Cold War 1947 - 1991

IMO blue's biggest problem on the times I've played on it was comms. There either were none, or there was no GCI, or the GCI had severe tunnel vision (understandable, I do the same when I've tried it). By contrast red usually has a lot of people on comms, one or several experienced GCIs, and we try and drag enemies into each other and set up traps and ambushes where we can. Fly in pairs, guys. Encourage your friends to come on and GCI. Find some clever tactics like using feints to facilitate fighter sweeps or bait greedy MiGs (like me probably) in front of a trailing, unseen pair of fighters. There's a lot more to be gained through that than asking for this or that missile or more of a given type of aircraft.

This ^

I mostly play Blue and some of us are really trying to provide better coordination, especially using ground forces which are at the heart of many missions and it often turns into a 3 hours try-hard tank driving nightmare while most of the team is doing team deathmatch in the air like it's Growling Sidewinder server. So it usually comes down to a very few people doing huey stuff, driving ground units and sometimes GCI-ing altogether. This can lead to pretty frustrating moments (flying a huey for 25min to drop a unit, then drive it to get killed because the focus is not on the objective)

I'm still a noob at DCS and I understand how starting out in CW can be complicated. Hell, the first time I played on it I got obliterated while flying at FL400 with the M2000 not even knowing where I was :lol: but it's obvious a lot of players either don't know what's going on or don't really care, talking on top of each other and so on.

Some good players try to lead by example by explaining stuff to others and I can't thank them enough but I have to admit that no amount of OP stuff on blue side will replace good tactics and coordination.

Not gonna lie, sometimes I just can't wait for winter sales to get some Redfor modules :music_whistling:

Thankfully it's not always like that but let's say there's a pattern.

Ever thought of doing some Cold War going hot scenario in Normandy map? I think that can make it very interesting as it is very fun map with lots of field airfields

Server News:

The new mission is almost ready. And for the first time all aircraft will be limited in numbers. Weapons anyway. Map - Syria.

One question though (since I don't own the Gazelle and don't feel like I ever will), does the SA342 Minigun work as supposed to? Except for the bloody aerobatic FM of course. I mean, can you kill infantries with it or is the minigun still malfunctioning? I remember it used to have some bug. Also, and if it works, can you destroy a BTR-80 with it?

Can anyone please run the test for me?

Very much appreciated.

Ever thought of doing some Cold War going hot scenario in Normandy map? I think that can make it very interesting as it is very fun map with lots of field airfields

Interesting thought. And the same applies to the Nevada map. I don't own either of the two so there's nothing I could do. Very busy with the Cold War stuff so I'm still not in the DCS WWll business yet. Which is why I never purchased the Normandy map in the first place. And not one WWll plane. On the other hand, the Nevada map never appealed to me. I don't really know why to be honest. I just simply never felt like buying it. And then I purchased the PG map and that maybe felt like having enough desert so why Nevada. But I think the reason is and in comparison with the 4 other maps, the Nevada area hasn't witnessed any aerial wars (thank God for that) that would encourage me to buy it. The other maps have so much history and stories to tell so you kind of get more out of them. Maybe that's the reason. Nevertheless, I might be making a big deal out of not getting the Nevada map :smilewink:

Sorry to disappoint you.

I noticed today that some MiG-21 jockeys are able to fire head on shots with their IR missiles, I thought rear aspect heaters were only allowed?

I noticed today that some MiG-21 jockeys are able to fire head on shots with their IR missiles, I thought rear aspect heaters were only allowed?

Head on shots? Dead ahead? I just checked out the mission file and rear aspect missiles are the only AA missiles allowed.

Normandy's runways may well be too short for most jets - the 15 and Sabre have gargantuan takeoff and landing rolls and the Su-25/A-10 are even worse. The 21 and 19 can both cope with quite short runways, not sure about the F-5 - but I assume it can. Obviously, the Viggen will have no issues.

Can I ask who was the hilarious dude that did this all over the server today?

I will spare the offending party the drama as long as he doesn't tell anyone what I accidentally did moments before he placed the Gudauta runway EWR. :doh:

I will also say - it wasn't Floyd, who apparently got blamed for it later on after the actual culprit switched aircraft.

I noticed today that some MiG-21 jockeys are able to fire head on shots with their IR missiles, I thought rear aspect heaters were only allowed?

I'll see if I can reproduce this later, but by rights the only thing that should now track hot aspect is the R-3R or the R-60M. I did have a front 3/4 shot look like it was tracking an F-5 (I shot it at 90 deg and he turned into me), but it went dumb and I don't know if it did so due to aspect or flares.

Worth note: several of us could not get IR missiles to even attempt to track Harriers. At all. I fired three within perfect parameters and they went dead off the rail - others had the same experience. Another thing that needs testing, but maybe it was just dumb luck.

There is difference between being able to launch and actually tracking.

As for Harrier, we had the same issue with Seal last night. Also, R-60 if fired from behind at a target of equal or higher speed should really be launched from 1 - 1.1 km at most. It's a very short range missile now.

I was sitting on its tail well within range, and he'd stopped flaring. It flew straight off the rail like a rocket. I'll have to do some testing to see if it's consistent or if I just somehow messed something up with the R-13s and then my guns killed his engine so there wasn't enough heat or something.

Server News:

 

The new mission is almost ready. And for the first time all aircraft will be limited in numbers. Weapons anyway. Map - Syria.

 

One question though (since I don't own the Gazelle and don't feel like I ever will), does the SA342 Minigun work as supposed to? Except for the bloody aerobatic FM of course. I mean, can you kill infantries with it or is the minigun still malfunctioning? I remember it used to have some bug. Also, and if it works, can you destroy a BTR-80 with it?

Can anyone please run the test for me?

Very much appreciated.

Anyone, please? :cry:

Asked around for the Gazelle and what I got is that there is no AI for the minigun, so you have to manually sit in the position and fire.

Asked around for the Gazelle and what I got is that there is no AI for the minigun, so you have to manually sit in the position and fire.

Oh, didn't know that. A Gazelle L it is then.

Thanks!

Sorry for the delay, the Minigun variant of the Gazelle can kill infantry and BTR-80 but I confirm there's no A.I. for shooting it. The gun is actually controlled by headtracking which is really painful. I don't know if multicrew is implemented but I have a feeling it's not.

The L variant will definitely be better !

You have to be like a nodding donkey with trackIR and the gazelle minigun, definitely no AI you need to have the Gazelle in a hover or on a stable flight path with autopilot modes on and you can switch to the door gunner. Best thing about it is 4000 rounds IIRC so a lot of ammo which you need because it's so bloody difficult to hit anything!

Sorry for the delay, the Minigun variant of the Gazelle can kill infantry and BTR-80 but I confirm there's no A.I. for shooting it. The gun is actually controlled by headtracking which is really painful. I don't know if multicrew is implemented but I have a feeling it's not.

The L variant will definitely be better !

You have to be like a nodding donkey with trackIR and the gazelle minigun, definitely no AI you need to have the Gazelle in a hover or on a stable flight path with autopilot modes on and you can switch to the door gunner. Best thing about it is 4000 rounds IIRC so a lot of ammo which you need because it's so bloody difficult to hit anything!

Cheers, boys!

This request goes out to very few of the SRS users out there.

Please try to use SRS as a communication tool and not as a place to shout out ones frustrations incase one gets shot down. Rather use team talk or discord to discuss the unfortunate situation.

Stumbled in this issue in the Sat mission on Caucasus, then reproduced it on my old solo mission. If mission was created in previous Open Beta, some NDB's can appear as not working (for me it was Senaki-Kolhi's NDB's).

Your assessment of R60 (not R60M) being equivalent to AIM9P5 is based on what if I may inquire ?

 

I'm also not sure if your short session comprising of one flight where you complained about absence of air to air missiles on Viggen is indicative of anything regarding missile performance. However the idea that situation before R60 was better is premature to say the least and can be easily disputed as RED was down to R3S (aim9b equivalent or copy) and R13M (aim9d equivalent) while Blue was free to use Rb24j / aim9p which are much later sidewinder variants than 1967 - 1968 Aim9D.

 

Also, 21 can only fire missiles in boresight since its weapon system does not provide any option to uncage seeker ( not to mention slaving seeker to radar as in f14 which hopefully in A variant will join server).

The absence of the Rb24j was a separate issue and one Alpenwolf acknowledged so not sure why you would bring that up other than a poor attempt at attacking the character rather than the argument alongside bringing up legacy issues now resolved.

My assessment is based on flying both planes on the server and also taking a look at the backend data files and having a few offline flights to test frontal aspect capabilities under repeatable conditions, for the R60, aim9p and aim9p5. So it is not just based on one small session. I am not suggesting to take away the R60, I am not suggesting the situation for red before R60 was better so please don't try to imply this is what I am suggesting.

Couple of points for @Sideburns:

 

Although the R-60 is capable of locking on in a head-on engagement, getting a hit this way is highly unlikely, if not impossible. Yesterday I launched an R-60 at an F-5 in precisely this fashion. He was in burner and flew straight and level, and yet the missile, well, missed completely and went for his wake instead (this may have been because the fuze took too long to arm, but I'm not sure). I need more attempts to verify this, but from what I've seen so far the Aphid does have very limited all-aspect capability, though in practice it's for rear-aspect engagements only.

 

While the MiG-21 can carry up to 6 IR missiles (and not 8, thankfully that's a thing of the past as that's highly unrealistic), that's hardly the optimal loadout for dogfighting. With the additional drag from two APU-60-2 launchers the Fishbed loses plenty of performance. On the other hand, with 4 R-60s mounted (one on each pylon) the MiG feels somewhat more agile than with a full complement of R-3s or R-13s, which may be down to the lower weight and better aerodynamics of the Aphid. These days I rarely see people taking off with a full load of 6 missiles. I like to fly with only 2, VPAF style, to give me the best possible turn performance post-merge.

 

I've had at least a dozen instances where an enemy plane required more than 2 Aphids to destroy. This is particularly true of the A-10 (no surprises there) words in others mouths.and, oddly enough, the Viggen (the latter seems capable of powered flight despite having its wings blown off and its engine on fire).

 

I'd be happy to go up against AIM-9P5s for testing purposes on CW. Now that the R-60 is back it's only right that we should give the F-5s a chance to adjust to the refreshed Fishbed.

I am aware of the performance restraints of the MiG21 when carrying 8 hence how my comments were made. I agree we should see how the server settles into the new loadouts, but I am suggesting letting the F5s have the Aim9p5 would make things fairer again.

Lots of words

I don't disagree blue could do with more co-ordination these days, as red has sometimes also needed in the past. The quality of players on both sides comes and goes but it is good to see the server getting more popular.

The R60 does have a limited frontal capability, so please don't deny this or make out like I'm the idiot here, nor did I say MiG21 should carry the full loadout. I know this is foolish and as commented the MiG21 can realistically carry twice the a2a missile loadout of the F5. As it stands red has two frontal aspect capable missiles in the R3R and R60, granted they are very contextual and limited but they are still a capability that is available to the MiG21. The uncage feature is a valid point but in practice the Aim9p manoeuvring capability is lacklustre and shots with aspect are far from guaranteed with the aim9p, as it should be so don't make out like uncage is a magic silver bullet.

This also isn't "all I want for Christmas" requesting Aim9l back on the Harrier or similar so try not to be so dramatic with the slippery slope fallacies. You may also recall the recent Rb24j issues were chased down, figured it out and communicated with ED and HB to get this resolved by the blue team using the broken Rb24j. It's a suggestion to make the server fairer by reinstating the F5s ability to carry two Aim9p5, not the end of the world.

The R-60 does not have a frontal aspect capability unless there is now a bug, because it should have been patched out nearly a week ago now. This was referenced (though not explicitly as a loss of all-aspect capability IIRC) in patch notes and confirmed by devs, one of whom you quoted in your post. If there is a bug, and the R-60 is tracking targets from frontal aspects, then please go ahead and demonstrate it - like we found performance graphs for the 24J. Replays, Tacviews, whatever - show us.

The R-60M is limited all-aspect, as it always has been, and crucially has not been available in any mission in this server for something like six months, nor is it now. The R-60 and R-60M are two separate missiles, they do not have the same engagement capability.

AIM-9P agility is fine. Learn to respect your weapon's launch envelope and you will almost never miss with it. The uncage function even allows you to effectively destroy one target while beginning a turn to engage a second - something the MiGs cannot even dream of doing, and something I capitalised on hugely last night in the F-5. It also has about twice the reach of an R-60, perhaps a little more depending on aspect and whether the target makes much effort to evade or not.

There is no argument to be had here, you're conflating two separate variants of a missile as being the same thing while also downplaying a critical close combat feature (don't even start me on the F-5's radar at low altitude - you know, the radar most people call 'useless' and don't turn on). Either you aren't aware of the full capabilities of the aircraft in question and their weapons, or you do know and you're trying to move the goalposts to get what you want, which is an all-aspect missile for the F-5 while red have only the R-3R, which can't be effectively used at low altitude. The decision's already been made, it's all academic at this point.

I don't think there are any "dramatic slippery slope fallacies" being made when people repeatedly argue in bad faith, but maybe that's just me. In the meantime, I certainly had a whale of a time swatting MiGs left, right, and centre last night with the oh-so-terrible 9P, and was only shot down by SAMs - not once by any of said MiGs, from any aspect. 8 of my 9 AIM-9 shots hit :)