Frosty2124
-
Posts
105 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Frosty2124
-
-
8 hours ago, JupiterJoe said:
Thanks for being so positive and helpful. Poor guy's just trying to do us all a favour and compile of list of stuff that needs fixing on our beloved module.
thank you so much for the kind feedback, i take pride in supporting people on the forums to not do something that puts any party in an uncomfortable position
-
1
-
-
one could reasonably infer that maybe you are conveying a similar attitude of negativity. coming out swinging tends not to help. if you aren't enjoying the interactions you are having, the sign out button exists for a reason
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Raisuli said:
I am currently struggling to understand how I keep my seat as a pilot in the Phantom. We make a good team; neither of us know what we're doing or do it well
As I understand it allowing stress to show in comms is a hangable offense in Navy ready rooms. Maybe the air force is different. I do know, having had to communicate through stressful situations in the military, that 'uhhh' is still dependent on the individual. I know a few people who can't get a sentence out in non-stressful situations without two or three of those.
In a perfect world I'd have a sit down with Jester and we'd work on that. It's not something you fix right away but with a little effort you can get past it, stress or no stress.
Which is what i mean by "human" hes a human, fallible backseater
I've both civil and military RT Certs so i know how it should be done, the "human" aspect of jester makes him easier to integrate with as a crew
-
Just now, =475FG= Dawger said:
You don't understand Comms brevity.
" I got, uuuuuhhhhhh, <pause> Nails, 11 O'clock". should be "Nails, 11 "
it should. but you don't understand how stress works....
aviation is a high stress environment, military more so.when talking to another callsign, you're correct you should avoid "uhhhh" as much as possible, but under combat conditions, its get the message across.
Jester is designed to simulate human behaviour as much as possible, please don't eject him when he miss Idents an aircraft or tells you to "just jam it in there" he's trying his li'l heart out.
-
3
-
-
15 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:
I don't own the F-14 so this is my first experience with Jester.
It turns out he is named appropriately because he is a clown.
Unprofessional and useless.
And his unprofessional demeanor was obviously on purpose.
He doesn't do what he should do. (call airspeeds and altitudes, look for additional bandits, etc)
What he does do is done badly " I got, uuuuuhhhhhh, <pause> Nails, 11 O'clock".
Comms Brevity is a thing, even on the ICS.
I would rather just have key binds to stuff in the backseat.
Or a key binds for trained, professional WSO/Clown mode.
Comms brevity is why he says "nails"
jester is designed to be as human as possible, humans aren't infallible.
wait until Jester makes a mistake.....
-
2
-
-
23 minutes ago, Ddg1500 said:
What I mean is after arrested touch down, the tomcat would be forced to pitch up and lift the whole nose up due to the retraction of arrest wire, which quite often sometimes
again, we'd need to see tracks. i've had this due to lag, or even random DCS buffoonery.
it could be anything
-
you'll need to provide tracks for us to better understand what you're referring to
-
That's hypoxia my guy, make sure you're oxygen is turned on
-
2
-
-
The what? can you provide some more info, iirc the Pitot is already attached to the aircraft
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Razor68 said:
0I have paid for it and it has been changed so much that it don't follow the rules of physics. I used to make aircraft for X-plane and was on the Laminar team so i know all about flight physics.
if you have tangible evidence that the aircraft isn't performing as it should, provide the Devs with the relevant footage and tracks, and the relevant performance data that demonstrates how it should perform, and I'm certain that devs will make the necessary adjustments.
otherwise you want to be wary of flaming, by saying "it don't fly right" and not saying what it isn't flying right in accordance with. you come of as having a weak argument and a bit of a silly goose.
-
4
-
-
31 minutes ago, Razor68 said:
3 year since i bought this module never had problems flying it or any of the other 22 modules i own. Now it is pretty much a turd, no wonder nobody flys it on mp servers anymore.
ok, but what's your point? you don't like the way it feels?
no one is forcing you to fly it
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Sindar said:
That's right. Incentivize the sale of goods no one wants so they don't take up shelf space. It is not necessary to incentivize the sale of good goods. It will always be bought. And there will always be a shortage of it. It's called high demand. There's no demand for F-14s.
P.S. 30% off. My mistake.
Why so salty
? There's nothing wrong with the cat, she's an old girl which more modern designs have taken lessons from and improved upon.
It's the most faithful representation of an aircraft we have currently in DCS, and shes a challenge to fly.Just because you don't like something doesn't mean that it is automatically bad
. based on the data and SME opinion it flies like it should, and when someone finds new data that highlights an inconsistency, HB change and update it. it'll never be perfect but all the constructive critiquing helps to get it ever closer
I'll also pick up all the toys and put them back in the pram for you
-
8
-
-
1 hour ago, Sindar said:
That's why it's 40% off.
That's not how that works chief
. the discount is to encourage sales, not due to the fact that its "poor" this isn't a balanced game....or a used car dealership.
-
7
-
-
Thats a cool as hell photo
-
1
-
-
41 minutes ago, maxsin72 said:
I really don't know, Enzo seems so sure in the podcast: he has no exitation, the interviewer ask him "5 second?!?!" and he confirms. I really don't understand why he is not telling the truth. It's really difficult to think that people who is doing a very important duty is lieing. Enzo had also the opportunity to tell "i can't answer", so why to tell a lie?
Typhoon is good, but the numbers quoted aren't feasible.
Sincerely,
a Typhoon SME
-
2
-
-
20 minutes ago, Sup_Bigans said:
IMHO the amount payed for these Tomcats are enough to set a readble cockpit and some used ones, instead of wasting time in the Eurofighter, a plane still in service and without operative history.
The aircraft has been designed with SME input, we got what we paid for, a realistic representation.
also, the tomcat is still in service and the typhoon does have a substantial operational history.
-
5
-
-
1 hour ago, JupiterJoe said:
When you have a LANTIRN on 8B and rockets on 1B, there seems an excessive amount of drag to the starboard. As if the LANTIRN has no drag assigned to it. A double rocket pod looks like it has more surface area at the front to create more drag, but I believe there is a similar effect with an Aim-54 on 1B. Am I wrong?
Zuni's are incredibly draggy
-
1
-
-
Just now, RaisedByWolves said:
Cannot do that. We are a bunch of insolent babies.
i think i just fell in love
5 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:I didn't say it wasn't, I've read it the first time IronMike wrote it.
Personally never felt the need to 'refresh' the aircraft just because of those dynamic cockpit features - was merely sharing my point of view here about them.
so what was the point you were trying to make?
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:
Sure, I fully understand.
On the bold, I didn't express myself right, I'm not questioning that, of course people know stuff eventually do fail, break, etc.
What I meant was, that several Tomcat fans / simmers, might find much more preferable visually wise to look at a not so 'disfigured' panel / cockpit.
It's merely personal preference, and they are also on their own right - just that.
yes, and as i eluded to above, the ability to disable this feature is coming
for now, just refresh the aircraft till you get the ACM panel you want, ergo effectively moot at this point.
hope this helps
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:
Yeah, but that might not be everyone's cup of tea.
Different people do buy modules and get their enjoyment out of them, for effectively different reasons:
- some buy the F-14 because they want to feel as a real life jet fighter as most as possible, and therefore they seek the utmost realism ;
agreed, the ACM panel falling off (and associated field expedient fixes) is part of this.
12 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:- others buy this module, because they highly appreciate the legendary F-14 Tomcat as the pure machine it is ... and want to enjoy its flight, its capabilities, its looks (cockpit and airframe), etc.
the ACM panel fixes form part of the looks of the cockpit too
12 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:And in this last case, flying something that is supposed to be powerful, hi-tech in its time, legendary like the Tomcat, doesn't quite match with broken, cheap patch, badly kept parts in the ACM panel - in terms of personal preference speaking.
welcome to military aviation, it's a myth that everything works all the time every time, I spent 7 years on Eurofighter and can attest to this first hand even on delivery jets (with less than 50 hours).
I appreciate your preferences and can sympathise with what your saying, I'd have loved my jets to have arrived from the factory and been able to go straight on ops. but sadly what your expectations are, are unrealistic both in terms of back than and even nowadays
also, i believe that that when finalised you'll be able to disable this feature iirc, so effectively your concerns are moot.
-
6
-
-
15 minutes ago, draconus said:
So far found these problems in F-14 MT: TCS symbols only, LANTIRN symbols/data only, uncommanded VR zoom in cockpit during Gs.
iirc and I might be wrong but aren't there new g effects? that last issue might be related
-
57 minutes ago, 79Au said:
1. I don't like these silly wires at all. I think it ruins the look of the product I purchased years ago.
2. If realism is so important, why don't we get more liveries with more numbers? (more than 4 per squadron) I see a bit of a double standard here. The problem with the numbers remains unadressed since release. Takes a couple seconds to duplicate, increment number, save. That's just lazy.
Maintenance issues and temporary fixes are arguably the meat and potatoes of realism. if we were going further, realistically you'd be rolling a dice every time you started the jet as to whether or not you'd have a 100% capable aircraft, even then you could brick the radar on launch, or have a system go INOP in flight.
as to your points:
1) its random what fix will be mounted if anything, I'm sure that if its that disheartening for you, a well worded letter to HB might result in a refund if you surrender the product although, you are receiving the product you purchased.
2) liveries are the bulk of the file size, as people have already previously said it'd be somewhat prohibitive to include every livery ever. that said if you have the storage the files page on the website will have a multitude of liveries for you to download.
-
5
-
-
4 minutes ago, Jayhawk1971 said:
I believe it. I can easily imagine 6 to 12 months of heavy duty can render even the most techy tech tech stuff into a bucket of improvised patch jobs. Especially considering meager defense budgets (even after the recent "surge" in defense spending).
I'm really curious how much leeway ground crews get with regards to fixing/ modifying their jets (apart from obvious safety regulations, of course).
so from my experience, anything above safety only dictates where the jets are allocated for example, the display jet is likely going to be a <profanity>box, and the sqns will focus on keeping the reliable aircraft mission ready, we had a load of hangar queens across the fleet and they were used as rob jets to facilitate the rest of the fleet.
there were an number of jets where you could reliably tell what was going to be wrong with them, DASS, SMS, FLIR, etc, and they got reputations.
-
4
-
2
-
-
Just now, Jayhawk1971 said:
I think this whole thing probably needs some time to sink in for many people. I think most grew up with the notion of US military aircraft being these high-techy, pristine, clean affairs with lots of shiny, blinking lights and cool displays (thanks in part to US military glossy PR material enforcing this belief). When in reality, the harsh conditions on a Carrier on deployment, with spare parts being a rare commodity, those Tomcats resembled more Han and Chewy patching up the Millennium Falcon.
Give it time, people will get used to it once the realism of it all sinks in. In my opinion.
it's not just old stuff, the amount of stuff I've seen inop or speed taped on typhoon will blow your mind
-
4
-
What are these wires on the ACM?
in DCS: F-14A & B
Posted
It's a backup, backup gunsight