Jump to content

Modern Warfare and DCS realism


Vanguard

Recommended Posts

Hi Folks,

 

I'm not really sure where this posts belongs, so this feels the safest, but if a mod has a better opinion, feel free to move it.

 

I was playing around in the mission editor and used the tools to "generate" a mission in a region. I clicked fly to check it out, and ultimately, there were a number of ground units, a pair of helos of each side, a pair of fighters or so on each side, and, well, bottom line, within 10s of seconds or a minute, it was an immediate "mosh pit", and all of the air was wiped with one fighter victorious in about 3 mins or so.

 

So, it got me thinking, what would a real modern battlefield look like? Most of the missions and campaigns have, at least in my opinion, a certain level of air superiority already established. The A-10C campaign for example, I can take days to analyze my threats and engage with no real danger.

 

I guess my question is, what would a real modern battlefield look like in the early days/moments before air superiority was established by either side? Would it be a mosh pit, how would helos and CAS aircraft operate in such an environment, or better yet, would they, and I'd be interested to hear the communities thoughts on tips and tricks to truely mimic such an environment in DCS.

 

Appreciate your comments and input,

Vanguard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends on a lot of situations, like how lopsided the battle is (ie is it a superpower invading a poor nation with outdated weapons). If we just consider more or less even sides, my understanding it you just wouldn't perform regular CAS if you don't have air superiority. Low and slow aircraft are too vulnerable to be placed on the front lines. If you had to run air to ground sorties you'd use strike fighters like the F-16 or F-15E. If your side even had friendlies on the ground to support, they'd probably also be vulnerable to enemy air power.

 

 

In short the first stage of the war would likely be air to air to establish dominance, with some air to ground directed at SAM's, radars, etc. Only once that has made some progress would A-10's and the like see major action. At least that's what I would expect.

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Establishing air superiority has been mission one since at least WW2 .

9700k @ stock , Aorus Pro Z390 wifi , 32gb 3200 mhz CL16 , 1tb EVO 970 , MSI RX 6800XT Gaming X TRIO , Seasonic Prime 850w Gold , Coolermaster H500m , Noctua NH-D15S , CH Pro throttle and T50CM2/WarBrD base on Foxxmounts , CH pedals , Reverb G2v2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, as others said, either one side has overwhelming superiority, or it kind of IS a bit of a moshpit until one side establishes dominance in one or more categories. That's why the whole ''Red Tide in Europe'' thing was such a scare, because with modern warfighting, even a conventional war, most the heaviest fighting would be over in the first few days or so before reinforcements from overseas could arrive. Until you have some kind of air supremacy, many mission types will just unfeasible suicide runs.

 

Look at Desert Storm. Despite the negative impressions of Middle Eastern nations, Iraq was ready to rock by any standards. Their tech was outdated, but they had a good defensive system in place, in general, and the US invasion was disproportionately in their favor, it wasn't bloodless, and it would have been a lot worse if not for very careful planning.

 

The firepower of even a semi-modern military is hard to wrap your head around, really. I mean the typical tank is rolling with dozens of 5'' shells, an infantrymen has the firepower of an entire squad, if not several squads of a hundred years ago (more depending on what he's armed with), even smallish aircraft carry payloads greater than a WWII level bomber, and ships are equally over the top. I mean, seriously, there is a LOT of fast moving, efficiently directed firepower there. And with SatNav, IR, NVGs, etc... there's no place to hide.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, as others said, either one side has overwhelming superiority, or it kind of IS a bit of a moshpit until one side establishes dominance in one or more categories. That's why the whole ''Red Tide in Europe'' thing was such a scare, because with modern warfighting, even a conventional war, most the heaviest fighting would be over in the first few days or so before reinforcements from overseas could arrive. Until you have some kind of air supremacy, many mission types will just unfeasible suicide runs.

 

Look at Desert Storm. Despite the negative impressions of Middle Eastern nations, Iraq was ready to rock by any standards. Their tech was outdated, but they had a good defensive system in place, in general, and the US invasion was disproportionately in their favor, it wasn't bloodless, and it would have been a lot worse if not for very careful planning.

 

The firepower of even a semi-modern military is hard to wrap your head around, really. I mean the typical tank is rolling with dozens of 5'' shells, an infantrymen has the firepower of an entire squad, if not several squads of a hundred years ago (more depending on what he's armed with), even smallish aircraft carry payloads greater than a WWII level bomber, and ships are equally over the top. I mean, seriously, there is a LOT of fast moving, efficiently directed firepower there. And with SatNav, IR, NVGs, etc... there's no place to hide.

 

 

Which is precisely why I don't care much for modern warfare in games. Knocking down a plane at 6km or more feels more like cheating than anything else. I much prefer WWll or even WWl style of air combat. No radar, no avionics, no guided or smart weapons, just stick and rudder, fly by the seat of your pants and shoot what you can see with your own eyes. There's a certain romanticism and excitement that gets lost with smart weapons, at least in games. The art of the dogfight gets lost and It takes the fun out of it.

 

I am a big fan of the WWll war birds and early helos like the Huey and Mi-8. I can't wait for the soon to be released P-47 Thunderbolt. Now that's a war bird.

🇺🇦  SLAVA UKRAINI  🇺🇦

MoBo - ASUS 990FX R2 Sabertooth,     CPU - AMD FX 9590 @4.7Gb. No OC
RAM - GSkill RipJaws DDR3 32 Gb @2133 MHZ,   GPU - EVGA GeForce GTX 1660Ti 6Gb DDR5 OC'd, Core 180MHz, Memory 800MHz
Game drive - Samsung 980 M.2 EVO 1Tb SSD,    OS Drive - 860 EVO 500Gb SATA SSD, Win10 Pro 22H2

Controls - Thrustmaster T-Flight HOTAS X,   Monitor - LG 32" 1920 X 1080,   PSU - Prestige ATX-PR800W PSU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all, thanks for your input thus far. @rayrayblues I tend to feel the same way, that's precisely why I'm looking for tips and tricks to bring a bit of balanced playability to the modern side.

 

I'd like to make the assumption of two superpower or at least two modernly equipped states. If we all agree the first phase is air dominance and nothing else of major significance would take place at least during the initial portion of this stage, and I'm looking to create some stand-off to avoid the "mosh pit", the first thing that comes to mind is extremely dense air defense. Is this realistic? On a map such as Caucasus, how dense would it need to be, and out of curiosity, IRL how dense would it realistically, and would it be enough.

 

Would there be a dense net of AD on each side of the mountain ridge and would this be effective in prolonging the air superiority phase, forcing each side to use cruise missles and spec ops to disable the net, or would they play little significance as both sides are launching BVR from their respective sides.

 

This may seem obvious to some, I honestly thought it was to me, until I started visualizing it and playing it out in the ME, and putting more thought into it. If a real war hypothetically broke out in that region how many jets would be up in the air at any one time lobbing missles at each other BVR over the mountain range, how long would it last, at is that literally how it would play out?

 

V

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with scenario design is that it is difficult to make it realistic and difficult to make it 'playable', and the two are often mutually exclusive. What a set piece battle doesn't take into account is the various stages prior to that situation There is no element of surprise, no advance-to-contact. Generally one side will be defensive, with established (and probably known) dispersals, AD sites, pre-surveyed artillery sites, etc. while the other side will be offensive and if planned correctly massively numerically superior to counter the advantage of prepared defensive positions. The attacking force will attempt to neutralise the air defence network, C3 (or whatever the current term is) and gain air superiority before committing ground forces. Now, this can happen in a number of ways. With Op Granby/Desert Storm there were no real time constraints, so the pre-ground war phase went on as long as necessary to achieve those objectives before putting a foot inside Iraqi territory, hence we never saw the vaunted 'Mother of all Battles' - a tank war on a scale not seen since WWII. Or it may be that an attacking force needs to achieve a certain objective quickly, in which case they may not have the opportunity to completely suppress AD/C3/etc before rolling across the border. NATO expected PACT forces to gain as much ground in Western Europe as quickly as possible to lessen the chances of tactical nuclear weapons being deployed against them.

 

If you just scatter a couple of tank platoons within range of each other then it will just be a slug-fest (and given DCS's limitations with ground war AI and omniscient targeting, they don't move for cover, withdraw or redeploy, they won't look for an alternative route to their objective, they will just sit there motionless exchanging HEAT shells until one side is obliterated). Same with air assets. Simply spawning WVR has eliminated the most important tactical phase of the fight and of course just places you directly in a furball. The fact is that the modern battlefield is vast and interlinked with many mutually supporting units designed to work as a cohesive force. It is kind of difficult to achieve that kind of scenario with DCS.

 

If you want an idea of how a modern (i.e. late cold war) battlefield could play out then stick a couple of these on your reading list:

 

Red Army, Ralph Peters (the only English language book written from the Soviet perspective that I know of).

Third World War, Gen Sir John Hackett

Northern Fury - H Hour, Bart Gauvin & Joel Radunzel

Team Yankee - Harold Coyle

Laptop Pilot. Alienware X17, i9 11980HK 5.0GHz, 16GB RTX 3080, 64GB DDR4 3200MHz, NVMe SSD. 2x TM Warthog, Hornet grip, Virpil CM2 & TPR pedals, FSSB-R3, Cougar throttle, Viper pit WIP (XBox360 when traveling). Rift S.

NTTR, SoH, Syria, Sinai, Channel, South Atlantic, CA, Supercarrier, FC3, A-10CII, F-5, F-14, F-15E, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Harrier, M2000, F1, Viggen, MiG-21, Yak-52, L-39, MB-339, CE2, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mi-8, Mi-24, Huey, Apache, Spitfire, Mossie.  Wishlist: Tornado, Jaguar, Buccaneer, F-117 and F-111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vanguard

 

I knew a Strike Eagle pilot that said in training they were told one of their primary targets early on (assuming war with Russia/China) would be S-300s and that they could all expect to die, their job was to take out enough of them to make a hole for the next wave to exploit (or something to that effect).

 

A ''real'' near peer enemy is going to more or less have a line of those covering the majority of the ''front line'', supplemented by warships like Moskva and so forth. Before you get to them, you also have to cross a line of medium range SAMs like Buks etc. Before you get to THEM, near the front line itself, you'll have scattered short range SAMs like OSAs. Scattered throughout all of it, you'll have Shilkas, Tunguskas, and Tors trying to intercept low flying aircraft and/or missiles. Above all of that, you'll have a swarm of angry interceptors. The Soviet Unions entire strategy in the evwnt of war boiled down to locking down the entire European airspace, and keeping carrier groups far enough away to degrade the effectiveness of their sorties. Thus the ''scary factor'' of WWIII scenarios in the real world, which is what peer wars quickly turn into.

 

For density, you should be able to google some simple OoBs or battle plans, but it would vary depending on the intensity of the conflict. A ''major war'' the density would quickly become very high, and life expectancy for individual aircraft wouod become very low. This is.why the emphasis on stealth aircraft, to try to live long enough to penetrate to key target areas and cause widerspread disruption.

 

Otherwise, nobody's going to be able to be super specific. A ''real'' major power war scenario isn't going to be ''fun'' though. It's either in the early days, where hundreds of aircraft per day are flushing down the tubes, or it's after one side has lost steam (and dominance) in which case it gradually becomes increasingly lopsided until their defenses finally collapse.

 

Do some basic research on any modern conflict, like 2008 Russo-Georgian, or even the Ukraine conflict in the first year when the aggression was much higher tempo. You get spotted, you die a few moments later, regardless of which side you're on.

 

It's all about long range SAMs and precision rapid response artillery.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vanguard

 

-snip-

 

You get spotted, you die a few moments later, regardless of which side you're on.

 

It's all about long range SAMs and precision rapid response artillery.

 

Precisely my point. Where is the fun in that?? Where is the skill in that??

Speaking of old school combat, does anyone else play "Rise Of Flight?"

Rickety old bi-planes and weak machine guns. So much fun. Your only tool is ACM's.

You gotta out-fly the other guy. :joystick:

🇺🇦  SLAVA UKRAINI  🇺🇦

MoBo - ASUS 990FX R2 Sabertooth,     CPU - AMD FX 9590 @4.7Gb. No OC
RAM - GSkill RipJaws DDR3 32 Gb @2133 MHZ,   GPU - EVGA GeForce GTX 1660Ti 6Gb DDR5 OC'd, Core 180MHz, Memory 800MHz
Game drive - Samsung 980 M.2 EVO 1Tb SSD,    OS Drive - 860 EVO 500Gb SATA SSD, Win10 Pro 22H2

Controls - Thrustmaster T-Flight HOTAS X,   Monitor - LG 32" 1920 X 1080,   PSU - Prestige ATX-PR800W PSU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to make the assumption of two superpower or at least two modernly equipped states. If we all agree the first phase is air dominance and nothing else of major significance would take place at least during the initial portion of this stage, and I'm looking to create some stand-off to avoid the "mosh pit", the first thing that comes to mind is extremely dense air defense. Is this realistic? On a map such as Caucasus, how dense would it need to be, and out of curiosity, IRL how dense would it realistically, and would it be enough.

 

Would there be a dense net of AD on each side of the mountain ridge and would this be effective in prolonging the air superiority phase, forcing each side to use cruise missles and spec ops to disable the net, or would they play little significance as both sides are launching BVR from their respective sides.

 

Take a look at this website to get an idea of how an Integrated Air Defence System (IADS) can look like: http://geimint.blogspot.com/ (look under "SAM Networks" on the right ledger).

 

Here's an example of the IADS of East Germany at the end of the Cold War: http://geimint.blogspot.com/2008/08/ddr-air-defense-cold-war-case-study.html

 

WARTIMERINGSNEW.jpg

 

This may seem obvious to some, I honestly thought it was to me, until I started visualizing it and playing it out in the ME, and putting more thought into it. If a real war hypothetically broke out in that region how many jets would be up in the air at any one time lobbing missles at each other BVR over the mountain range, how long would it last, at is that literally how it would play out?

 

The modern battlefield is a very deadly place throughout all dimensions. Weapons reach far and have incredible precision. Staying undetected is key on the modern battlefield as these modern weapons can target you very rapidly as soon as you are detected. Back in the old days the enemy could detect you without having the ability to strike you. Long range precision guided munitions changed that. While it is so important to remain undetected, this got incredible difficult as well, thanks to modern sensors.

 

In a full scale air war stealth fighters would make up the bulk of the first wave, trying to use their stealth advantage to take out as much of the enemy air defense as possible. Against a peer opponent this would only be possible to a certain degree and it's quite likely that neither side would gain air superiority immediately. In that case ground strikers would have to carry out their mission in contested airspace, probably at very low level to remain hidden from enemy aircraft and radars.

 

 

The books recommend by Lace do a great job at picturing such a battlefield and I really document to read them:

Red Army, Ralph Peters (the only English language book written from the Soviet perspective that I know of).

Third World War, Gen Sir John Hackett

Northern Fury - H Hour, Bart Gauvin & Joel Radunzel

Team Yankee - Harold Coyle

If you want to try this out by yourself, then DCS might not be the best place to do so. I would recommend to take a look at Command Modern Operations as it does a great job at simulating the modern battlefield at the operational level. The abovementioned book Northern Fury has actually been written by a campaign designer of this game and is based on that campaign and the this "game" is used by Navies and Air Forces around the world for training.


Edited by QuiGon

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you already have air superiority and have suppressed enemy IADS, you wouldn't tempt fate with strike aircraft.

 

Even if there's a really, really important objective and above conditions aren't met, most significant powers have lots of cruise missiles to use instead. And frankly, that's the answer to OP's question in my opinion: both sides would try to pummel opponent's defensive/offensive capabilities with cruise missiles, and if available probably also with stealth aircraft. That's basically how it has been all the way since the Gulf War in early 90s as far as I recall.

 

Though, one initial question may change how first days of a war may look: are we talking about asymmetrical warfare, or a peer vs peer or near peer war between two great powers.

 

Since it was the example OP have, A-10C in my opinion, is an asset that you would be using after you've already established dominance over hostile air defense assets. Flying them when there are enemy fighters and multi-tiered SAM systems still active is a bit suicidal in my opinion.

Wishlist: F-4E Block 53 +, MiG-27K, Su-17M3 or M4, AH-1F or W circa 80s or early 90s, J35 Draken, Kfir C7, Mirage III/V

DCS-Dismounts Script

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would recommend to take a look at Command Modern Operations as it does a great job at simulating the modern battlefield at the operational level.

 

Very much this. C:MO is a highly recommended piece of software which complements DCS nicely. There are many cross-overs including Tacview integration, and it is possible to play out any post-WWII scenario (real or hypothetical) you can imagine.

 

I would love to see these two linked in some way one day, and it has been hinted at (by Matrix, not ED AFAIK), but I imagine it will be a very long way off. One can dream though...

Laptop Pilot. Alienware X17, i9 11980HK 5.0GHz, 16GB RTX 3080, 64GB DDR4 3200MHz, NVMe SSD. 2x TM Warthog, Hornet grip, Virpil CM2 & TPR pedals, FSSB-R3, Cougar throttle, Viper pit WIP (XBox360 when traveling). Rift S.

NTTR, SoH, Syria, Sinai, Channel, South Atlantic, CA, Supercarrier, FC3, A-10CII, F-5, F-14, F-15E, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Harrier, M2000, F1, Viggen, MiG-21, Yak-52, L-39, MB-339, CE2, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mi-8, Mi-24, Huey, Apache, Spitfire, Mossie.  Wishlist: Tornado, Jaguar, Buccaneer, F-117 and F-111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since it was the example OP have, A-10C in my opinion, is an asset that you would be using after you've already established dominance over hostile air defense assets. Flying them when there are enemy fighters and multi-tiered SAM systems still active is a bit suicidal in my opinion.

That's what most people say aboutb the A-10 when they look at it from today's perspective, where it got employed like that a lot, but initially it was planned to be able to perform CAS in a high threat environment in and around the Fulda Gap. That's why they came up with such a durable design when they developed the A-10, to be able to take some pounding and give the pilot a better chance to survive in such environments.

For asymetrical warfare there are birds like the Super Tucano that don't provide the survivability that is necessary for high intensity battlefields that the A-10 was made for.

 

I would love to see these two linked in some way one day, and it has been hinted at (by Matrix, not ED AFAIK), but I imagine it will be a very long way off. One can dream though...

Thinking about the dynamic campaign that ED is working on, I would see a lot of potential there!


Edited by QuiGon

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what most people say aboutb the A-10 when they look at it from today's perspective, where it got employed like that a lot, but initially it was planned to be able to perform CAS in a high threat environment in and around the Fulda Gap. That's why they came up with such a durable design when they developed the A-10, to be able to take some pounding and give the pilot a better chance to survive in such environments.

For asymetrical warfare there are birds like the Super Tucano that don't provide the survivability that is necessary for high intensity battlefields that the A-10 was made for.

 

 

Yes, that was the deal when it was developed in Cold War, to plug the fulda gap from flowing with T-80s and such. But I would say that was more along the lines of "make sure this thing kills lots of tanks before eventually going down". Besides, since the question was specifically about modern warfare, I still say that A-10 is pretty much not a first week of the war aircraft in a conflict against a peer/near peer opponent.

Wishlist: F-4E Block 53 +, MiG-27K, Su-17M3 or M4, AH-1F or W circa 80s or early 90s, J35 Draken, Kfir C7, Mirage III/V

DCS-Dismounts Script

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How long would it take until either side would run out of airplanes ? 2 days, 3 days, a week maybe.

Unless you take tactical nukes into consideration this is all hyper-hypothetical as no 2 super powers have infinite amounts of airframes or missiles.

 

The reason why we dont seem to have an answer is that there maybe is no real answer and both super powers knew they could not sustain a war for more than a few days without the risk of bleeding out in high-tech material and thus be forced to use nukes, pretty soon.

 

The only good thing about nukes, they make you stop thinking about such a scenario as it would rather rapidly lead to using them with fatal consequences for all.

Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Asus 1080ti EK-waterblock - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus PG278Q 27" QHD Gsync 144Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most stuff I've heard/read suggested NATO expected a war in Europe to be over (more or less) within 10-14 days, the heaviest fighting in the first 2 or 3 with massive casualties for all, followed by a week or two of glorified mop up operations by whoever was still functioning by then. Germany was considered a writeoff and some doctrines called for nuking it as soon as the USSR invaded just to slow them down. Reinforcement from the mainland US was highly improbable, whatever happened would happen with whatever forces were at hand. After that it would probably turn into a more protracted conflict with the US, but similarly fast paced.

 

 

I distinctly remember an interview with former NATO... whatever the topmost head guy's title was. He said during most the Cold War people had no idea how thin Europe's defenses were. He said they had about 7-10 days supplies, and that it wasn't affordable to station enough troops to defend it and without them it wasn't possible to win. It was pretty much only the threat of nuclear war that deterred invasion. He also mentioned most the Euros refused to devote much resources to the matter.


Edited by zhukov032186

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the French famously devoted a lot to the matter, as in their nuclear arsenal which was strictly separate from NATO was specifically designed to barely reach over the Rhine river. That's the Cold War equivalent of announcing that you'll trip your friends when followed by zombies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC from one of those many YT vids I have been watching the baseline was Germany would become a nuclear waste land, bombed by dozens over dozens of bombs of different sizes, some carried by parachuters as tactical nukes, some by Fighter Bombers and other by missiles of different sizes.

 

What an outlook to live here, at least it'll be quick.

 

The normal dose the USAF planned for a rather small-midsize USSR airfield was ~40 nukes...yeah, to hell with peace.

 

 

As long as lions don't eat grass it will remain this way, make no mistake.

Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Asus 1080ti EK-waterblock - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus PG278Q 27" QHD Gsync 144Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC from one of those many YT vids I have been watching the baseline was Germany would become a nuclear waste land, bombed by dozens over dozens of bombs of different sizes, some carried by parachuters as tactical nukes, some by Fighter Bombers and other by missiles of different sizes.

 

What an outlook to live here, at least it'll be quick.

 

The normal dose the USAF planned for a rather small-midsize USSR airfield was ~40 nukes...yeah, to hell with peace.

 

As long as lions don't eat grass it will remain this way, make no mistake.

 

 

So we are good then:megalol:

 

 

i7-7700K OC @ 5Ghz | ASUS IX Hero MB | ASUS GTX 1080 Ti STRIX | 32GB Corsair 3000Mhz | Corsair H100i V2 Radiator | Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe 500G SSD | Samsung 850 EVO 500G SSD | Corsair HX850i Platinum 850W | Oculus Rift | ASUS PG278Q 27-inch, 2560 x 1440, G-SYNC, 144Hz, 1ms | VKB Gunfighter Pro

Chuck's DCS Tutorial Library

Download PDF Tutorial guides to help get up to speed with aircraft quickly and also great for taking a good look at the aircraft available for DCS before purchasing. Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great topic!

I am currently reading "Warthog: Flying the A-10 in the Gulf War". A must read for any hog driver. (Oddly I don't have the hog yet?)

Even though the Gulf war from a historical viewpoint was a quick "easy"win. Leading up to and fighting for those first few weeks was anything but easy. The author paints a picture of what a modern air war would (did) look like. Lots of unknowns. Lots and lots of AAA, scared of migs, long 8-10 hr missions. Hell the flight over from the states in the opening chapters had me about wetting my pants!

 

And Red Storm Rising was awesome as well. Just more bigger :)

hog.thumb.jpg.38754e39e823ad81b956aac8599aa830.jpg

T-16000M FCS | Track IR5 | Quest 2 | ASROCK Z370 | i7-8700k | GTX1080-OC | 32GB DDR4 | Windows 10 | OSX High Sierra for real work

 

Hack build

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Truly superior pilots are those that use their superior judgment to avoid those situations where they might have to use their superior skills.

 

If you ever find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

 

"If at first you don't succeed, Carrier Landings are not for you!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everyone, in our time it’s very difficult to find a high-quality and interesting game, but when you are obsessed with airplanes this game fits perfectly into your repertoire, I personally fly only on F-16, and many have encountered the problem of the inconvenience of a regular keyboard, but I recently found this site https://www.grelly.uk/video-games-consoles/ is where a very wide range of choices

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...