DCS Discussion

Redwolf · January 28, 2020, 10:47:23 AM

Thank you, folks!

BTW, I just had my ground attack targets defend themselves by shooting 152mm HE at my F-86. I mean they missed, otherwise that would have been a nice KABOOM :)

Jarhead0331 · January 28, 2020, 11:00:16 AM

LoL...its rare for the kinds of missions I create, but I got shot down the other day too in a Hornet. I was dropping warheads on foreheads over on Qeshm Island when I got the brilliant idea to roll in on a group of Shilkas using CCIP mode. I lost a wing, entered a painful spin and hit the silk, which was my first experience doing so in VR, believe it or not. It was so intense, I look forward to doing it again. \m/

mikeck · January 28, 2020, 12:31:03 PM

The only way I can take out the Tunguska and ZSUs is to use the F-16, move the waypoint over them, come in low and almost Mach 1 and drop 2 cou-97's on auto so i can stay level.

Otherwise, same thing happens to me, I get clipped in my dive

Skoop · January 28, 2020, 01:40:55 PM

Harms won't take em out or do the tungs shoot the harms down ? I've had a ton of luck with the LD10s, only problem is I run out and have to rtb for more.

mikeck · January 28, 2020, 02:38:23 PM

Harms are a problem....but a problem resulting from a larger deficiency in DCS: Electronic warfare. Except for the occasional ECM pod, it's non existent. In real life- even in 2008 (the main time frame of DCS...at least until the JF) no one is attacking an integrated SA-10 site (or any air defense) with JUST HARM missiles. They would be accompanied by an EA-6b, EF-18g, EF-111, etc to provide the electronic suppression for the HARMS to succeed. We don't have that in DCS. So you are left shooting big Ol' missiles at a system designed to shoot down big ol' missles. Different story if that SA-10 can't track the HARM until it's a mile away due to EW

mbar · January 28, 2020, 03:15:06 PM

Quote from: Jarhead0331 on January 28, 2020, 11:00:16 AM
LoL...its rare for the kinds of missions I create, but I got shot down the other day too in a Hornet. I was dropping warheads on foreheads over on Qeshm Island when I got the brilliant idea to roll in on a group of Shilkas using CCIP mode. I lost a wing, entered a painful spin and hit the silk, which was my first experience doing so in VR, believe it or not. It was so intense, I look forward to doing it again. \m/

The next DCS module should bring VR base jumping in Las Vegas and Dubai.

Jarhead0331 · February 04, 2020, 08:54:04 PM

There are people who complain about the graphics and effects in this sim...I feel sorry for them.

Pete Dero · February 05, 2020, 03:56:50 AM

Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 04, 2020, 08:54:04 PM
There are people who complain about the graphics and effects in this sim...I feel sorry for them.

Can't get much closer to real life footage . :clap:

I feel sorry for my PC that has to reproduce this ...

Skoop · February 07, 2020, 04:08:20 PM

Just saw that the next up date will add AAR to the JF-17 which will be a welcome addition not having to take up valuable munition hardpoints with fuel tanks. Been putting in some serious hours in this little jet in MP, it's been a blast, modern cockpits are a joy to use, it'll be hard to go back to the f14.

Jarhead0331 · February 07, 2020, 04:28:56 PM

Quote from: Skoop on February 07, 2020, 04:08:20 PM
Just saw that the next up date will add AAR to the JF-17 which will be a welcome addition not having to take up valuable munition hardpoints with fuel tanks. Been putting in some serious hours in this little jet in MP, it's been a blast, modern cockpits are a joy to use, it'll be hard to go back to the f14.

How are they going to do that? AAR is only available on the block 2 and we have a block 1.

Skoop · February 07, 2020, 07:35:35 PM

The additions will make it a block 2. From what I saw, you choose between the block1 or 2 in the mission editor or choose it in the f10 com menu on MP servers. Not sure if we'll get the helmet mounted site with block 2 but would be nice. Maybe that'll be block 3 update.

mikeck · February 08, 2020, 08:10:34 PM

Quote from: Skoop on February 07, 2020, 07:35:35 PM
The additions will make it a block 2. From what I saw, you choose between the block1 or 2 in the mission editor or choose it in the f10 com menu on MP servers. Not sure if we'll get the helmet mounted site with block 2 but would be nice. Maybe that'll be block 3 update.

I guess this shouldn't piss me off but it does; and I hope I'm wrong. The DCS world was originally A 2008 conflict in Georgia supposing that Georgia had joined NATO. ED has stated repeatedly that the aircraft and weapons in the game would be limited to aircraft that existed at that time: down to the block or model. They would also add earlier aircraft (F-86, mig-15, F-5) to support earlier scenarios but NOT later. ED used this as the reason they were not making the F-18E super hornet instead of a (almost entirely retired) F-18c, why they chose the block 50 F-16, and the forthcoming AH-1T instead of the W. Fine....

Yet here we are with the JF-17....an aircraft that had a few pre-production models in testing in 2007 but wasn't in actual full production until late 2008....out and available in squadrons in 2009. So we have one red generation 4.5 aircraft built in the mid-2000's (and deployed after the scenario takes place) vs Four blue generation 4 fighters. Not only that, but gen 4 fighter in the block/model
Configurations delivered around 1991-92! (F-16C blk.50, F/A-18C, F-14B snd F-15C). We also have 3 red gen 4's of the same period

So not only do we through in an aircraft that wasnt in operation in 2008 but also throw it up against aircraft operational in 1992- 16 years earlier. (I won't even go into whether they JF is over-Modeled in the flight and avionics performance dept).

And now...we have the JF-17 block 2!!!
" On 18 December 2013, production of Block 2 JF-17s began at PAC's Kamra facility."

Seriously?? We are going to introduce in aircraft that is 16 years more modern than any others because "it's not fair that Red doesn't have an aircraft to match the F-18 and F-16" but now...because it's "not fair" that the JF-17 has short range", they're going to bend the rules again and just up it to a version a full 20 years ahead of every other aircraft.

There is NOTHING wrong with the SU-27, MiG-29 and SU-33. They simply need to make hi-fidelity models. There is no need to introduce an M1-A2 SEP3 Abrams into a 1990 scenario simply because you want a cooler tank. Not to mention marvel at its performance vs M1-A1s, M-60A3s and T-72Bs

Rant over

Skoop · February 08, 2020, 10:01:14 PM

I totally agree, just watched youtubes of the latest versions of the f16 being produced and it looks awesome, has all the great tech advances of the f-35 minus the super expensive stealth stuff. The F-16 is still being produced and modernized by the US because we still need a cheaper day to day workhorse versus the expensive f35 / f22 fleet. Not to mention all the foreign licensed producers like Israel that add their own features to the design.

Maybe this is a good sign of having multiple versions under one module. I'd hate to have to buy the f16 again to get a more modern version. Also since the JF17 was a 3rd party addition, I wonder if that gives them some flexibility.

Regardless, I'm loving the Jet, it was very impressively done. When it released, I scoffed at it, but after seeing the youtube reviews, it was impressive the amount of versatility the aircraft provides, so I gave it a shot. The way I fly in Dynamic MP PVE missions, it fits perfect for me. Show up, see what mission needs to be accomplished, plan the loadout for it, execute it then RTB to rearm for the next mission.

I just use my imagination with this thing, I join the server in a blue JF17 and pretend it's an Israeli F16 or a Swedish Gripen flying for NATO or something. For me, it's more about the capabilities I can bring to the team based setting than fretting over the fact that I'm flying a jet produced by pinko commies and pakis.

Yskonyn · February 09, 2020, 03:03:58 AM

ED always claimed they could not do modern stuff because of secret data they (obviously) can't obtain and they would only place the DCS label on high fidelity modelled aircraft for which they can obtain all relevant data.

Its odd indeed to see them doing the JF-17 and placing a DCS label on it. I am pretty sure the module is nowhere near real life specs, but you hardly hear anyone about it. :nerd:

mikeck · February 09, 2020, 03:28:04 AM

Quote from: Yskonyn on February 09, 2020, 03:03:58 AM
ED always claimed they could not do modern stuff because of secret data they (obviously) can't obtain and they would only place the DCS label on high fidelity modelled aircraft for which they can obtain all relevant data.

Its odd indeed to see them doing the JF-17 and placing a DCS label on it. I am pretty sure the module is nowhere near real life specs, but you hardly hear anyone about it. :nerd:

Yeah...grim reapers did a video comparing the specs vs other aircraft and it was ridiculous how better the performance was at almost every speed and category. I've never flown it so can't comment. I WILL grumble about how it came out fully loaded with ground radar while we have waited....and will for some time...for ground radars in the 16/18. I know they are different developers but damn. F-18 has been out 1.5 years man