Ourorborus

Is there a way to include MIDS channels in mission editor? It would be good to use with single player wingmen.

Easy comms off Latest stable release of DCS Just Supercarrier extension (love this implementation btw) Never use keyboard. I am in VR so I avoid keyboard. PTT for each radio is mapped to TM Warthog thumb switch. Voicecoms work fine, but some commands have always been problematic (e.g. intent to refuel, attack primary) for these I used to say "options, take x etc" everything but the take x works.

I also have the issue of "take x" command not functioning. Other commands work as well as they always have done. Mostly flying F18 in single player campaigns. RAMP start with engines already running.

Just a quick shout out to Andre. This thread is full of issues and Andre is always very quick at resolving them. Love your product, it has helped out of sight the immersion factor of my sims. It is a testament to the product that I mostly only notice it's absence (when I forget to plug my transducers in, or the still pending catapult shots) rather than its presence. Add to that the support given to users here. Thanks mate. Keep up the good work.

I too can understand the OP point of view. One of the things that appealed to me with DCS was the detail. I have ben flight simming since Micropose flight Sim on the C64, and one thing that turned me off for a few years (I realized in hindsight) was the plethora of basic and incomplete aircraft available on sims in the norties. I downloaded them all and never really learned any aircraft well. Fast forward to a few years ago when I found the A10 on DCS, a highly detailed aircraft that took time to learn. It was only last xmas that I felt the need to move on to the F18, and it was a tough decision between that and the F14. I keep a Huey in Hangar for a change of pace and nostalgia, and am also building a WW2 stable, as these are technically easier to learn, and give me a change of pace/different experience but I am unlikely to use more than one modern aircraft every year or two. I would much prefer to see core improvements, new sceneries and enhancements to the environment I fly in than new aircraft, (especially early access ones which I will not touch until a certain level of completion is achieved). Modules such as the Supercarrier, and good scenery will encourage me to part with dollars more than a new aircraft.

Someone pulled the plug in the bottom of the gulf. What you are seeing is the water draining out. The important question is if the water is spinning the right way for a northern hemisphere drain.

+1 Immersion aside this would greatly assist SA. Although since discrete frequencies are not modelled, AI calls would get busy quick So I suggest this be added after discrete frequencies.

As someone who mostly uses stable, I am often perplexed reading many of the bugs/ issues/ partial improvements that are discussed on the forums. I often ask myself "why don't I see this?, or why does this function differently for me?" And I wonder if it is because so many are using the OB. Even statements such as "the latest patch" aren't very helpful as it is not clear if this is the latest OB or Stable patch, or even if the post occurred the day before the actual latest patch. It must also make EDs job that much harder sorting through which version the post is talking about, made even worse when threads get large. While the title states a separate forum for each version, perhaps a different approach would be a requirement to state which version the OP is using when asking a question or stating an observation.

+1 As a person with fairly low spec for VR (GTX 1060, 16GB) I have noticed each stable release over the past year has given a substantial performance improvement. BZ ED!!

Not sure it is "So many people" It is a small number of very vocal people. The last poll proved that. Consequently this poll does not include the option maintain the status quo. Those few vocal people are trying to prove an argument without providing a null-hypothesis.

As a wishlist ...+1 .. although I do imagine it would be a resource hog.

Good point. We should stop banging our fists arguing the majority should adopt the style of game play and be concerned for what the minority. Perhaps a poll to see which side of this argument the Majority sit... Oh hang on the Majority would prefer the current state of affairs to your proposal...…………………. So to paraphrase... stop banging your fists demanding a reworked pay model to suit what you want. "Everyone else" doesn't want your solution. By the way you do have an option to pay subs, I am sure ED will take any donations you like. :)

Yes ols is a different system. Just as papi is different to tvasis. But they all serve the same purpose. To give glideslope information on visual final. I am not surprised to hear some naval airfields have ols as it would maintain consistency with carrier ops. (I have never flown nor controlled at any US naval air station) However this is not the norm. Airfields generally have papi or tvasis. I would prefer to see airfields have the system they use in real life. Sent from my F8331 using Tapatalk

At a field they are known as PAPI or T-VASI.... but yes very useful

The IFLOS is located abeam the island on the port side, whereas the ICLS is located aft of the island on the starboard side, placing it behind the IFLOS. This is exacerbated by the angled landing deck effectively placing them further apart longitudinally. If both are set to exactly the same angle, then "on glideslope" on the IFLOS would be "high on the ICLS" Similarly "on glideslope" for the ICLS would be low on the IFLOS. With the exception of CATIIIC ILS, instrument approach systems are designed to get you below the cloud to fly the last portion visually. Same rule applies here, use ICLS to get visual, then IFLOS.

….because he failed to hit you on taxy, he also failed to ram you out of the sky by forming up with his wingtip in your engine intake. He probably figured trying to knock you off during final approach was the only way left he could keep his membership to the DCS wingman AI union.:pilotfly:

For VR users I have found the excellent VR Kneeboard by Egon "Rider" Carusi to be a perfect solution for this. I use it with an old WACOM Bamboo tablet on my knee and write down 9lines and Inbound info as they are spoken to me, just like I would in RL. I just wish there was a "say again" function for when I miss something.

the practice is known as VERTREP as opposed to RAS (replenishment at sea), which it forms a part of. I doubt there would be any in game effect but it sounds like an idea for a good mission or two, particularly as part of a campaign.

You can (and should) turn the AoA indexer down. The control is just below the HUD brightness knob. Personally I prefer the instruments being able to be so bright as it allows me to use the cockpit lighting and see my instruments during the day. i.e. when the annoing dark cockpit makes it impossible to read otherwise.

I have the Secret labs Titan (Batman edition). and love it. It is not exactly cheap and a very firm design. But I like that, particularly for long sittings where a "plush" design only gets hot and makes you feel the structure underneath. I also find my warthog base rests on the base under my thighs very well providing a realistic centre stick setup. It is even made CoVID working from home a dream as it is 1000% better than the garbage at work.

It is called the anti g straining manoeuvre... Essentially tensing most of your body to prevent blood being drained to your feet (positive g ) or to your head (negative G)

Thank you AMVI Rider. I have been using this for a month now and it has changed my VR experience. I am using an old WACOM Bamboo strapped to my realworld kneeboard and it works flawlessly. No more pausing the sim to check mission freqs, Lifting the HMD to peek at pdfs/printouts, or struggling to copy nine line data. Ic ando it all from within sim. You Sir, are a genius!

+1 I'd love to see this. Localised wind speed is not the only factor in wave height. Just as wave height is not the only factor in deck motion. This is also true in littoral waters where a current coupled with a narrow channel can change the current's speed and swell. (Bernoulli's effect). Ultimately the swell period has an equal if not greater effect on ship motion than wave top height however this effects every ship differently based on hull size, design and weight distribution. The relative direction of the swell has a major effect as well, and a good OOW or NAV will adjust heading to compensate. I have personally witnessed waves over a 27.5m height flight deck yet deck motion and winds were within SHOL. Of course accurate fluid dynamics as they pertain to the water body would be beyond the reach of a flight sim, and if achieved would be a major FPS hit. So a simple slider to increase deck motion independent of wind would be a fantastic addition. +1

Do you have AA mode engaged? The hornet stores page only lets you access AA weapons in AA mode and AG weapons in AG mode.....

I find turning off easy comms and ensuring you have the correct freq dialled in gets the best response. I find if I use callsigns it gets confused, probably due to an Aussie accent. It isn't exactly standard phraseology but if you are on the right freq, just saying the instruction (i.e "inbound, hornet ball, on station) works and is 1000% more immersive and less disruptive than menus.