes and flaps - 1st landing was even without flaps at all.
You may expect it to be OK for the SU-25 as well. True fighters? Don't know. I landed F-5 with AA armament on british concrete airfield, once again in just pleasure testing flight without consulting proper procedure.
But there is Channel map coming - who knows which one would be better or more interesting from this point of view.
-
If' collect 10k miles which is $10, can I use them for $10 discount on already discounted planes.
I.e. 24$ plane to be bought for $14 with 10.000 miles?
Just do not forget that manual for the miles says that you get no miles for the module for which you apply miles. Use them on the cheapest module you are buying
-
Thanks very much for the replies, by offline mode i meant could i use them without logging in to DCS, as the Frogfoot and civilian Mustang are.It seems i can if i log in first and then select offline mode.
It seems to be source of your problem. You have to log-in online, activate offline mode and then you can fly your modules after you log-in (in offline mode now). So you will have to log-in.
Without activation of the offline mode or/and logging you can fly only default free modules (Su-25 a TF-51). Happens to me from time to time. Logging-in into DCS is not as straightforward as to other game clients i.e. STEAM.
-
I believe it was more due to the fact that the MFDs weren't as user friendly, compared to what NATO aircraft would be using. Causing more workload on the pilot than what would really be necessary. Subsequently, this could often cause a reduction in pilot awareness, having to have their focus stretched so far. I recall hearing something like this from an interview (Aircrew Interviews channel) with a Luftwaffe pilot that flew the Mig-29 after securing them and made comments on this issue, if my memory serves me right.
I remember such a comparisons, they appeared i.e. after training dogfight between Swiss(?) F-18 and former East Germany Mig-29 (still in the inventory of the united Germany). They made comparison of the visibility from the cockpit, ergonomics, workload etc. But those Migs were truly basic models with just radar screen - but first models of the F-16 actually had also just one HDD around pilot's knees and numeric board on the left side of the dashboard. Hardly a big difference. I even remember some descriptions about later model where some other display was added at the higher part of the main panel and it was said how it increased safety of the operation as now pilot doesn't have to look down into the depths of the cockpit (loosing situational awareness).
I am fairly interested because as a "Easterner" these are my memories of the first contacts with the open information about military and aviation after the regime in the Eastern block had changed.
-
Full sim eastern aircraft - no question. As there are currently only 2(?), one is obsolete fighter and another is helicopter.
At the same time (if possible, of course): Su-27(?). Is there any Su-27 comparable to: F/A-18, F-16, (and incoming) F-15E, Eurofighter in terms of the capabilities?
Something like Su-30MKI would be probably more appropriate - once again, if possible.
-
Once you make comparison between the first F-16 and Mig-29 what makes F-16 better in terms of the displays and situational awareness?MiG-29 Fulcrum - Again, highly requested and although not particularly regarded as challenging to fly, it was said to have poor situationanal awareness for the pilot. With displays and HUD that was far inferior to anything NATO had. This caused the crew to be highly dependant of third party information from the ground or AWACS before performing any sort of action. (Including ejecting from the aircraft in some circumstances apparently!)I am not talking about the view from the cockpit - most likely there is no jet in history to be comparable and never will be as with stealth, pilots are going back deeper into the plane.
I remember even descriptions that early Vipers were even unable to fire BVR missiles.
Thus it depends on what version do you pick - although Russia is clearly behind in general development.
Anyway F-111 would be quite a shock for me and maybe (if there would be chance to get reasonably well made product even as an early access) just maybe reason to buy it even at full price.
Trouble is in neverending lack of the dynamic campaign and proliferation of the Fox-3 capable birds - online F-111 could be easily in the world of troubles as there is almost nothing from her real world.
But give me a vote - and I would go for it.
-
I also have issue with Steam as I was unable to start it offline when I wanted to play a game and I was few days out of the internet. But it is the case for the several games locked to the main platform. DCS included - unfortunately if you forget to switch to offline. (That's why I even bought 2nd copy of some games i.e. on GOG. But they do not sell DCS :D )I'm smart enough to control my own platform instead of Steam doing it for me.
BTW, another no go for Steam is that they have the monopoly on some games, like almost all the race sims. Besides Life4Speed there's isn't much to get so you get stuck with Steam or nothing. I went for nothing (except L4S) since monopoly is not the way to go. That on the Steam side... now we we're talking about what again...:pilotfly:
Yet, if someone want to have the module for the both platforms for whatever reasons - he has to go through the Steam (or pay twice). It is fair to understand the options
Mirage F1 in air combat
in Aerges
Posted
I did not question F1 vs. NATO fighters (while it is not fully off the interest as due to proliferation of the Mirage as well as other planes such encounters either happened or were possible in case of the conflict) but rather those "soft stats" i.e. Mirage vs. Mig-21/23. Not(!!!) complaining for your answer, just to clarify.
When we talk about training - according to rather (locally) known pilot that was higher rank and even later display pilot from the former Czechoslovakia, annual flight time of the pilot was around 70 hours. Varying according to experience level, rank, branch of the aviation.