SonofEil

This is honestly one of the few things left that I'd get really excited about. I think chances are slim, but goddamn an Osprey would be fun.

The right eye strobing blackout actually seems worse after today’s update.

That picture's insane, it looks like the left mains are in the grass! I was thinking also, even with min fuel there's no way she was under the weight limit for the runway/taxiway/ramp. I wonder if there was any damage to the airport infrastructure. I'd be surprised if there wasn't. EDIT: Cool writeup from the Capt. of Lebombo, makes it sound easy. And what does that little airport need with two static 747's?! :smilewink:

Haha, that's the one! I bet there was some pucker happening during that touch down and landing roll.

On the civilian side, you know your weights because it directly impacts takeoff and landing performance. For the small guys there are no shortage of rural airstrips that might be easy enough to land at, but a little too short to take back off from at max fuel and/or payload. Military pilots typically takeoff and land at the same airport so it's not a huge consideration, but they do also keep emergency alternates in the planning, and your weight could dictate whether or not an airfield is a viable emergency landing site. A neat aside, there was a video I saw recently of a 747 (I think) being donated to a museum on a smaller regional airport. The 747 landed with min fuel and very little runway to spare and that was that. The plane could literally never again leave that airport because its runway was far too short for a takeoff.

You know what, it’s alright. I’m aware that outside file hosting exists, but I’m not using my personal resources to cover ED’s (or vBulletin’s) deliberate shortcomings. And who are we kidding that they’d even be able to make it 49 minutes into the track to view the issue. The bug is thoroughly and accurately described, it’s corroborated by other users. Fix it or don’t, it’s your sim.

No guys, the track file isn’t “missing”, I know exactly where it is. And you’re welcome to it: Or update these archaic upload limitations to something useful smdh.

I was a little surprised that I was having the issue. I know irl the probe heat is hand-checked prior to taxi. As it stands in DCS the probe heat switch sits in a position labeled as OFF (at least that's its default cold start position), it can be flipped down into a spring-loaded TEST position, and also up into, presumably, an ON position (though it's not labeled as such.) I flipped it on when I noticed the issue but saw no results.

Track size is 21MB so it's obviously not attached. If any of the mod/testers are interested I can email it. Did a 1.5 hour tour of the Caucuses at ~26,000ft., ambient surface temp -9C. Around halfway through the flight (49 min according to TacView) the aircraft starts performing a sine wave while in ALT hold, slowly climbing then slowly descending with increasing amplitude but negligible change in indicated airspeed and altitude. Found probe heat switch at the back of the left console and turned it on. After another 30+minutes airspeed indicator and altimeter still hadn't recovered. Flipped Probe Heat switch to test and it blinks on the master caustion panel, but the light isn't illuminated when the switch is in the on position. Instruments didn't recover until dropping below ~12,000ft. while approaching the airport.

They definitely changed something. In the previous version it was a simple click and drag to uncage the standby AI, now it takes a couple clicks/drags/wiggles to get it to uncage during startup procedure.

I see one comment mentioning a huge in-game performance hit. What’s it looking like for everyone else? Better/worse/no change?

I also expected the C to get a promotion to full module relatively soon...until the RAZBAM E was announced. Having worked on/with software development contracts before (though not specifically within ED of course) there is now a 0.0% chance of ED upgrading the Charlie Eagle in the foreseeable future. We can list all the differences between each model until we're blue in the face, but at the end of the day they would absolutely cannibalize each others sales. Yeah some of us would buy both, but the vast majority of people would buy one or the other. Hell, I don't even think I'd buy both. I'd be excited for this and there's now maybe enough publicly available info to do the aircraft justice. But, I don't think DCS World is currently sophisticated enough for the F-117. My understanding of the radio environment is transmitters/receivers simulate fairly primitive attenuation and masking...and not much else. Aircraft have a given RCS number but, besides notching, changing aspects/materials/environmental effects/etc. aren't accounted for. There should be a long list of core radio environment updates to DCSW before ED considers adding stealth aircraft.

The Tomcat would like a word. (But yeah, I get your point.:smilewink:)

I come back to Tomcat after six months and this is still an issue?! What the actual hell. Does this not count as the low hanging fruit that HB said had been mostly worked out?

Did as instructed, crash still occurs under the same conditions. Now if you don't mind I'm going to revert to my original Saved Games\DCS folder thankyouverymuch! :cry: Seriously though, let me know what else I can do to help. dcs.txt