Galinette

That's a weird reason for choosing between a M2.2 interceptor and a straight wing subsonic tank

You can't, it's in the aircraft model itself

The Mirage 2000C has a fixed amount of 112 chaff and 16 flares. You can attach a pod on pylon 10 if you want more, with 108 chaff , 48 flares, or a mix. The DCS decoy system being too limited to properly model the M-2000C, the amount is overriden by internal code and thus changing values in lua does not work. If you need more than you can mount with the pod, for training purposes, I think you can use the "unlimited weapons" option, it also applies to decoys (to be confirmed)

The amount of internal chaff and flares is fixed and cannot be changed. It's 112/16 In order to add more chaff or flares, you need to load an "ECLAIR" pod in the Rearm Menu Since this work differently to the classical DCS chaff/flare sliders, those sliders are disabled and the value is not relevant. Those values are there because of a DCS decoy system limitation. Again, this is a bug report channel. Not a place to request mods.

It's your lucky day

All correct. The display/cycle waypoint limit is realistic, and you can manually choose another one, this will display it.

Hi! Just got the files, they seem pretty difficult to print due to the big internal overhangs. How did you configure your slicer? I'm using a Prusa Mk3S+, and I can find no way of printing the main part without massive internal supports (which will be very hard to remove) or having unsupported overhangs that I feel will fail printing properly. Yours seem very clean. Thanks!

ASL was fixed for upcoming update with a lot of A/G bombing improvements. Deleting Saved Games will not fix it now, it's most likely a luck effect or different conditions.

Check the face scenes in the movie! It's two years old. I had the privilege to take part in it as a virtual pilot and speaker, this was a good experience. Even if the merge scene required like 50 takes

There are sevral pilot face views in this movie: But with the lighting it's not easy to tell the color. Just a pretext for linking to that movie though

Modes 1/2/3 are not secure. They are not used for RoE. They are used for coordination, M1 will identify the task, M2 uniquely identifies an aircraft, and M3 is AFAIK for being identified by civilian ATC and identifying civilian aircraft (because it's the civilian mode A) Mode 4 is secure. It uses a bigger key that is loaded by ground crew. There are actually two keys named A and B that the pilot can select, common use is having each key being used for a zulu time day, and everyone switches at zulu midnight. So key A will be the key chosen by the coalition for the flight departure day, and B for the next day. There are maybe other real life procedures for keys A/B, such as B used in case A is suspected of being compromised (hacked by the opponent), all is classified. In DCS M-2000C, currently: - A and B are two different keys, the pilot has no access to the actual key and can just select A or B as IRL - All aircraft in the same coalition on a server share the same A key and B key independently of their zulu departure day. That's for simplicity, to ensure that two friendlies using key A will recognize each other. It might change in the future if users show interest in being more realistic, maybe with an option. - Aircraft from different coalitions have incompatible keys Warning : key erasure is implemented. If you land and do not select "HOLD" within one minute, or if you select "ZERO" at any time, the keys are wiped. You don't have mode 4 anymore. The "AUDIO" switch position allows having audio warnings whenever you are interrogated in Mode 4 by an incompatible key. This means you either: - Have wiped keys or an IFF failure - Have selected key B while the interrogating aircraft has selected A, or conversely - Are interrogated by an ennemy in mode 4.

Just wait december release

Are you in OpenBeta or Stable?

Fixed! Thanks for reporting

You used the word "weed" several times in this thread, this might be the root cause of the "unexplained myriad of problems" you encountered

Just breaking wings is for sure very simplified, aircraft over speed damage is more complex. There can be destructive oscillations, excessive heating, engine malfunctions or compressor damage... From a development point of view its not really cheesy, just simple. The goal was to punish people going 15% faster than the envelope and breaking parts is easy in DCS. You deserved to be punished For instance, with over-G damage, wings are bent and the FM is altered, which required much more work, whereas other modules just break wings in this case.

It's not a gimmick, the mini-feeders just before engine fuel pumps don't refill in negative G conditions, and thus can only supply the engine a couple of seconds, depending on fuel flow. That's actually very common. Designing a fuel feeding that can sustain negative G indefinitely increases complexity and weight and can be considered unnecessary in most cases. Besides this, staying at negative G in a fighter aircraft has mostly zero benefit and is never done by pilots more than a couple of seconds because it's very uncomfortable and demanding for the body. For pitching down by an important amount, reversed positive G pull is faster, more effective, and more comfortable. Besides airshows, where it's not uncommon, nobody does level inverted flight. Now for the F-16, I know it has the capability of sustained negative G. I don't have the information for the F/A-18, but it really could just be not modeled in DCS. What about the tomcat? From NAVAIR 01-F14AAD-1, 11-21: And for the A-10C, I don't have the information either, but it would seem absolutely dumb to have designed the fuel system for sustained negative G given its missions. It's simply not yet modeled in DCS. What you see in the F-15E now is the norm IRL, and the F-16 is an exception. Now every DCS module has its simplifications, don't consider to perfectly know how a real jet behaves because you know it in DCS. That's true for every module from any developer.

Wing damage is triggered, not "anywhere near its rated speed", but 15% above the mach max at altitude. This means you absolutely can maneuver around the air frame limits without causing any damage. CptSmiley and SMEs might comment about that limit better than me. The actual damage realism (broken wings, fire) could be debated. But you are fully outside the specified airframe limits, and that's a fact! The engine fuel starvation under long enough negative G is also realistic, as far as I know. The argument "Yeah but F-15C in DCS doesn't loose engines" isn't elligible... This is an old FC3 module, systems models are simpler.

A fix is being tested. This should be released in December if it works well. The oscillations have been caused by several changes in FBW laws, mostly the one coordinating the rudder. AP gains have been tuned but we need to test it a lot to be sure we do not impact negatively the autopilot.

For information, that system was implemented in the Mirage 2000 for about two years. A special option check box enables this for the SRS bind (the module has SRS binds in DCS, like a couple of other modules such as the Tomcat) which bypass SRS hotkeys when it detects the module. If enabled, a quick press of the PTT menu will not trigger SRS PTT but open the respective comm menu. And a long press will not open the menu. There was initially concerns about the short PTT delay required for this to work. But after some time everyone got used to it and it's not a concern anymore. It's being added for VOIP the exact same way and should be available soon. So it's definitely something doable in the modules themselves.

Could you please follow your own advice?

These videos are outdated, the aircraft always draws the route back to base point after the last steer point, and this was fixed with the TSD route update.

No, it's actually one of the most irrelevant one. Please explain how either: Including only a small set of liveries in the base game, with additional downloadable livery packs Including only low res liveries in the base game, with additional HD livery packs Would allow more cheating than possible today, or would prevent improving an hypothetical existing livery cheating problem by classical means such as adding liveries to IC. In the case of the first point, yes a player without the additional livery packs would see a default livery for players using the additional ones, not a "ultra high visibility cheated livery". In the case of the second point, it's even less relevant. Edit : For the record, I'm using three DCS installations for various reasons such as module development on my desktop (gaming & main dev hardware) and two on my laptop (which is a PITA to upgrade for storage space) with only the required module installed on each.

@SharpeXB I think everyone in this thread knows your opinion now. I summarize: Anyone considering that $65-$100 is a significant amount should re-examine its life priorities. Having 50GB (and growing at a fast pace) of textures on the base install is not an issue for you. Removing liveries in the base install is bad because it will allow people cheating. Please add something constructive, or let us discuss the topic constructively, your last posts were just bitching and not significantly helpful.

Or, if you want to leave all liveries, having a light, low detail aircraft (model and textures) that can be upgraded to a high detail version on demand. I don't need having rivets modeled on the stuff I destroy, only on the aircraft I fly.