snipy

Maybe reported, but couldn't find in search as date and time are too general, but date on DED seems to be backwards for days. Image attached, showing 06/41/16. It should be 06/14/16, as there aren't 41 days in a month. Also, for logbook, does it use UTC time? Because I'm flying a 06:00 mission on Caucus on 06/14 (or 41)/16 and it is logging it as night flight hours.

This may or may not be F-16 specific, except that the F-16 has a hook, so, in theory, the procedure might be to take an arrested landing. But in DCS, that is not feasible at the moment. So... is there a procedure for landing with a blown tire, or is it just put it close and eject? I've been playing around, as sort of a challenge, and just cannot seem to stop the jet with a blown tire. It is easy to replicate, so it's rather fun as a challenge. Get an F-16, put external tanks on the wings, get your ground speed up real high, before rotating. Most times you'll hear the tire go, and the gear dragging, then you can rotate. If you hit G and F2 pretty quickly, you'll notice that the front wheel goes up, but the back don't. Eventually you can get them up, but either way, flip back over, slow it down, and set up for a landing. At about 70 knots, or so, just when I think this is the time I'm going to do it, the gear with no tire really bites in, and the jet starts to rotate. I'm going to give it a full boot of opposite rudder today when I get home from work, and see if I can keep it on the runway. But, if there is an actual procedure, following would be better, obviously.

And if I was in the F-5, I wouldn't have noticed it, because trim is part of the package. But it seems like the F-16... trim is meant to be an odd thing, done in certain instances. I'm kind of surprised the flight control system can auto trim the aircraft, but loses its shit the second the gear come down. Maybe manually adjusting the trim turns the auto trimming off complete, no idea. Just seemed odd to me.

Yea, that is why it seems odd. It should be the same AOA to land, but it feels different. I'm going to keep practicing, and if I can't get it, just add "switch to CAT I" on downwind. That way, if it's mental, I'll be good to go.

CAT III on a clean jet seems to lands different, to me, as well. I can also land an asymmetrical jet easier on CAT I. It doesn't seem like it is just asymmetry, if setting the symmetry the same, and just flipping the CAT I and CAT III switch makes a difference.

In this training mission, the first missile off was one off the left wing in a 1 on 1 head on engagement. The second is 2 on 1, which sends one on the right and one on the left. So now I'm two off the left wing and one off the right wing. The third engagement is a mad dog 120, off the tip, so holding the side button with a long name (NWS AAR Discon MSL Step) switches to the 120Cs, then bore, and release. If somewhere along the way, I quick hit the MSL step, which I did, then I'm now three off the left wing and only one off the right wing. It's not terribly difficult to do, for me. But, I can then either just jetison everything, which seems wasteful. Or try to figure out how to fly this plane unbalanced, which seems like a better plan. The difference, at least the little bit I've played with it, is that all of that doesn't seem as noticeable with that Cat I switch on. I'll keep playing around with it, but it seems a lot easier in Cat I, than Cat III, even with everything else the same. Why does the trim get taken off the plane when the wheels touch the runway? If I have to accelerate to take off, because I'm not going to stop before the end, I end up fighting it up, since all the trim corrections are no longer applied to the jet.

To start, I'm a terrible pilot, been playing DCS less than a year, and have fewer than 24 hours in any flight simulator, and 20 of it are in the F-16. Doing the AIM-120 training yesterday, for about the 10th time, I set up the jet as CAT III, as it has external fuel, and then was playing around with switching between missiles when doing the two targets at once. Anyway, I ended up, after all four targets were down, with 120s on 9 and 8, and nothing on the left side. I put some pretty heavy LWD trim, and decided to fly around to run the external tanks out. Nothing really felt too out of the normal, though, until I was on the downwind and put the gear down. And then the plane got complete squirrely. All the trim was now no longer needed, or needed much much more, and I had to fight the stick the whole way down. I finally felt like speed and everything was alright after 4 waive off, but the second the wheels came down, the plane jerked and was tough to keep on the runway. I ended up not being able to, rolled and died. So I've been practicing this yesterday and today. Is it normal to have the trim reset when the wheels touch down? Because I've noticed that it does, and thought maybe that would have something to do with why the plane jerks when touching down. Also, is it normal for the jet to need a change in trim when the gear is down in CAT III? It seems like an in opportune time to start having to correct when also about to make the break. Lastly, should all VFR landings just be in CAT I, where I feel like I have more control, even if carrying a CAT III load? CAT III landings just seem harder.

And I think that is why the F-14 was increased, for this competition, because tactics existed back from when it was a 7.5 jet, and it might have become common to over-G it just because of the change to 6.5. Folks that flew that thing forever at 7.5 probably would have balked at the idea of going to 6.5, and so... it became a thing. Logically, we can look at this and say, the F-14 drivers seem to behave differently, what's different? Well, that is one concrete difference. And maybe it is sufficient to explain the anomaly.

I think saying something like "This guy over G'd the jet to get a kill, but it wasn't a good idea, even though it worked." would go a long way. Because the disconnect seems to be not the existence of the action, but the existence of the action... and its validity as a common tactic. If we're just discussing things that have happened, I, and you, could argue that kamikaze should be a valid method. Right? We can prove its existence. (Which you've done.) We can prove its semi effectiveness. (Which you've done.) But its hard to argue its validity as a common tactic.

These are again, one offs, not repeat use, and one example of Schrödinger's cat--if he didn't check the G meter, then he didn't over G... But the logical argument is that if it was not trained, it was not meant to be employed. Snodgrass going up against another fighter is war games, and he gamed the game. What seems to be forgotten is that these jets are weapons, meant to be used in combat, to gain or maintain aerial superiority, to support or allow boots on the ground to gain and maintain strategic objectives. If everyone pulls G and breaks their jet, because they want a kill, we're going to lose air superiority pretty quick, and the ground guys are going to get hammered. There is a common adage, you fight how you train. They aren't trained because that isn't how it is meant to be fought.

If you are interested in arguments, consider that of the thousands upon thousands of fighter pilots, with hundreds of thousands of hours combined, spread across a multitude of jets... you've dug one (1) example of repeat use of disallowed "configuration" as a common tactic. One example of repeat use. I think that would be called rare, don't you? Probably even a bit individualized, given we don't even see the folks in his unit employ such tactics. Did he not want to teach them to his unit? Did he not want his unit to survive? Of course he wanted them to survive... he didn't want them to use those tactics. Logically, then, that they were not taught should be proof enough that their use was not meant to be employed.

Hey guys, discord invite link expired. For those flying Day 2... um, how do we get in? Edit, nevermind: email link expired, the one on front post works.

Is there any way I can register and pay for some people who won't do it themselves? If I give them an entry, they'll come suck with confidence with me, otherwise, they won't.

I'm on stable. That's what I was worried about, that there is more training on beta. I saw a post somewhere around here about a tool that can be used to switch back and forth between the two. I'll run it down and pop over to beta. Maybe I can train landing over there...

Is this a beta at the moment training mission? A user file? I only have startup and taxi/take off in my training missions. YouTube video for reference:

This is a few months old, so not sure if you are still looking, but: I'm running just a standard Windows 10 Pro (1909) on unRaid 6.8.3. The VM config isn't anything fancy, I've got the vdisk on the cache drive, as that one is SSD. I've given it 4 CPUs, 12 GB RAM to start (for 2 people right now), OVMF BIOS, Yes to Hyper-V, just basic settings. It seemed to work right out of the box for me, with the exception that I needed to add Windows firewall rules. I don't store any important data on this unRaid, it sits in the DMZ, and is also my Plex blox. Just something to consider when putting your storage world accessible.