Cold War 1947 - 1991

yea it is easy to identify but people listening at all is another problem

It might be worth getting in the habit of not relying on self-defence anyway (I know, the Viggens have kind of had to do so recently with the 24). Considering the AJ had four weapons pylons, not six, that means any attempt at a period-appropriate Viggen leaves you with two missiles and two other stores, or no missiles for a full load. The AAMs went on the inner pylons only, and if carrying Mavs, it seems (thanks to the manual Sideburns linked) that for whatever reason, one was always on an inner while the other was usually on an outer. Speed and low flight can still help (just less, with the speed restriction) but the main thing is going to be coordination with other flights and actual CAP from fighters. On Open Range the other day, we had F-5s flying with heavy air-to-ground loadouts, no F-14s unlocked, and Viggens being left unescorted to fly strikes alone or at best in pairs. I got to my target on most sorties but rarely got back from it, as red had near total air superiority thanks to our de facto lack of fighters.

My suggestion for the F-5 guys, at least those who read this thread (maybe GCIs can "gently suggest" over SRS for those who don't) is that they do not fly air-to-ground sorties unless we have enough fighters to provide some kind of challenge to the enemy over the front. At the same time, the Viggens will be more effective flying in at least pairs, not only to give them some safety in numbers but also to work over a target quicker. 2-4 Viggens carpet bombing a ground installation in a single pass is a hell of a lot more effective than a single rusty MiG pilot flying like 8 sorties against the same target because he can only half-remember how to set up for a nav bombing high-drag run

Just to be clear about the Viggen, Viggen pilots should enjoy themselves as much as the rest of players flying all kinds of aircraft. And it's a shame that some players will always take things to the extreme resulting in forcing restrictions on everybody. I guess, it's the way with everything.

Viggen pilots can fly as they like while keeping in mind the objective they are assigned for. The thing is, when you take 6 x RB-24J's you're literally limiting other Viggen's. I can only ask players to take 2 or maybe 4 missiles max. Even the F-5, the MiG-19 and some MiG-21 players can't/don't take more than 2/4 missiles. We know it's the AJ that'd be more suitable but it's the AJS we have and that's why these kinds of restrictions. Pretty much the same story we had with the Harrier: No AIM-9M's and some AG weapons were also not available to have players use it as a striker only due to its way too modern systems. That's all. No other reasons for limiting the Viggen like that. And then it has bugs?! That makes things only more difficult for me.

12 hours ago, rossmum said:

It might be worth getting in the habit of not relying on self-defence anyway (I know, the Viggens have kind of had to do so recently with the 24). Considering the AJ had four weapons pylons, not six, that means any attempt at a period-appropriate Viggen leaves you with two missiles and two other stores, or no missiles for a full load. The AAMs went on the inner pylons only, and if carrying Mavs, it seems (thanks to the manual Sideburns linked) that for whatever reason, one was always on an inner while the other was usually on an outer. Speed and low flight can still help (just less, with the speed restriction) but the main thing is going to be coordination with other flights and actual CAP from fighters. On Open Range the other day, we had F-5s flying with heavy air-to-ground loadouts, no F-14s unlocked, and Viggens being left unescorted to fly strikes alone or at best in pairs. I got to my target on most sorties but rarely got back from it, as red had near total air superiority thanks to our de facto lack of fighters.

 

My suggestion for the F-5 guys, at least those who read this thread (maybe GCIs can "gently suggest" over SRS for those who don't) is that they do not fly air-to-ground sorties unless we have enough fighters to provide some kind of challenge to the enemy over the front. At the same time, the Viggens will be more effective flying in at least pairs, not only to give them some safety in numbers but also to work over a target quicker. 2-4 Viggens carpet bombing a ground installation in a single pass is a hell of a lot more effective than a single rusty MiG pilot flying like 8 sorties against the same target because he can only half-remember how to set up for a nav bombing high-drag run

So just to clarify on this point, perhaps for people who have seen the AJ37 Viggen has seven* hardpoints, and also respectfully challenge the "not relying on self defence" suggestion:

• The outermost two wing pylons on the AJ37 were wired for the Rb28 Falcon only. Given that this weapon was not taken forward by the Swedish air force for the AJ37, due to poor weapon performance, the outer two AJ37 wing pylons were unused but physically present. This is why why they appear empty on some diagrams for AJ37, or don't appear at all, until the AJS-37 upgrade. The AJS37 upgrade enabled all six weapons pylons to carry Rb24/24j/74 if desired.**
• The AJ37 "smart" weapon carriage appears to have been a function of computer weapon handling capacity and wiring, hence some diagrams indicating two Rb24 or Rb75 only in specific locations. 
• It appears from Swedish air force documentation, https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8bCDRcq9BVeY0gycWRrMXVIdTA/view?resourcekey=0-oFS9Xlxr5xkcifaQ000kBA page 8,that permitted weapon loadouts changed over time (perhaps the air force figured out they could split the wiring for weapons between nearby pylons) and asymmetric loadouts were feasible. I would recommend considering these if you want some more flexibility in self defence (i.e. single Rb24/24j and/or countermeasure pod) at the expense of a little imbalance of the airframe. i.e. CM pod, Rb75, X-tank, Rb24j, Rb75 is quite a flexible loadout for contested airspace anti armour while being period correct. Conversely four Rb75 (AJ37 computer can only handle two at a time) with two Rb24/24j (outer wing pylons Rb28 only) would not be correct for an AJ37.
• As per documentation, and the designation of the Viggen, the AJ37 was a strike fighter with an airspace defence / fighter role if required. Gunpod, CM pod, dual Rb24j and an X-tank is a valid AJ37 loadout.
• Speed and extending from a bad situation still very much a valid tactic for the AJ37 being as it is among the fastest fighters at low level. Remember to eject stores to have the full 1400kph available currently.
• As always pairing up and flying sensible formations providing mutual support will make you much more effective and survivable in any airframe.

Finally if we are discussing period correct airframes and weapons focus should the discussion now focus be on the Su25t, Ka-50 and Vikhr missile (prototypes, limited availability for combat or not available in this timeframe) and also the MiG21 being able to deploy the Grom (this has been questioned, limited evidence to suggest it should be capable). Will we also see similar restrictions or removal for these systems? . At the moment it seems blufor have been quite restricted whereas redfor get minimal restrictions. Appreciate Ka-50 soon to go due to Mi-24, but that should be with similar considerations towards period correct weapons.

* Sources also indicate an additional two wing pylons could be configured for a total of nine! But this was so rarely used it is not worth considering for DCS. Limited information on what these could carry but I would assume it is additional dumb weapons i.e. rockets and bombs.

** Carriage on the outer pylon was initially frowned upon by Saab engineers due to the increase weight of later Sidewinders impacting fatigue life of the wing. Eventually the air force and Saab came to an agreement on fatigue life expectations and the carriage was permitted (note this is a long term, over many years fatigue life issue, not the wing snaps immediately if outer pylon used issue).

On 5/31/2021 at 7:38 PM, BIGNEWY said:

DCS: Mi-24P Early access date

 

Hello all, 

 

We plan to release the DCS: Mi-24P to open beta today the 16th of June 2021

 

Thank you for your support and patience. 

 

The ED Team

Good news. Alpenwolf's work will increase dramatically.

6 minutes ago, Admiral_ZIPANGU said:

Good news. Alpenwolf's work will increase dramatically.

Yeah! Rubbing my hands already!

Some good updates for the Syria map by the way. Maybe it becomes more flyable for some players now. It wouldn't feel right not to fly the Hind in Syria.

On a side note, it always amuses me how many fixes the C-101 receives almost every update. I can only salute them for taking care of their baby that much, or even more than other developers regarding their more popular modules! Just sayin'

would love to see some syria missions going again, always love flying helicopters there.

1 hour ago, Sideburns said:

 

Appreciate Ka-50 soon to go due to Mi-24, but that should be with similar considerations towards period correct weapons.

 

36 minutes ago, LoneS said:

 

He said he always made a little exception when talking about helicopters for reasons he mentioned some days ago....... just check out his last posts am I the only one who reads everything here before talking? At least read his posts

I am aware of the situation and do read the posts, did you read my post? Relevant content quoted above for absolute clarity.

I seem to remember being in a server a while back where you could load as many Phoenix missiles as she would hold even though the “rules”said only so many of a certain type.  As soon as you got off the ground and away from the airport the plane went into a death spiral. Can’t this logic be applied to the aforementioned problem?  

1 hour ago, Sideburns said:

 

Finally if we are discussing period correct airframes and weapons focus should the discussion now focus be on the Su25t, Ka-50 and Vikhr missile (prototypes, limited availability for combat or not available in this timeframe) and also the MiG21 being able to deploy the Grom (this has been questioned, limited evidence to suggest it should be capable). Will we also see similar restrictions or removal for these systems? . At the moment it seems blufor have been quite restricted whereas redfor get minimal restrictions. Appreciate Ka-50 soon to go due to Mi-24, but that should be with similar considerations towards period correct weapons.

 

12 minutes ago, LoneS said:

 

Then why write this then:

" <- the discussion now focus be on the Su25t, Ka-50 and Vikhr missile (prototypes, limited availability for combat or not available in this timeframe) -> "

Missing the preceding word which frames the sentence as a question to the audience of the post, as intended, attempting instead to make it look like I made an absolute statement or demand?

11 minutes ago, Mr. Big.Biggs said:

I seem to remember being in a server a while back where you could load as many Phoenix missiles as she would hold even though the “rules”said only so many of a certain type.  As soon as you got off the ground and away from the airport the plane went into a death spiral. Can’t this logic be applied to the aforementioned problem?  

that was growling sidewinder server, I think they removed that a while back maybe he still has the script and would be willing to share it but I don't think tanking airframes for carrying 6 missiles would be an effective solution since without doing that they might kill and enemy aircraft or two in process of losing all those missiles and the airframe versus that just destroying the airframe and six missiles

2 minutes ago, LoneS said:

 

" <- At the moment it seems blufor have been quite restricted whereas redfor get minimal restrictions. -> " With that it is obvious and after talking about the forggy and the shark that yes it is a demand for balance or whatever you want. The question thing is now what some journalism bullshit as in "I'm only asking a question"? Come on son.

After all that if I'm wrong then you did a bad job at explaining yourself so no problem.

Ok, keep misframing my statements.

Balance is a dynamic thing, as new bugs and features arise and it is prudent to review it from time to time. Given the Viggen has had so much attention w.r.t balancing it seems odd to overlook other airframes and weapons systems against which it was balanced and in light of some new bugs I have highlighted in previous posts. But as per my question I would be interested to hear other people's opinions. Cheers, you've made your position clear unless you want to say more?

DCS AJS-37 Viggen by Heatblur Simulations

• Adjusted error accumulation simulation in FLI
• Lowered damage values for major airframe and wing components to try and avoid multiplayer damage desync.
• Fixed floating probe on fuselage
• Fixed incorrect label on countermeasures switch
  
  Hopefully the Viggenu No Wingu Jutsu will be a thing of the past
  
   

1 hour ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

Yeah! Rubbing my hands already!

 

Some good updates for the Syria map by the way. Maybe it becomes more flyable for some players now. It wouldn't feel right not to fly the Hind in Syria.

 

On a side note, it always amuses me how many fixes the C-101 receives almost every update. I can only salute them for taking care of their baby that much, or even more than other developers regarding their more popular modules! Just sayin'

Lol when it comes out today, will it be included in a mission sometime later today?

UPDATE IS OUT!!

The Ammo track on the Blue side seems to have replaced the M818 with the M939. This may affect the CTLD script...

Server News:

The update file is really big. Downloading at 110-120 MB/s on the server's machine. Way slower on my own so no idea if I'll be able to add the Mi-24P tonight.

Anyways, it's a new bird so use SP and maybe some quick missions for familiarisation purposes.

7 minutes ago, Admiral_ZIPANGU said:

The Ammo track on the Blue side seems to have replaced the M818 with the M939. This may affect the CTLD script...

Thanks for the information! This might be it. I'll check it out when possible.

1 minute ago, Alpenwolf said:

The update file is really big. Downloading at 110-120 MB/s on the server's machine. Way slower on my own so no idea if I'll be able to add the Mi-24P tonight.

 

Very slow download on my end as well, about 5.5MB/s 

I wouldnt be complaining about 5.5 Im getting 2.2

26 minutes ago, GeneralMav24 said:

I wouldnt be complaining about 5.5 Im getting 2.2

 

I was getting 2, got up to 10 now!

16 minutes ago, CrazyGman said:

I was getting 2, got up to 10 now!

Damn it, I'm still at 5.5 

2 minutes ago, ConkersBFD said:

Damn it, I'm still at 5.5 

At 55 >:)

Oh man, Cyprus, that could an interesting venue for CW fun and games. DL'ing at 6 but still a beastly download.

13 minutes ago, Zachrix said:

At 55 >:)

Urge to kill rising

2 minutes ago, CrazyGman said:

Urge to kill rising

Oh its okay no server is updated so I am sitting here doing BFM against AI