F-8 Crusader

As for A-4E. Absolutely, would love to see it as full fidelity module. Mods are fine, but there is a point I feel it gets more inconvenient to run it like that instead of fully integrated version.

Yup, I stopped using it for this reason. I wish that dev team would work with ED to make it official, but thus far they have no interest.

I really think ED should develop a carrier version of the Phantom instead of the Air Force E model once they come back to the Phantom.

The E was the most widely used and produced. Though the G was probably the coolest.

For a navy phantom, F4J or S would work, but there are also the Brit phantom's to consider.

Honestly given the huge numbers produced and variants they should do both/a few.

Yup, I stopped using it for this reason. I wish that dev team would work with ED to make it official, but thus far they have no interest.

If this goes one some team will finally do it.

The E was the most widely used and produced. Though the G was probably the coolest.

 

For a navy phantom, F4J or S would work, but there are also the Brit phantom's to consider.

 

Honestly given the huge numbers produced and variants they should do both/a few.

Yeah, but E is generally a more ground pounding than air to air platform. I personally like J and N.

B/N shared some ECM and RWR stuff with F-8J too.

No Hiromachi, you’re a Phantom phan

Yes Sir, real Phan here :)

If this goes one some team will finally do it.

 

 

Yeah, but E is generally a more ground pounding than air to air platform. I personally like J and N.

B/N shared some ECM and RWR stuff with F-8J too.

Yes, another Phantom Phan! We need a "DCS on-hold/cancelled the F-4" Support Group right here!

I'd prefer an F-4J over the F-4S or F-4N myself since it saw combat. And I think the slatted F-4E's were actually designed for air-to-air - slats, TISEO, APX-80 IFF - all are air-to-air assets. When they went to Vietnam, they also had crews that trained together, like the Navy, so that they could be more proficient than ever before. But they also did add AGM-65A's and more potent air-to-ground stuff.

All F-4Ns saw combat :P Just that they were called F-4B back then. F-4N was in service from Feb 1973, so they must have seen some action.

As for F-4E, naaah. It's radar was nowhere near APG-59/AWG-10 from F-4J and even lacked in comparison to APQ-72/AERO-1A. Navy Phantoms (including later F-4Bs) got SEAM, VTAS, dogfight computer with ACM launch zone indications and dogfight modes for AIM-7s, air-to-air IFF, data-link and pilot lock-on mode.

Air force throughout the Nam war did not emphasize air-to-air capabilities nearly as much as Navy post RAG / Top Gun introduction.

For me Navy Phantoms remain primary air to air predators.

If this goes one some team will finally do it.

 

 

Yeah, but E is generally a more ground pounding than air to air platform. I personally like J and N.

B/N shared some ECM and RWR stuff with F-8J too.

Well, blue air needs cold war ground pounders :). I mean currently we have the.... Oh wait, we don't... And I'd say the F4E is decently well rounded for either A/A or A/G though the naval phantoms were far better optimized for A/A. Besides once the F14A comes out, that will be the definitive cold war naval fighter for the second half of the cold war, so I'd rather see something more on the strike/multirole side of the house.

Really there should be 2 different modules for it IMO (or 3 if you want to add ze British onez).

Well, blue air needs cold war ground pounders :). I mean currently we have the.... Oh wait, we don't....

A-10A : ))laughs in GAU-8 ((

I really think ED should develop a carrier version of the Phantom instead of the Air Force E model once they come back to the Phantom.

I really, really, REALLY hope they will not do this.

F-4 = F-4E. I want multirole fighter-bomber that has seen service all over the world, has a gun, lots of guided air to ground weapons/sensors, a targeting pod, and also some slats on those wings.

The version Belsimtek chose is literally the best F-4 to do. A naval F-4 in addition to it would be cool yes, but a naval F-4 instead of an 80s F-4E would be a huge shame.

A-10A : ))laughs in GAU-8 ((

Fair, but I'm limiting myself to actual fully click modules. If we throw in FC3 we have the A10A and Su25A. So CAS, but still no strike planes.

And full disclosure I'd love to see clicky versions of both.

I see no reason to exclude FC3, and while "full clicky" is a must-have for some, there is certainly an important case to be made for an "abbreviated model"- dcs has a pretty brutal learning curve, and it's certainly something to take pride in learning how to operate these aircraft, but there does need to be an onramp of sorts to bridge the gap between those just getting started and the hardcore simmers. Il-2 isn't clicky at all, and although I spend more time flying dcs, I've had far more fun with the other sim. Bringing the casual players on is important, if for no reason than the potential development dollars they bring with them.

I really, really, REALLY hope they will not do this.

 

F-4 = F-4E. I want multirole fighter-bomber that has seen service all over the world, has a gun, lots of guided air to ground weapons/sensors, a targeting pod, and also some slats on those wings.

 

The version Belsimtek chose is literally the best F-4 to do. A naval F-4 in addition to it would be cool yes, but a naval F-4 instead of an 80s F-4E would be a huge shame.

This:

is cooler than this:

Period.

Also, I think we should get Phantom Phans thread somewhere else. This one after all belongs to Crusader folk:

And full disclosure I'd love to see clicky versions of both.

I would too, but I'd like to see more non-clicky ones as well for a few reasons: like I mentioned before, for newer players. Why ,in the future, would they buy an ossified and outdated module like fc3?

Second, I rarely ever actually click anything, having mapped the most critical controls to stick/hotas/mfds

Third: with as many planes as we'd like to see released, and as many hugs as we want seen fixed on past modules, and with the limited number of people actually coding/developing the modules, perhaps the occasional medium-fidelity module would be a realistic compromise

This:

 

 

 

 

is cooler than this:

 

 

 

 

Period.

This, on the PG map, does it for me

This would be my preference. ;)

https://live.staticflickr.com/4305/36001678411_7df36a66db_b.jpg

I would too, but I'd like to see more non-clicky ones as well for a few reasons: like I mentioned before, for newer players. Why ,in the future, would they buy an ossified and outdated module like fc3?

 

Second, I rarely ever actually click anything, having mapped the most critical controls to stick/hotas/mfds

Third: with as many planes as we'd like to see released, and as many hugs as we want seen fixed on past modules, and with the limited number of people actually coding/developing the modules, perhaps the occasional medium-fidelity module would be a realistic compromise

Thats part of the problem flying in VR. You WANT to click stuff as opposed to mapping it, cuz you can see it in the pit, but not the keyboard/hotas, and going through 3 layers of shift keys sucks :).

I've thought about what a medium-fi plane would look like, but at the end of the day I have a hard time picturing it versus the small bit of extra effort to do a full-fi plane. The A10A is an interesting case as the C version, is more advanced avionics wise but most of the other systems to my knowledge are pretty similar, aero is the same, so it would be IMO fairly easy to do one.

Anyhow back to the Crusader

I only fly vr, so the keyboard is only used for bindings I can find by touch. I use the mouse for the rare stuff that I haven't bound, but that's not very common. Additionally, using a common binding system across all aircraft for universal tho controls (gear,flaps, speed brake, et cetera) makes it easy to jump from plane to plane with plenty of open bindings still available that's unique to each airframe- but I don't notice that much of a difference going from, say a mig29 or the -25T to say, a viggen or m2k (in terms of control, not flight experience obviously)

Fwiw, I've been spending most of my time in the mi8, gazelle, and ka50 lately

I'd love to put the tomcat to use, but at the moment it's a beautiful slideshow.

With as much as I'd like to see more non-naval air in DCS, I really really want to see the f8, especially if I could do this:

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/the-true-story-behind-the-famous-sequence-of-thirteen-days-movie-featuring-the-rf-8-crusader-low-level-high-speed-run-over-cuba-during-the-missile-crisis

F-8 scene from thirteen days

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DoSNLeC-eMUQ&ved=2ahUKEwjZ0MjA3ZrnAhVFvJ4KHUNABHoQwqsBMAB6BAgHEAQ&usg=AOvVaw3eqk4aVgGDdcd7uBvKffwY

You know what also would go well with F-8J ?

This:

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry but I couldnt hold myself :) Phantom fan here.

 

As for A-4E. Absolutely, would love to see it as full fidelity module. Mods are fine, but there is a point I feel it gets more inconvenient to run it like that instead of fully integrated version.

This

Except I want the F-4E not the F-4N or J :D:D

Navy and Marines > Air Force any day :P

All F-4Ns saw combat :P Just that they were called F-4B back then. F-4N was in service from Feb 1973, so they must have seen some action.

 

As for F-4E, naaah. It's radar was nowhere near APG-59/AWG-10 from F-4J and even lacked in comparison to APQ-72/AERO-1A. Navy Phantoms (including later F-4Bs) got SEAM, VTAS, dogfight computer with ACM launch zone indications and dogfight modes for AIM-7s, air-to-air IFF, data-link and pilot lock-on mode.

Air force throughout the Nam war did not emphasize air-to-air capabilities nearly as much as Navy post RAG / Top Gun introduction.

 

For me Navy Phantoms remain primary air to air predators.

Well the F-4E was the better dogfighter, and not just because it came with a gun :)

The slats helped the turning performance quite a bit, and AFAIK apart from the weaker radar the F-4E feautured more toys overall.

Navy and Marines > Air Force any day :P

Who cares about the branches & insignias, it's all about the technical stuff :D

Navy and Marines > Air Force any day :P

Whatever gets chosen, it will make a great teammate to the Crusader!

And yes, you were right about the weapons, radar and training of the USN F-4's Hiromachi! Just like the F-8 pilots, they were the deadliest in the skies.

Although the F-4B's saw service, none of them say in -N standard. Slatted F-4E saw combat and made multiple aces with both the USAF and Israel, which most people forget. The IDF has nine aces in the F-4E which saw combat in the Yom Kippur war with slats and the gun making them pretty good dog fighters.

Back to the F-8 though, it will be a beast... it's better than the F-5 in virtually every way so I can;t wait to have cold war servers with it available.

Pretty sure the F-4S also had slats, and in fact it supposedly turned better than the -E because the gun in the -E made it more nose heavy (source: somewhere in here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxjSyQfUWwM, sorry if I can't do better).

Honestly any Phantom would to it for me. Sure the Navy paint schemes are amazing, but so are these:

Anyway, Crusader content to limit the derailing: