Aircraft flyable in campaign

[cns180784]

Just to clarify, are the only squadrons in the campaign you can join are those with F-16 block 50/52s?

[molnibalage]

@cns180784:

Just to clarify, are the only squadrons in the campaign you can join are those with F-16 block 50/52s?

Nope, but rest of AC do not have AFM (except Mirage-2000C or D) and their modeling and realism is limited comparing to F-16C because the avionics code and tons of other things. You can fly any AC if you want only question does it have sense or not…

[ASharpe]

@molnibalage:

Nope, but rest of AC do not have AFM (except Mirage-2000C or D) and their modeling and realism is limited comparing to F-16C because the avionics code and tons of other things. You can fly any AC if you want only question does it have sense or not…

But, if you’re playing a multiplayer campaign, nothing is more fun then taking control off and rolling a KC-135 while your buddy is on the boom.

So…even without flight models there is still hours of entertainment to be found here.

[cns180784]

Whats the difference between the F-16 block 32/40 to the 50/52s? i know theres’ no HMCS on the 32 i think, and the 40? anything else?

[Agave_Blue]

All the cool kids fly Block 40’s.

So I’ve been told.

[pandacat]

40’s acceleration sucks compared to 50/52s. I flew 50 and don’t look back.

[pandacat]

I would really like to see either mig 29 or su27 fully modeled in BMS. But it seems no one has ever fully modeled Russian birds anywhere. DCS’s Russian birds are pretty limited too. So wonder there is still a lot of classified stuff on these old Russian birds?

[cptmtge]

the last time someone posted potentially classified information on this site he was never heard from again

that was humor hahaha

[l3crusader]

@pandacat:

I would really like to see either mig 29 or su27 fully modeled in BMS. But it seems no one has ever fully modeled Russian birds anywhere. DCS’s Russian birds are pretty limited too. So wonder there is still a lot of classified stuff on these old Russian birds?

No doc, no aerodynamic data, so no good modeling for the 27 or 29.

Considering that DCS has a good access to docs for russian aircrafts (the ka-50 being a good example), if they dont have anything planned for these 2 aircraft, I doubt BMS can do better.

Not to mention, as already said time and again, that coding radically different avionics than those of the F-16, would be a nightmare to do and maintain.

[molnibalage]

@ASharpe:

But, if you’re playing a multiplayer campaign, nothing is more fun then taking control off and rolling a KC-135 while your buddy is on the boom.

So…even without flight models there is still hours of entertainment to be found here.

Does the refuel function works…? I never knew this. I should test the effect in case you fly with a SOJ AC. EA-6B/EF-111. Sadly red side does not have SOJ. I tried to created but I simply did not find what defines this role and capability. Even I allowed SOJ role and set SOJ steerpoints did not worked for other AC and in dat files and DB I could not find anythign what define this capability.

[Agave_Blue]

@molnibalage:

Does the refuel function works…? …

My understanding was that, no, a human-flown tanker cannot perform a refuel.

[Blu3wolf]

In my experience, if a human gets into the tanker, its stuffed permanently, others will not be able to refuel even after he leaves the tanker.

[pandacat]

@l3crusader:

No doc, no aerodynamic data, so no good modeling for the 27 or 29.

Considering that DCS has a good access to docs for russian aircrafts (the ka-50 being a good example), if they dont have anything planned for these 2 aircraft, I doubt BMS can do better.

Not to mention, as already said time and again, that coding radically different avionics than those of the F-16, would be a nightmare to do and maintain.

Sounds like we kinda hit the wall with BMS existing game engine? Not much expanding potential?

[l3crusader]

@pandacat:

Sounds like we kinda hit the wall with BMS existing game engine? Not much expanding potential?

People have been saying that since day one about Falcon 4… and here we are. There is always potential to expand, the problem is documentation and human resources available.

There are a million things worth improving for the general environment of the sim, that would benefit ALL aircrafts… different avionics are a far distant priority. Not to mention, as said above, the problem is often not the difficulty in coding, the problem is knowing exactly what to implement. The F-16 is fairly unique in that it is possible to find documentation on it. The Mirage 2000D or -5, the SU-27, even the F-14 or F-15, etc… we wouldnt even know what to implement.

[ASharpe]

@Blu3wolf:

In my experience, if a human gets into the tanker, its stuffed permanently, others will not be able to refuel even after he leaves the tanker.

Yes, the key to this is waiting until he is ON the boom, and THEN enter and roll the tanker.

[drtbkj]

@cns180784:

Whats the difference between the F-16 block 32/40 to the 50/52s? i know theres’ no HMCS on the 32 i think, and the 40? anything else?

The biggest RL difference is that the 40/42 was designed to incorporate LANTIRN and the 50/52 did the same for HTS. The 50/52 had improved engines.
I’ve wondered how BMS handles the modeling of the variants. My purely subjective feeling is that the 50/52 is a bit “peppier”

[Agave_Blue]

@drtbkj:

…. My purely subjective feeling is that the 50/52 is a bit “peppier”

The MCH seems to disagree with regard to the 52 ….

@MCH:

…. Reference the previous discussion on airspeed at TC entry and power modulation. If you see greater than 500 (not likely with a PW motor) pull power to min AB, or fan the boards, you will slow down during your initial turn. Less than 500, leave power set in full AB. ….