Ff you could have one thing in the next update it would be…
-
expanding the working tanker planes would be nice. I gave a little try at it with other models from FF6 ka6 carrier tankers and IL78(?) Russian tankers.
I flew to KA6 in FF6 and was not able to hook to drogue, but Tanker was trying and extending drogue when I got close. I can’t fly straight enough and Auto pilot did not work, so I don’t know if it even worked in that version of falcon. but It sure won’t work in BMS with my efforts anyway.
A few people have recently been trying to get a KC130R and Russian tankers to work. Would be very cool to hook an AV8 to a KC130R or have a Russian Tanker working.
-
This post is deleted! -
->F-35 AFM and “stealth capabilities” for F-16 training.
->LIVE ACMI pods to be implemented inside BMS GUI
e.g MENU ACMI AREA button ….Which you can debrief of the view 3-4 Separated screens HUD-MFD’S -TACVIEW combined.
-
I get around the same FPS with the stock model and the Janhas model that I believe is used in the Balkans theater though? Well that is when my game is not crashing but I digress
-
While browsing models in LE, i found F/A-18E/F wingtip slot matrix needs some fix…
left side/ slot 0.
cos 0 sin
-sin 0 cos
0 -1 0==========
right side/ slot 10cos 0 sin
-sin 0 -cos
0 -1 0hope BMS guys already fix it… cockpitwing lod needs fix too.
-
the super hornets just need a skin that isn’t canned food and a little love to the flight model and the cockpit art and they would be great, currently not fit for human consumption because of the underthrust and broken flight model.considering how much of the skeleton is there it might be a doable bump for a touted addition in 3-4 weeks
-
also, a basic cockpit on the f-117 with the TGP setup centrally allowing IR and laser guide on all the munitions would be both mostly accurate and very fun. for dessert storm first night, that was a silver bullet- it literally won an air war by taking out C&C and power logistics to most of the larger IAD sites, which allowed conventional aircraft free range. the f-117 also destroyed large numbers of aircraft on the ground. much of the duty logs of the 37th fighter wing has recently been made public. they fought a 43 day war. it’s a very interesting read. apparently there is still an undisclosed stealth asset from the era, or, the raptor was operational much earlier than we are lead to believe.
the f-117 just needs a tgp and an rwr. everything is thermal, IR, or laser guided, and it doesn’t use a traditional radar it uses a digitally pre planned map overlaid with GPS information. I still don’t understand why no one makes a simulator of that plane. it seems to have a very specific difficult flight and delivery plan, which begs for a sim treatment…I see it like a submarine.
-
doesnt need a RWR I believe
or perhaps have police radar gun detectors up front in the cockpit.
-
doesnt need a RWR I believe
or perhaps have police radar gun detectors up front in the cockpit.
yeah i think that’s accurate right? I know the use of commercial radio scanners definitely happened by the other side they found them later on.
-
Towed decoys.
-
Towed decoys.
It is not possible to model them as long as we do not have even lobe modeling or very specific radar modeling.
Towed decoy is for example good against 2K12 Kub (SA-6) because it has fixed HW and does not have any SW in its “brain” but against the stone age S-75M Volkov (SA-2F) and S-125M Neva is pointless. The human operator simply see the target and the towed decoy. Because of the age when designed these old SAMs required more manual work but has some off design benefits. Kub is advanced literally in any area comparing these old SAMs but surprisingly it is cannot handle towed decoy. During AF many times hit the Kub the towed decoy.
As long as SAM anti SEAD tactics does not exist and SEAD is way to over modeled I rather not add any tools which just make the balance shit even more towards to airplanes.
My vote is on the following:
Day/night modeling for eyeball and visual tracking. Currently AI is able to launch night MANPADs and IR SHORAD while in RL visual spot and tracking is required for this except a very few systems where IADS and datalink help is needed to find the target at night.
Only a very few SHORAD/MANPAD have night engagement capability but only in case they can get coordinates via datalink from other radars. And these are the most advanced systems from the latest years.https://forum.htka.hu/threads/9k35-s…-2#post-516825
Even Strela-10MN has night vision camera its FOV is only some degrees of less. Autonomous search and target acquisition is not possible. You have only a funnel view.https://forum.htka.hu/threads/9k333-…-2#post-516827
9K333 Verba with datalink eq. and night vision. Same case as Strela-10MN.https://www.mbda-systems.com/product/mpcv/
Mistral also has such version where the launcher system has IR cameras but also requires target coordinates via datalink.As long as are only some exceptions and all of them latest XXI. century stuff with minimal produced qty. IHMO all visual eyeball tracking SHORAD and IR MANPAD should be disabled a night. In DB of Falcon are mostly Cold War or just a decade latest eq. which are not capable to do such thing. It would be far, far better general modelling disable all of these. In current DB is not a such IR SHORAD or MANPAD which is able to perform night time engagement.
(This is one of the reason why attacked USA during EDC in 1986 because only rad SAMs and AAA were the threat and Libyan fighter did not flew at night.)
Of course if night has effect on eyeball, aircraft without night time engagement capability should not be able to take off because it is pointless and it would be cheat when AI perform night strikes with J-5/6, H-5 etc.
I always bet my vote in such modelling upgrade instead very specific things.
-
Since you mention it, weather should also influence the ability to use IR SAMs. Also the delay before firing can be ridiculously low against a fast and low aircraft.
-
Since you mention it, weather should also influence the ability to use IR SAMs. Also the delay before firing can be ridiculously low against a fast and low aircraft.
In first step day/night diff would be a huge step forward. The weather is a much harder modeling issue.
Reaction time of SAMs even currently can be modified at least for radar SAMs as I know. OR it could be in the older F4 versions. -
ROKAF FA-50 for present war scenario.
-
In first step day/night diff would be a huge step forward. The weather is a much harder modeling issue.
Reaction time of SAMs even currently can be modified at least for radar SAMs as I know. OR it could be in the older F4 versions.Reaction time, I tried, for IR SAM. I couldn’t, so I modified the missiles FM to reflect that the best I could in my Lorik’s theater.
-
Reaction time, I tried, for IR SAM. I couldn’t, so I modified the missiles FM to reflect that the best I could in my Lorik’s theater.
The FM…? How…?
-
It may be an abusive wording of what I did. I modified the .dat files to enable guiding later, amongst other things.
The result is abnormal behaviour in the sky. The counterpart is, while you anyway don’t see the weird part because no smoke, you still have better chances to fly low and fast without being hit
Oh also, I increased minimum altitude for launch.
-
It may be an abusive wording of what I did. I modified the .dat files to enable guiding later, amongst other things.
The result is abnormal behaviour in the sky. The counterpart is, while you anyway don’t see the weird part because no smoke, you still have better chances to fly low and fast without being hit
Oh also, I increased minimum altitude for launch.
This is a very bad abstraction.
If you wish to model the aim time such way I recommend to give very small and long (~ 8 sec) initial thrust which makes very slow the missile maybe you can keep below 50-80 kts then after about 8 seconds give the thrust what it deserves. As long in not two 0 value next to each other in the array as thrust value you get missile flame and the smoke either.
-
This is a very bad abstraction.
If you wish to model the aim time such way I recommend to give very small and long (~ 8 sec) initial thrust which makes very slow the missile maybe you can keep below 50-80 kts then after about 8 seconds give the thrust what it deserves. As long in not two 0 value next to each other in the array as thrust value you get missile flame and the smoke either.
Which is pretty much what I tried to achieve.
EDIT: mmh not sure. What I did is prevent the missile from guiding in the first seconds, so it can’t lock on a close, closing fast target. This is supposed to simulate lack of time to prepare the missile launcher and the operator not firing at all finally.
If you have a better way to simulate that, I’m a taker. I can provide my own files in private message if that helps. This may be a very bad abstraction, but it’s the best I found.
-
Which is pretty much what I tried to achieve.
EDIT: mmh not sure. What I did is prevent the missile from guiding in the first seconds, so it can’t lock on a close, closing fast target. This is supposed to simulate lack of time to prepare the missile launcher and the operator not firing at all finally.
If you have a better way to simulate that, I’m a taker. I can provide my own files in private message if that helps. This may be a very bad abstraction, but it’s the best I found.
If you disable the guidance the missile flies off course from the intercept trajectory. This is very bad. If you wish delay, make a delay with thrust but do not force off course the missile.