All Activity

Carrier landing issue as Essex not as #1 in group This issue was initially noticed when we attempted to have more than one USS Essex carrier in a single ship group. Aircraft can spawn and launch fine from any of the carriers, but the issue arose with landing. The arresting cables didn't function upon return to any of the carriers besides the number one carrier in the ship group. This is confirmed in the provided track file. Track file test: - Takeoff from #2 Essex carrier. - short pattern and attempt to land on #2 Essex carrier. bolter. - Moved over to #1 Essex carrier, successful landing. Also to note, this issue does not occur with the Super Carrier. I had replicated the test and attempted the same process with the F/A-18 and F-14 with no similar issues I had with the Essex carrier and F4U Corsair. In all attempts, easy comms were used to test if established communications had any effect on carrier landing ops. No effect was observed. Only note is that Essex carrier comms do not function when carrier is not in the #1 slot of the ship group. As our group (vCTF-58) plans to have Task Groups (up to 22 ships in one group, 4 of which are carriers) this will become more of an issue when we would like to be able to launch and recover from any of the carriers in the same group with the same heading. A temporary solution would be to separate the carriers in the own group in the same formation, but this becomes an issue for out mission makers. Tests were made in single player but issues were similarly noticed in multiplayer. carrier issue.trk

I don't use auto rudder, take off assistance or simplified flight model, I don't have any devices with force feedback.

Более подробно о FFB https://ffbeast.github.io/

Having same issue - MFDs are lit up and can see my Windows background, but SimAppPro only recognizes MFD. Also, it won't recognize either for Game Peripheral Display.

I bought it on release chuffed to have another vintage prop. I agree with those disappointed with the sounds. I’ve heard em startup as well as fly and they’re far more meaty and grunty. It flies ok, like a Jug-lite maybe? It needs work on ground handling too for me. I haven’t flown it much lately and I spend most of my flying time in the old birds and swap around, I just haven’t fancied the Corsair as much as I’d have liked to. Definitely worth having though, carrier landings n all . I wouldn’t give it back.

Hi @milo85I just checked and it works fine for me. just make sure "auto rudder","take off assistance" and "Simplified Flight Model" are disabled and your force feedback settings are set accordingly.

Σας καλωσορίζουμε στο τέταρτο φροντιστήριο για το Mirage 2000C που πραγματεύεται τις μεθόδους προσέγγισης και προσγείωσης σε συνθήκες περιορισμένης ορατότητας (ILS). Το παρόν video παρέχει συμβουλές ΑΠΟΚΛΕΙΣΤΙΚΑ για εικονικές πτήσεις!

Operational note- for the folks that use this in multiplayer, seems to only really work with a single Growler (or Crowler if you're not using it with a -C). Script will recognize multiple valid jamming platforms based on how you set up the script, however the menu options get confused once you spawn in a second, differently-named unit (e.g. works fine for Gauntlet 11, but breaks when you bring in Gauntlet 12). By no means a dig at the script, it's awesome. Just putting the note out there in case someone is looking.

Can you tell us anything about the improvement of RCS modelling in the DCS engine, and how closely that will be tied to the F-35? I'm curious whether improved RCS modelling is something that will be introduced concurrently with the F-35 or whether we are likely to see those changes incorporated earlier as part of the ongoing game engine improvement. Also, can you share anything about whether RCS modelling will be improved on existing aircraft, and whether there has been any decision on whether 3rd party modules entering EA between now and when RCS modelling is improved will be required to incorporate any required extra data into their modules at entry to EA?

Planning on using greater energy and cranking, and banking on your missile getting there first?

I dont think that the walking pilot animation would have been good enough. Also, the pilot feature here involves other actions, like opening doors, jumping/crouching, or shooting an M4. You will notice that, in multiplayer, you cannot see the "walking ejected pilot" of other players. That is purely a client side thing. Re VR/missing pilot body being noticeable: that's because your legs are straight out in front of you, directly in the field of view. The same isnt true when walking around with your arms at your side. In any event: I'd like to implement a better walking animation and drive it through this feature, and I might even do it. But I want to be fully transparent about what the feature does today, and what you should expect on release.

Вот и хорошо! А нашлемка, соответсвует реалу + -?

Anybody interested in creating a look-alike like this?

Да нормальный ИЛС ))

Can't wait for the new Hercules, but in the meantime I've been having some fun in the free mod. Here's some aerobatics, a Khe Sanh landing, and a carrier landing:

Any news on this project? 1./JG71 is considering to recreate something like ENJPPT for our potential newbies, and this server would be perfectly suited for that.

It doesn’t matter if I could load chaff, I would still take all flares

Not going to stop me from using as much as I can. With 12-40 km range, radar range finding, gain knob, I think it will have good use in right situation

I've played some instant action games with P-51D and noticed how movements of my wingman are completely unrealistic. Depending on how I fly the wingman move to keep formation but do so in a very artificial way (like translating from point to point). Also, other friendly planes e.g. bombers in formation keep bobbing like buoys...

nice video, but I believe it would have been better to wait for the upcoming v1.2 before producing it.

This is exactly the kind of campaign I was hoping for - one where the player can take a hand in mission planning. I'll be buying this as soon as it's available, thanks for making it

To be fair, that came from an interview (translation posted here) more than five years ago and a year before TG even partnered with Heatblur, so I find it tough to take that as a comment on the current situation. Not too sure why you replied to this thread either, that interview is not the same as the one referred to here.

+1

This would be an ED issue. We don't have the ability to change spawn points on their carriers.

Yes, please extend the map to the south.