Stearmandriver

Hell hath no fury like video gamers when someone wants to play their game a different way.

Several of us have, which is why it's kinda interesting that this thread received the "correct as is" tag. Pictures and tracks have been posted... how can the CCIP line angling off almost 90 degrees in straight and level flight be considered "correct?"

Exactly, that's the same question I keep asking too: how can this be an INS alignment problem, if the ONLY THING it affects is the CCIP line? If the INS was severely mis-aligned, ALL of your attitude and likely position indications would be completely wrong. This bug is specific to CCIP; it's not a general INS mis-alignment. It's also not user error... and it's also very much not "correct as is".

I believe you have to be heading somewhat towards the station as well. Pretty tough to calculate fuel remaining without a positive closure. That said, sometimes the Tacan will glitch. If it's not behaving as expected, turn it off and back on, that'll usually square it away.

Also worth looking into DCS Liberation if you haven't seen it. It's a free standalone campaign generator for DCS; I believe 2.4.2 is the latest version on Github. A great team of folks have put it together and it's completely changed DCS for me.

Very much agreed on both of these. I've been wanting a realistic Intruder sim since I read Coonts' books in my teens... and that was a while ago lol.

So what you're saying is... get ALL the modules, just to be safe? (I have no problem with this advice .)

But here's the thing: if it's an INS problem, why does it only affect the CCIP line? Why isn't your normal attitude symbology on your HUD (pitch ladder, roll scale) affected as well?

ICLS definitely works currently; must have been something wrong with the mission set up.

Well, you don't have the nose-pointing or alpha advantages that the Hornet seems to have against other fighters, so I feel like it's gotta come down to playing energy management and geometry better than the other guy. When I'm able to actually *win* a fight against another Hornet (vs just getting lucky because the other guy lost sight or something), it seems to come down to me (more through luck than skill I'm sure) properly employing maneuvers like yo-yos and displacement rolls; maneuvers designed to use geometry to your advantage, and manage your energy state. Check out the old "Art of the Kill" video on YouTube for Falcon; it's cheesy but there's good info. The true bible on this stuff (that's publicly available, anyway) is probably Shaw's "Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering". Electronic formats can be found online for cheap. Note that I'm no expert at any of this; those are hopefully just a couple thoughts that get you pointed in the right direction.

I like it! Reminds me of the airboss trap log, but cleaner. Will this only be part of your campaign, or could it be extended to work with any DCS mission? Thanks!

Once again, outstanding guide. Thanks!

I use low-level tactics against SA-10s in Liberation too.. ripple a string of closely spaced Snakeyes off during a 500ft, max speed run over the site. It generally works if there's terrain to mask your ingress until you're close. The CP is your target; kill that and all the SA-10s seem to be down.

I did, that's why I asked. You seemed to be claiming that overbanking tendency is not a real thing, which is what confused me. Every jet I've flown has exhibited overbanking tendency beyond about 25 degrees AoB. Positive stability in roll applies at smaller bank angles, but it seems inevitable that at some bank angle, the speed disparity between the inner and outer wing in a turn will create enough lift differential to overcome the degrees of positive stability. It makes sense that fly by wire systems would correct for this - the Airbus does, for instance - so it makes sense that the Hornet wouldn't exhibit this behavior (which was the original point, the DCS Hornet does). But it is indeed a real thing.

The Hornet drivers stated the same... what? That the Hornet actually has an overbank tendency?

I... don't know, because I'm not sure I'm understanding the problem Hodo was trying to describe. I fly the ICLS and the ball to a trap with no problems. I find the Hornet flight model to be very stable on approach. I actually really enjoy about 99% of how this sim handles. The only issue I brought up here was the already-acknowledged problem of the plane ballooning pretty severely as flaps are extended. Once configured and trimmed though, I think she flies great in the groove.

Interesting responses and I'm glad to hear it. Thanks!

Couldn't tell you anything about real world tactics, but in DCS the Kuznetov can be killed by a single flight of 2 Hornets, each carrying 4 GBU-24s, performing a level release at 35,000ft which seems to put you above their SAM envelope. Of course this requires escort to deal with their CAP first.

Oh, you're saying the book shows a legacy model with the glass UFC? I misunderstood, sorry. That's interesting... dunno then.

Super Hornets do. This is not a Super Hornet. The E / F models are Supers... this is a Legacy.

Basically, I'm curious about whether night (or daytime low vis) conditions affect the ability of AI enemy fighters to locate me. I enjoy doing low-level, radar-silenced ingress to a strike target, and those tactics do seem to make it a little tougher for the AI to find me... I'm wondering if adding darkness to the mix affords me any additional protection? Or is the AI detection algorithm pretty much the same in all weather and lighting conditions? Thanks...

It was probably an erroneous radar target or designation. I've seen it before, both on the carrier itself and on aircraft on the carrier. No idea how or why it happens, but it's a bug, not intended new symbology. Try hitting undesignate and if that doesn't work, try hitting reset on the radar DDI and if that doesn't work, turn off the radar.

I usually leave the hook up and do touch n goes, so after the first break I stay in the bolter pattern. You won't get an LSO grade this way (well you will but it's always just a bolter), but I use Bankler's Case 1 Recovery Trainer mission for this, which gives a much more detailed grade anyway. Lots of fun!

Wake is modeled very simplisticly and somewhat unrealistically in DCS. Basically, from what I've seen it's one effect that interfaces the same way with every module. No variability seems to exist for relative weights of generating and encountering aircraft, or generating aircraft's configuration or g loading. A Hornet experiences wake from a straight and level KC-135 pretty much identically to the way a Spitfire experiences wake from another Spitfire in a dogfight. That's like saying your LSA will be affected identically by wake from a 777 and another LSA . It's distracting / immersion-breaking enough that my inclination would be to leave wake off, but I don't because most servers have it enabled and I want to stay in practice. But yes - approaching the tanker correctly is the key to avoiding wake. I don't come from the side as suggested above - maybe that works too - but I come from below, lined up with the basket, and ease up to it as I approach. There's a sight picture that makes this automatic: put the pod that the hose comes out of between the 2 panes of glass visible at the top of your HUD. Set it just slightly offset to the right of center. Then just keep it there as you slowly approach the tanker. That'll start you well below the tanker when you're farther away, and bring your probe right up to the basket as you approach... and it'll keep you out of the wake (for the most part... you'll still get a little rolling moment but no violent upset).

AAR is one of my favorite things to do in DCS, just behind carrier ops, so I surely wouldn't use an "auto" or "easy" feature - but I do see some value in his suggestion. The forums are littered with people who, for whatever reason, are massively frustrated by AAR in this game. It's typically not great business sense to massively frustrate your customers ;). If an auto option leads more people to explore more aspects of DCS - and ENJOY doing so - that equals more user retention, more modules purchased, more revenue for ED... and we all benefit from that. I could even see an auto option both motivating people to learn it themselves (because it's pretty damn cool), and HELPING them learn by demonstrating the sight picture. Hard to see how it's different than auto or warm start options. Make it controllable on servers etc., and then what's the harm? The way I see it, how other people play the game has no effect on the enjoyment I get from playing it my way... That said, I'd still encourage everyone to stick with the practice until you get it yourself, because it's fun!