Vietnam War - POLL

A MiG-19 would be awesome, but I want the F-4 Phantom more, esp. the E model since we got the MiG-21Bis :)

A MiG-19 would be awesome, but I want the F-4 Phantom more, esp. the E model since we got the MiG-21Bis :)

The Phantom would be awesome, though I would prefer the F4D, so we can have multiplayer missions where the Mig-17F can go up against a missile only Phantom. I think that would be more fun for both sides, better balanced and more challenging. The Mig-17F won't have short range or medium range missiles and the Phantom won't have a gun. I also really hope that we aren't going to use the Mig-21bis as the North Vietnamese plane of choice or any Mig-21 as the North Vietnamese ride of choice, that we get a Mig-17F & Mig-19. The North Vietnamese didn't fly the Mig-21bis during the Vietnam War and the Mig-21's they did fly weren't that common or the most representative jet for the North Vietnamese side. The Mig 17F point defense bomber interceptor was their most numerous front line point defense bomber interceptor.

It would be awesome to have multiplayer maps where players can opt for underdog planes, like the Mig-17F or F-105 Thud, without fearing being on a map where everyone else is using a F4E or Mig-21bis. I don't think it will be that fun for a Mig-17F player, to have one or several F4E's booming and zooming the Mig-17F, with an all aspect integrated cannon to make snap shots at the Mig-17F, which would be trapped like fish in a barrel. Also, consider the F-105 drivers, they would have Mig-21bis players routinely chasing down and shooting down the F-105, using a version of the Mig-21 that didn't even face the F-105, during Vietnam. The Mig-17F would be a much better historical match up the F-105 and give the F-105 players a good chance of escaping or even shooting down their opposition, which is the least we can do for the players we are also depending on to handle all the in mission ground pounding.

If we make the Vietnam match up F4E vs Mig-21bis, then, when we get on to multiplayer, it will be 20 players using the F4E , 20 players using the Mig-21bis, and Hadwell in the lone Mig17F or lone F-105 Thud. Worse, we might have missions where the North Vietnamese are using Su-27's to counter the F-15's being used by the USA and South Vietnam. :megalol: It would be better to have the F4E you are hoping for than to never have an F4 in DCS at all, but if we can have an F4D instead of the F4E, all the better.

:thumbup: MJ

I'd just really like a direct match up for the MiG-21Bis, and the F-4E fits that role perfectly :)

If we get MiG-17s, -19's and F-105's then I'd like the F-4D as well (which could mount a gun pod btw), but until we get those other planes I'd prefer the F-4E :)

F4E +999

I'd love to fly an F-105 over 'Nam; seeing B-52D arclight strikes, fighting MiG-21's over Hanoi etc. That would be awesome! Also imagine the possibilities that might develop from the multi-seat engine code: imagine being able to crew an AC-130!

The Phantom would be awesome, though I would prefer the F4D, so we can have multiplayer missions where the Mig-17F can go up against a missile only Phantom. I think that would be more fun for both sides, better balanced and more challenging. The Mig-17F won't have short range or medium range missiles and the Phantom won't have a gun. I also really hope that we aren't going to use the Mig-21bis as the North Vietnamese plane of choice or any Mig-21 as the North Vietnamese ride of choice, that we get a Mig-17F & Mig-19. The North Vietnamese didn't fly the Mig-21bis during the Vietnam War and the Mig-21's they did fly weren't that common or the most representative jet for the North Vietnamese side. The Mig 17F point defense bomber interceptor was their most numerous front line point defense bomber interceptor.

 

It would be awesome to have multiplayer maps where players can opt for underdog planes, like the Mig-17F or F-105 Thud, without fearing being on a map where everyone else is using a F4E or Mig-21bis. I don't think it will be that fun for a Mig-17F player, to have one or several F4E's booming and zooming the Mig-17F, with an all aspect integrated cannon to make snap shots at the Mig-17F, which would be trapped like fish in a barrel. Also, consider the F-105 drivers, they would have Mig-21bis players routinely chasing down and shooting down the F-105, using a version of the Mig-21 that didn't even face the F-105, during Vietnam. The Mig-17F would be a much better historical match up the F-105 and give the F-105 players a good chance of escaping or even shooting down their opposition, which is the least we can do for the players we are also depending on to handle all the in mission ground pounding.

 

If we make the Vietnam match up F4E vs Mig-21bis, then, when we get on to multiplayer, it will be 20 players using the F4E , 20 players using the Mig-21bis, and Hadwell in the lone Mig17F or lone F-105 Thud. Worse, we might have missions where the North Vietnamese are using Su-27's to counter the F-15's being used by the USA and South Vietnam. :megalol: It would be better to have the F4E you are hoping for than to never have an F4 in DCS at all, but if we can have an F4D instead of the F4E, all the better.

 

:thumbup: MJ

for balance reasons there can just be a retrofitted mig17f with r3 heatseakers.

pr perhaps the mig17pf which had a radar that worked along with gunsight to track targets.

I Honestly wouldn't want to fly anything other variant of the f4 other then the F4E, preferably the later F-4E with wing slat modifications it got in 1972. after all we have the mig21bis not the pfm.

F4E would also be needed since there is a possibility of 3rd party doing a Mig23.

most 3rd party developers are flexible to allow for multiple combat sceneries not just restricting tech to a certain time period or war.take the f86f for example. it has LABS and retrofitted with heatseakers. to allow for post korean combat scenerios.

the mig21bis has r60 & r60m missiles which it only recived years after its initital service date.the mig21bis may be the last production variant of the mig21, but its radar is still inferior in terms of max range, and tracking capabilities to the F4.

if im not mistaken the f4 had both air and air to ground mapping modes, and the air to air mode had like what 90km max detection range, as well as off boresight tracking/lock mode? mig21bis is still confined to a radar that only has a max range of 30km.

for balance reasons there can just be a retrofitted mig17f with r3 heatseakers.

 

I don't think the North Vietnamese had a Mig-17F with R3 missiles. I think that they used the wing pylons for drop tanks only. Also, F-105 sim pilots ought to have a rival without missiles, to make it easier for the F-105 sim pilots to opt for dropping their load and getting away or fighting the Mig-17, without worrying about r3 missiles.

Instead of two Mig-17's, go with a Chinese Shenyang J-6. We don't have a Chinese DCS add-on, yet. As far as the Mig-21bis, the Vietnamese didn't use it, so I think a Vietnam War map should feature a Mig-17F, a Mig-19, and only a Vietnam war era Mig-21 or no Mig-21. After all, the Mig-21 wasn't that common a North Vietnamese ride, anyway. Their most numerous point defense bomber interceptor was the Mig-17. The Mig-17 was the most common Soviet made bomber interceptor in the Vietnam War and the Shenyang J-6 was the most common PRC made bomber interceptor in the Vietnam War. Worst comes to worst, we don't really need a Mig-21 to make historically plausible, challenging, and balanced missions. if we want to do a What if second US Vietnam War scenario, Blue will certainly have planes that eaoutperform the Mig-21bis.

While we may very well get a F4E, instead of the F4D, I don't think that the Mig-21bis should have any influence on the decision to have one type of DCS Phantom or the other. If we want to do a what if US Vietnam War II scenario, where the Vietnamese are now flying the Mig-21bis, Blue will certainly have planes that more than match the Mig-21bis. We are going to have a historically appropriate US rival for the Mig-21bis in DCS and that rival is awesome, the F-14. I don't think we have to fear the Mig-21bis being too uber for Blue, on a multiplayer map, any time soon. :megalol:

Still, if it comes down to no DCS Phantom or having a DCS F4E, I would surely take the F4E in DCS, every time. I jsut don't want Vietnam multiplayer maps to devolve into repetitive F4E vs Mig-21bis, but maybe there are ways to work around that issue, other than the one I suggested. Kev2go, you Humingbird, and frosty, certainly all have great taste in rides.

Worst comes to worst, we don't really need a Mig-21 to make historically plausible, challenging, and balanced missions. if we want to do a What if second US Vietnam War scenario, Blue will certainly have planes that eaoutperform the Mig-21bis.

That depends on the era, since most of the kills were made by MiG-21 surprise attacks IIRC (or at least later on; it's been a while since I've read the relevant book). Once USAF pilots learned to avoid getting entangled into dogfights with the MiG-17's, I don't think the latter were of much danger, at least to US fighters.

What about using the MiG-21bis without radar and e.g. with 2 missiles to simulate PFM's? For the second part of the air war, MiG-21bis can be used to simulate MF's IMHO.

I'd love to see a hypothetical Linebacker III scenario with the Tomcat-A thrown in. :joystick:

I'd love to see a hypothetical Linebacker III scenario with the Tomcat-A thrown in. :joystick:

Yeah it would be like clubbing baby seals.

Might as well throw in a f15a and f16a too. Just for ***** and giggles.

Dak To, Ho Chi Minh trail, Kon Tum, etc... But this needs heavy emphasis on infantry combat which the sim does not seem to follow. I would love to throw napalm on virtual charlies in bushes but that takes modeling to a whole new ball game. Vietnam is mostly bushes flying.

Dak To, Ho Chi Minh trail, Kon Tum, etc... But this needs heavy emphasis on infantry combat which the sim does not seem to follow. I would love to throw napalm on virtual charlies in bushes but that takes modeling to a whole new ball game. Vietnam is mostly bushes flying.

That and Ed needs to work on flame effects for napalm to work.

On the f5e thread I posted a source that showed napalm/ incidieary based bombs for the f5 such as the blu1 and blu77. Someone from Belsimtek responded saying they can't add those because the engine wouldn't support it. Despite 1.5 and dcs 2.0 coming soon. Flame effects are still not sophisticated enough to properly simulate napalm. ED needs to do work on their end.

Yeah it would be like clubbing baby seals.

 

Might as well throw in a f15a and f16a too. Just for ***** and giggles.

F-14A in Vietnam is not as far fetched as you might think. The F-14 went operational in 1974 and was onstation to cover the evacuation of the American Embassy in Saigon. There's already a Linebacker III campaign for the tabletop wargame "Downtown" that surmises a 1975 expansion to the war and adds the Tomcat as fighter sweep/escort (this is what inspired the idea).

As far as the "clubbing baby seals" bit, that's only assuming unrestricted ROE. ROE in Vietnam required visual ID of a target in order to declare it bandit, and TCS wasn't added until later. Tomcats would be carrying the AIM-7 and AIM-9 in a fighter sweep/escort role, so while they would have an energy advantage, it wouldn't a BVR fest by any means. Besides, the rudimentary RWR would make SAM threats a challenge, and would require package coordination and/or reliance on EA-6B barrage jamming.

That depends on the era, since most of the kills were made by MiG-21 surprise attacks IIRC (or at least later on; it's been a while since I've read the relevant book). Once USAF pilots learned to avoid getting entangled into dogfights with the MiG-17's, I don't think the latter were of much danger, at least to US fighters.

 

What about using the MiG-21bis without radar and e.g. with 2 missiles to simulate PFM's? For the second part of the air war, MiG-21bis can be used to simulate MF's IMHO.

I think the primary goal of the Mig-17F sim pilot would be to get the F-105 Thud sim pilots to drop their bombs short of their intended targets. The Mig-17F is a point defense bomber interceptor and not a air superiority fighter. If the Mig-17F sim pilots succeed in preventing the F-105 Thuds from bombing the ground targets, they accomplish their goal.

:thumbup: MJ

I think the primary goal of the Mig-17F sim pilot would be to get the F-105 Thud sim pilots to drop their bombs short of their intended targets. The Mig-17F is a point defense bomber interceptor and not a air superiority fighter. If the Mig-17F sim pilots succeed in preventing the F-105 Thuds from bombing the ground targets, they accomplish their goal.

 

:thumbup: MJ

but mig17f isnt even capable of mach 1 in level flight.

f105 can just avoid the mig17's and in full burner can easily speed away from them.

if the f105 avoid entangling in dogfights with migs, they are nearly untouchable.

in the early days of operation rolling thunder, before the F4's arrived in numbers, mig17s tended to avoided f105s with F-100 Super Sabre( mistaken for F104) Escorts.

in a game, most players will want to fly the best available fighters anyways.

also people have been talking about the USAF f105 and f4, but forget about the US navies contribution to the air war.

light attackers like the A4 skyhawk would makes things interesting. that would be agile enough to dogfight the mig17s.

The a6 Introduder for a 2 seat attacker.

also the last gen gunfighters like the F8 crusader, providing cover.

but mig17f isnt even capable of mach 1 in level flight.

 

f105 can just avoid the mig17's and in full burner can easily speed away from them.

 

if the f105 avoid entangling in dogfights with migs, they are nearly untouchable.

 

If the Blue team avoids entangling in dogfights? No one can resist a dead sexy Mig-17F.

http://pre04.deviantart.net/3962/th/pre/i/2013/055/8/6/asha_lee_with_mig_17_by_eeyoremd-d5w3y96.jpg

Underestimating the 1st generation Mig-17F is exactly the kind of thinking I am hoping for, online. A 1st generation plane can be dangerous to a 3rd generation plane, can easily damage or destroy much faster & more technologically advanced rides, especially in an online environment where players are willing to hang around, low to the ground, anchored in furballs, fixated on shooting down someone they have been battling for 5 to 10 minutes.

Anyway, even if it is tough to get air kills with the Mig-17F, that is a feather in the proverbial cap for the Mig-17F. In a casino, you can't expect to hit the jackpot every single time. The thought that you could hit, that you have to be in it to win it, the investment of time and effort in getting the kill, I think all of that will help some players stay highly motivated and interested in coming back for more multiplayer matches.

:thumbup: MJ

If the Blue team avoids entangling in dogfights? No one can resist a dead sexy Mig-17F.

 

http://pre04.deviantart.net/3962/th/pre/i/2013/055/8/6/asha_lee_with_mig_17_by_eeyoremd-d5w3y96.jpg

 

Underestimating the 1st generation Mig-17F is exactly the kind of thinking I am hoping for, online. A 1st generation plane can be dangerous to a 3rd generation plane, can easily damage or destroy much faster & more technologically advanced rides, especially in an online environment where players are willing to hang around, low to the ground, anchored in furballs, fixated on shooting down someone they have been battling for 5 to 10 minutes.

 

 

:thumbup: MJ

That Image doesnt say much out of context. I too can go into a guns only training server and fight F15 Dogfight it with nothing but a Mig15/Sabre.

I mean I myself once managed to shoot down a very nugget Mig21 player with F86 Gar8s, back when I myself was still a newish sabre pilot.

Either way most people dont like the idea of flying the underdog, due to the fact most players want a fairer fight, and will just choose the best avialable plane, to fight the enmies comparable counterparts.

That Image doesnt say much out of context. I too can go into a guns only training server and fight F15 Dogfight it with nothing but a Mig15/Sabre.

 

I mean I myself once managed to shoot down a very nugget Mig21 player with F86 Gar8s, back when I myself was still a newish sabre pilot.

 

 

Either way most people dont like the idea of flying the underdog, due to the fact most players want a fairer fight, and will just choose the best avialable plane, to fight the enmies comparable counterparts.

Well, that is the point of my multiplayer screenshot. Anyone can go onto a multiplayer server with a 1st generation plane, armed no better than a Mig-17F & otherwise inferior to the Mig-17F, and tangle with players using aircraft that are from the 3rd & 4th generation, depending on how the mission is set up. So, players can certainly make due with the relatively superior Mig-17F, up against players sim flying planes such as the F-105. This isn't even a fictional what if scenario, such as the Mig-21bis vs the F4 would be, the North Vietnamese did use the Mig-17F against the F-105, in the actual war.

Also, having a Vietnam map without a DCS Mig-17F would be down right unVietnam like. The Mig-17 was the most common point defense bomber interceptor for the North Vietnamese, bar none. Was it outclassed by US fighters in a number of ways? Sure. So was the Zero outclassed by the Hellcat in many ways, but I could not imagine a Pacific War map that did not feature the Zero. Facing superior enemy planes can be tough, but that is part of the fun. If players think that the F4E would club the Mig-17F like a baby seal, we can always have a DCS F4D, instead of an F4E, with missiles only. Hitting a nimble & fast turning Mig-17F with a short range rear aspect only IR missile might not be that easy, especially if the Mig sim pilot keeps his or her head on the swivel or on the periscope, at least. Anyway, that would certainly be more of a historical Vietnam match up than the Mig-21bis vs anything.

:thumbup: MJ

Aye! I forgot the obvious, in addition to two versions of the the F-14, we already have an ideal match for use in a what if Vietnam War scenario involving a North Vietnamese Mig-21bis, the Belsimtek F-5! The Mig-17F & Mig-19 can totally be matched against the F-105, & no internal gun F-4D , without the what if Mig-21bis being an issue for Blue. The F-5E is going to be a solid match for the Mig-21bis, a highly competitive multiplayer match up. :thumbup: MJ

but mig17f isnt even capable of mach 1 in level flight.

 

f105 can just avoid the mig17's and in full burner can easily speed away from them.

 

if the f105 avoid entangling in dogfights with migs, they are nearly untouchable.

 

in the early days of operation rolling thunder, before the F4's arrived in numbers, mig17s tended to avoided f105s with F-100 Super Sabre( mistaken for F104) Escorts.

Don't know where you are getting that last nugget from. Just gotten through reading, Pak six - Gene Bessel, When thunder rolled & Palace Cobra - Ed Rasimus , A tale of 2 bridges - Major A. J. C. Lavalle and currently reading Going Downtown - Jack Broughton. There are plenty of examples in all of those with Mig-17s engaging F-105's. It seems like the NV tactic was to get the 17 up high, dive through a formation with guns blazing then hightail it to the ground and head home.

On the Topic of a what if US Vietnam War II or some sort of post Vietnam proxy war type scenario: In 1985, the Soviet Union stationed Mig-23's in Vietnam. If a dev team makes a Mig-23, we could have a pretty cool match up, with the F-14 vs Mig-23 and F5E vs Mig-21bis, and maybe even a F-16 in there, if you read the article. The F-14 may have outclassed the Mig-23 (or maybe the match up was lopsided due to relative pilot training?) but I think if we have restrictive ROE's, it would be a pretty solid what if match up.

NYT Article on Mig-23 in Vietnam: http://www.nytimes.com/1985/01/02/world/soviet-said-to-put-mig-23-s-in-vietnam.html

Also

Don't know where you are getting that last nugget from. Just gotten through reading, Pak six - Gene Bessel, When thunder rolled & Palace Cobra - Ed Rasimus , A tale of 2 bridges - Major A. J. C. Lavalle and currently reading Going Downtown - Jack Broughton. There are plenty of examples in all of those with Mig-17s engaging F-105's. It seems like the NV tactic was to get the 17 up high, dive through a formation with guns blazing then hightail it to the ground and head home.

That would be very exciting for multiplayer. I tend to think of the F-105 and the Mig-17F as the natural adversaries of one another in Vietnam. I may be wrong, but that is what it seems to me. I have to read that book, sounds like a great read.

:thumbup: MJ

That Image doesnt say much out of context. I too can go into a guns only training server and fight F15 Dogfight it with nothing but a Mig15/Sabre.

 

I mean I myself once managed to shoot down a very nugget Mig21 player with F86 Gar8s, back when I myself was still a newish sabre pilot.

 

 

Either way most people dont like the idea of flying the underdog, due to the fact most players want a fairer fight, and will just choose the best avialable plane, to fight the enmies comparable counterparts.

Ilike to fly authentic aircraft models to fight with different aircrafts. Ican feel the aviation technology footprint. Authentic dynamic is important.

I agree when multiplayer, virtual pilot want a fairer fight.

At same time, a reasonable advantage or disadvantage existin almost every war.

Personally, at most time, I will chose the aircraft with disadvantage to try and feel. OF course, I will fly both sides' aircrafts, trying to feel the difference.

eager to see vietnam scenery for DCS.:pilotfly:

On the Topic of a what if US Vietnam War II or some sort of post Vietnam proxy war type scenario: In 1985, the Soviet Union stationed Mig-23's in Vietnam. If a dev team makes a Mig-23, we could have a pretty cool match up, with the F-14 vs Mig-23 and F5E vs Mig-21bis, and maybe even a F-16 in there, if you read the article. The F-14 may have outclassed the Mig-23 (or maybe the match up was lopsided due to relative pilot training?) but I think if we have restrictive ROE's, it would be a pretty solid what if match up.

 

NYT Article on Mig-23 in Vietnam: http://www.nytimes.com/1985/01/02/world/soviet-said-to-put-mig-23-s-in-vietnam.html

 

Also

 

 

 

That would be very exciting for multiplayer. I tend to think of the F-105 and the Mig-17F as the natural adversaries of one another in Vietnam. I may be wrong, but that is what it seems to me. I have to read that book, sounds like a great read.

 

:thumbup: MJ

you cant really simulate ROE in in a even in a simulation game so well.

Most players would just go ahead and use BVr missiles anways if they know there are no freindlies ahead, and Bomb Migs before they took off, and bomb other targerts with left over ordinance that normally they would not have been permitted to.

Operation Rolling thunder, no one would wnat to play 100% relasitic simulation of that because it was dictated by civilian Bureaucrats, not the AIr force officers in vietnam, which ultimately was more detrimental to the overall war effort and to the pilots risking thier lives.

Operation linebacker was Much more loose in Restrictions.

In game there is no threat of demotion, relieved of duties, or court martial for disobyeing orders.

you cant really simulate ROE in in a even in a simulation game so well.

 

Most players would just go ahead and use BVr missiles anways if they know there are no freindlies ahead, and Bomb Migs before they took off, and bomb other targerts with left over ordinance that normally they would not have been permitted to.

 

Operation Rolling thunder, no one would wnat to play 100% relasitic simulation of that because it was dictated by civilian Bureaucrats, not the AIr force officers in vietnam, which ultimately was more detrimental to the overall war effort and to the pilots risking thier lives.

 

Operation linebacker was Much more loose in Restrictions.

 

In game there is no threat of demotion, relieved of duties, or court martial for disobyeing orders.

Well, loadouts can be modified and restricted for multiplayer events, so BVR weapons can be kept out of the multiplayer events where the Mig-17 is used, the same way that the AIM 120 gets restricted, sometimes. What North Vietnam plane would ever make using BVR weapons a god idea, anyway? Even if we did a what if scenario with the Mig-21bis, it lacks BVR capability. Frankly, if players jsut want to take down Mig-17 from BVR, they might as well shoot at AI, off line. Online, I would expect that players would want close in kills, for Youtube videos, if no other reason. :pilotfly:

:thumbup: MJ

I'm pretty sure a good mission designer could enforce ROE's. Force Loss of mission if areas not on the ROE are bombed etc. I think it would be nice to see a level of discipline required to succeed.

Of course it would all be moot without some form of Automated GCI for both sides.