Should the F-15C Get JHMCS

[ShuRugal]

coming off like jelly Flanker fanboi ;)

 

It always makes me laugh when I see someone say this sort of thing... Until I realize that the irony is probably cruising in their blindspot, then I just get sad.

[wilbur81]

So long as FC3-level aircraft have PFM (Professional Flight Model), I am very happy with flying them - a lot! :)

 

Hear! HEAR! :thumbup:

[Sweep]

So your plan is to tell everyone that owns any, or all, of them that they no longer work in DCS World and they wasted their money. :doh:

 

Or maybe he's saying us FC3 owners are entitled to full ASM/PFM jets instead?

 

I mean, both thoughts are equally wrong, but......That one sounds nicer, doesn't it!?

[Hyperion35]

One could just as easily argue that the current version of the F-15C should have the ability to fire the Python 4 with a DASH helmet since it had that capability in Israeli service in the mid-90s. But this is not the specific version of the F-15C modelled in DCS. Same with the air-to-ground capabilities, the F-15 has had these, and the ability to use conformal fuel tanks since the original F-15A variants, and the Israelis have used F-15 A/B/C/D variantd in this manner since the 1980s. But this is not the F-15C that is modelled in DCS.

 

It's not just a matter of "timeline", it's a matter of which specific aircraft model is represented.

 

In addition to all of this, within the FC3 package, I kinda like that the mix of specific models gives a nice mix of capabilities: the Russian jets have better heatseekers while the F-15 has better medium-range missiles, better radar, and better RWR. And within the Russian options, the MiG-29S has ARH BVR missiles, but it lacks the fuel, range, payload, and HDD found on the Su-27/33, etc. This isn't specifically about balance, but by choosing to model these specific variants of these aircraft, it gives pilots a the opportunity to do different things with different aircraft.

 

Besides, I would think that it would be possible to modify the .lua files to allow the F-15C to fire R-73s with the helmet-mounted sight from the Su-27 if one really wanted to have this capability.

[captain_dalan]

The Hornet will be able to lase its own GBUs! This will make it a fast jet with LGBs.

 

I can't believe you used Hornet and fast in the same sentence! ;)

 

The Flaming Cliffs planes just need to be gone, removed from DCS and replaced with full fidelity modules. They really shouldn't be mixed in with the "DCS level" aircraft imo.

 

I have heard/read that people that want to fly this sim should really only buy huge 8k computer screens as well.

 

 

 

In my opinion the times from startup till airborne for FC3 aircraft should be altered to reflect the times it takes for the real aircraft. In the event of a shoot down there should be a "cool down" period before re spawn is permitted.

 

Can't this be somewhat settled by not starting each flight cold and dark?

 

On the subject:

 

1. In my limited experience with HOBS missiles (and their respective targeting apparatus), just because you have the HOBS capability, doesn't mean that it's usually the best idea to use it. Granted, my experience comes from simulations, but i think people overreact on it. Not that it matter when doing a simulation.

 

2. I'm with Sweep and GGT on the priority list. I'd take a comprehensive and authentic sensor system, working bulls eye indicator and avionics package in general to HMS. Why? Because the above describe the AC's capabilities more accurately over a longer period of time and are much more "needed" to have the most authentic experience when flying that same AC.

 

3. Balance? Can someone explain to me that word in my good ear???

[Kev2go]

It always makes me laugh when I see someone say this sort of thing... Until I realize that the irony is probably cruising in their blindspot, then I just get sad.

 

 

 

sure bud, whatever makes you sleep better

[Kev2go]

 

 

I actually agree, Getting more appropriate startup times would be nice For FC3.

 

Even with if you try Cheat Start on full fidelty, you cant get up in the air as fast as FC3

[GGTharos]

This guy is ready to taxi in less than 3 minutes from engine start. He'd be ready to go in less than one if he was allowed to start both engines simultaneously and skip the checks ... like we are.

 

And I'm reasonably certain you can scramble almost any modern DCS jet in 2 minutes or less in-game.

Edited April 14, 2017 by GGTharos

[mvsgas]

You can't start both engine at the same time in RL IIRC.

[Weltensegler]

ED is a company. Sometimes companies can afford to do upgrades on already sold products without that them being promised on release.

 

Easier if it is a big upgrade because though you have to put more man-days into it you can sell a big upgrade as a new product.

 

So it is likely that it comes down to 2 questions.

1. Is the update big enough to make a new product of it?

2. Does the update take so few man-days that a company can give it out for free and bring in the loss somewhere else.

 

I would assume the answer is NO in both cases.

Though continuous threats like this may indicate to ED that a high fidelity F15 could be a profitable new product.

So please go on :)

[Wizard_03]

Simple solution would be too offer a discounted upgrade price to owners of FC3 and a standard purchase price those who are not owners of FC3 for a full DCS fidelity upgraded Module,

 

But I agree FC3 is from a different era and game. Its nice having them all under one roof but when I think about it, FC3 level fidelity is kind of an affront to what DCS modules are.

[AegisFX]

Update the sim with names like we would give to cars( and have given the F-16C).

 

F-15C, model year, block, etc.

 

Now introduce another f-15c with said enhancements.

[OnlyforDCS]

I actually agree, Getting more appropriate startup times would be nice For FC3.

 

Even with if you try Cheat Start on full fidelty, you cant get up in the air as fast as FC3

 

This is not really a problem. In my Mirage2000 I can get in the air as fast or faster than any FC3 plane. I just skip the Inertial navigation config. In a RL fast scramble situation it would already be ready to go, besides I know my way around caucauss pretty good by now. :lol:

[WRAITH]

Hello all,

The F/A-18C Lot 20 is coming out within the next year. Along with it's other new weapons like HARM,HARPOON and JSOW, it will be coming with JHMCS and AIM-9X. the The JHMCS and AIM-9X would mean that the Hornet would completely annihilate the Eagle in the merge most of the time. Since the F-15C does nothing but air to air and is the king of air to air fighting in all of history, I think the F-15C should get JHMCS BECAUSE the F/A-18C is.What do you guys think.

 

Edit 2 - Why does the Hornet have JHMCS and the Eagle doesn't? I just think it would be ridiculous to not have it on an air to air fighter but have it on a strike fighter. DCS is a simulator so let the Eagle have JHMCS if the Hornet does too, unless this is a simulator of the Final Countdown. They would be modeled in the same time period

 

+1

 

I voted, YES!

 

It adds to the fun and to have added features is always a good thing if possible in ED-DCS.

 

More is always welcomed!

 

Will we get more................ :dunno:

[Kev2go]

This is not really a problem. In my Mirage2000 I can get in the air as fast or faster than any FC3 plane. I just skip the Inertial navigation config. In a RL fast scramble situation it would already be ready to go, besides I know my way around caucauss pretty good by now. :lol:

 

thats the exception really. M2000c is the only one i have been able to scramble without navigation in about 1 min, which is faster than the mig21, proably becasue of considerable automation and few switches being required. for the statrtup ( perhaps American designers could learn a few things from the french)

 

but looking at the startup procedures of american aircraft, and looking at such the rl versions of F15 or F16Caircraft wouldnt be able to scramble up very fast compared to the m2000c. Even thinking of the A10C, youd think for a CAS plane, it be able to startup quick to get to supporting troops asap, but also takes abit to get up , especially with INS ground alignment.

Edited April 14, 2017 by Kev2go

[OnlyforDCS]

Except it's not the exception. It's the rule. The Mig21 can get up equally fast in the air. As can the F5E. You just have to memorize the correct sequence of switches.

 

Since the those three are currently the ONLY full fidelity fighters in the sim, I don't see the problem except with the ease of use of the FC3 fighters.

 

That's a whole different matter. Basically you are arguing that because they are simple to start up, they are really easy to use. Well, Im pretty sure there are a lot of people here who would beg to differ.

[IASGATG]

but looking at the startup procedures of american aircraft, and looking at such the rl versions of F15 or F16Caircraft wouldnt be able to scramble up very fast compared to the m2000c. Even thinking of the A10C, youd think for a CAS plane, it be able to startup quick to get to supporting troops asap, but also takes abit to get up , especially with INS ground alignment.

 

I can get a cold A-10 airborne in under 60 seconds. God invented inflight alignment for a reason.

[MoGas]

And the sniper pod.....

[GGTharos]

Wanna bet? In an F-15 the switches are set in the cockpit. You fire up the APU, slide the throttles into idle, electrics come on automatically once the 50% switch drops (one engine spooled up to 45% RPM), and once both engines are up you go.

 

The F-16 and A-10 isn't likely to be very different either.

You can align in the air.

 

Like I said, the time consuming part is procedure and checks. They're very important in RL, but not in our simulated aircraft ... including the DCS level stuff.

 

Realize that alert 5 aircraft alert to launch when bandits are at a certain time point from their base, not this 50nm between bases silliness that you have in airquake...

When playing airquake, the quick turn around is just what players want most of the time.

When playing something more proper with larger distances, those quickly mitigate most startup shenanigans.

 

but looking at the startup procedures of american aircraft, and looking at such the rl versions of F15 or F16Caircraft wouldnt be able to scramble up very fast compared to the m2000c. Even thinking of the A10C, youd think for a CAS plane, it be able to startup quick to get to supporting troops asap, but also takes abit to get up , especially with INS ground alignment.

Edited April 14, 2017 by GGTharos

[Kev2go]

Except it's not the exception. It's the rule. The Mig21 can get up equally fast in the air. As can the F5E. You just have to memorize the correct sequence of switches.

 

Since the those three are currently the ONLY full fidelity fighters in the sim, I don't see the problem except with the ease of use of the FC3 fighters.

 

That's a whole different matter. Basically you are arguing that because they are simple to start up, they are really easy to use. Well, Im pretty sure there are a lot of people here who would beg to differ.

 

Yes i have the startup procedures memorised very well, and I still have to say that the m2000 is the fastest to get up in the air. (Ypu dont have to worry about missing anyhing when more things are automated, becasue lets be hoenst if you have the stress of having to Insta startup to protect any airfield without time to double check, your bound to at least on occasion miss some stuff)

 

and in actuality F5E potential to get in the air fast is ruined by the part of not having an APU or at least starter cartridges. thats were most of the time is wasted. I agree the procedure isself simple and quick, not much to memorise. ( considerably less switches for startup than the Mig21)

 

 

thats why Northrop in the F20 tigershark gave it Starter Cartridges which did not need crew members to supply air to the engine, thus could spool up quick and the INS alignment process was very quick also. ( OFCS F20 never got put into service but thats besides the matter)

 

In any case as indicated by the Video of the F15, I would not consider that fast for horn given out to scramble for Interception.

Edited April 14, 2017 by Kev2go

[SkateZilla]

Can a brother get a Professional Definition of Airquake?

 

I just wanna make sure I'm picturing it correctly.

[pr1malr8ge]

Can a brother get a Professional Definition of Airquake?

 

I just wanna make sure I'm picturing it correctly.

 

 

Airquake as described by Adam's dictionary.

 

any time Sweep kills Scorch there is a Violent burst of hot air in all directions!

 

 

:music_whistling:

[gavagai]

If I could replace every FC3 module with an equivalent DCS module I would do it in a heartbeat, and I think most of the FC3 defenders would, too. There is no denying the sim would be better for it, and the number who couldn't learn the equivalent DCS module would be very small. After all, if some are arguing that is actually very quick and easy to get the full fidelity modules up in the air, then there is no reason to protect users from the small additional challenge.

 

The argument goes both ways, doesn't it....

 

In the meantime we have the FC3 modules and they are OK, but they do not hold my interest for more than a few flights a year. I wouldn't fly this sim if FC3 level is all we had on the menu.

[Sweep]

Airquake as described by Adam's dictionary.

 

any time Sweep kills Scorch there is a Violent burst of hot air in all directions!

 

 

:music_whistling:

 

Ask him about those 6k defensive setups then...

 

:D

 

Can a brother get a Professional Definition of Airquake?

 

I just wanna make sure I'm picturing it correctly.

 

Airquake is where people go to bulls and kill each other for hours on end with no real goal besides increasing KDR.

 

It's like team deathmatch: Minimal coordination, no planning, just takeoff, head to a certain meeting point (usually bulls), kill, land, rearm, repeat.

 

And that's where a lot of people go wrong with their wishlists, seems like many think DCS is only about this airquake scenario...Which I guess it is, mainly, in the open and public side of things.

Edited April 14, 2017 by Sweep
wording

[Kev2go]

Ask him about those 6k defensive setups then...

 

:D

 

 

 

Airquake is where people go to bulls and kill each other for hours on end with no real goal besides increasing KDR.

 

It's like team deathmatch: Minimal coordination, no planning, just takeoff, head to a certain meeting point (usually bulls), kill, land, rearm, repeat.

 

And that's where a lot of people go wrong with their wishlists, seems like many think DCS is only about this airquake scenario...Which I guess it is, mainly, in the open and public side of things.

 

and not forget

 

Airquake also consists of blueforce and redforce having mixed aircraft ( that is what i most dislike about air quake) so Bluforce Su27s will fight Redforce F15s or F15 vs F15 which is silly