IronMike

Absolutely. I thought I replied to you on that in the bug thread, but seems like I forgot, my apologies. We're currently reworking parts of the AP again, which we believe will let us model the inner workings even more realistically and avoiding odd behavior at the same time. FYI, HDG hold does kinda work, only that it weaves back and forth with a +/-2-5° bank. That you could not autolevel below 5° bank however I could not reproduce, it does so clearly on my end. 5° shows very shallow on the hud or VDI, so you could be under the impression you are banking less than you actually are, which happened quite often to me, surprising me time and time again how little 5° bank is when aimed at in the HUD or VDI. Else there is another underlying issue with hdg hold in relation to mag var changing, which we are currently looking at, hoping it will get rid of the banking (which is kind of trying to adjust for a changing magvar).

Oversweep on ground spawn is universal now, and unsweeping your wings prior take off is a checklist item. This is unfortunately due to the fact that you can only set one wingstate for all ground spawns, unlike the carrier. It is necessary to avoid wing sweep 20° fwd spawns in hangars, as we find unsweeping the wings is nothing outrageous (or even abnormal irl to do and) to ask from the player, while ofc having them spawn with wings damaged and stuck in a hangar is. Hope that makes sense.

Unfortunately not at the moment as a living document, a public bug tracker takes a lot of time simply to maintain. Currently I do not think that there is a bug we are not aware of, we keep checking the bug section, forums and also other social media frequently, plus our fairly large test team serves us a bridge in case we miss something. In terms of reporting there is no need to pre-occupy yourselves: rather have a bug reported twice than not at all, so if you feel like you want something reported simply do so please. Thank you! Soon.

Hey everyone, sadly and very unfortunately, our changes for this patch have not shipped this time around due to an unfortunate series of smaller mishaps in the publishing process and miscommunication. Not to be repeated and lesson learned. This patch was to see, amongst other things, the next larger overhaul in the AIM-54 as well as various other medium and minor features and fixes making it to the F-14 and Viggen. Instead, these improvements will ship in September together with the next series of features we'll get done by then. We'll detail the AIM-54 changes in a post on the forums to give you a preview until then. Apologies for the non-existent showing. We set our sights on September and beyond and hope to make it a major, wrinkle-free update for both aircraft.

Hey @ShinyMikey - I was just about to post something. Sadly and very unfortunately, our changes for this patch have not shipped this time around due to an unfortunate series of smaller mishaps in the publishing process and miscommunication. Not to be repeated and lesson learned. This patch was to see, amongst other things, the next larger overhaul in the AIM-54 as well as various other medium and minor features and fixes making it to the F-14 and Viggen. Instead, these improvements will ship in September together with the next series of features we'll get done by then. We'll detail the AIM-54 changes in a post on the forums to give you a preview until then. Apologies for the non-existent showing. We set our sights on September and beyond and hope to make it a major, wrinkle-free update for both aircraft. [edited to explain it a bit more in detail and more accurately.]

Haha, nice, fish go boom.

Guys, can someone remind me please what this thread was initially about?

We appreciate the wish for a cleaner cockpit very much, unfortunately it is not within the realm of feasible currently though, as a complete rework of the cockpit would simply take far too long. And while we do believe the cockpit is a faithful representation of its in service character, and it was a deliberate decision to tell many small stories through its wear and tear. It is also an artistic decision we very much stand by. That however does not mean that we would not want to give you more options, if we could. But this is precisely what forge is for. And I should probably clarify a bit on that: weathering details does not mean the entire cockpit. More like panels, places, spots. But this is where we can make certain things more legible, a bit different, etc. to diversify the experience. It likely will not constitute in the end what most of you would regard as a "clean cockpit", and in the end is also not meant to deliver that, but meant to deliver the experience of not flying always the same aircraft. But we do hear your wishes, and I would be surprised if not some of them at least will be considered when time comes. It will, of course, have to fit within the current representation. Thank you for your kind understanding.

Also always check the mission folder for SP missions. Watching the Devildog, Training Day, etc etc... all exist there as full blown missions. Some of the Lantirn IA missions like Clay Dagger or Training Day also start on the ship and full blown. It needs to be a bit of a mix, the point is still Quickstart and Instant Action more or less. Though, I do not care too much about that, but also about new players who will keep coming in. And who will then still want to find suitable IA missions to get going. If you have a particular mission you would like to see bumped to full blown, let me know. I won't promise though, because for full blown missions I also prefer to go all in, which adds a ton of work ofc. But also, also: while we won't add masses anymore, we will continue adding stuff, like the final hour mini campaign for SA, etc. New maps will also mean new missions, always. PS: Found the culprit: my memory. Soldier was picked intentionally, because at the point of mission creation the T-55 would not die reliably. Hence the splash damage on the soldier was considered as a T-55 kill by proximity/ disablement. That it gets now splash killed from the BTR is kinda funny. I changed the trigger to the T-55, so hopefully that fixes the issue. Will be in the next patch.

Thank you all! Will take a look and fix, not sure how/why the unit changed in the trigger.

May be more than one navy variant, but at least one, and yes, they will be offered separately, not included in the F-4E package.

Listen to the latest episode of Air Combat Sim Podcast featuring @Cobra847 - CEO, Founder and Lead Artist at Heatblur Simulations. A big Thank You goes to @baltic_dragon, @Belgeode and the entire Air Combat Sim Podcast team! We hope you enjoy the episode.

Thank you for the report, we'll look into it.

Yes, please, everybody - ED is very helpful with the issues that cross over between us - but they, too, need to follow their own priority list - you can imagine they have to deal with many more issues than we have to. In principle, it is our responsibility to finish the FM polish, which steps need to be taken in the background is not really relevant. The remaining/ open issues with the F-14 are not lost on us, and the effort to resolve them all is continuing. Thank you for your very kind patience with us.

With upgrades, the F-14D or even a newer iteration, with AMRAAMs, multirole, etc etc could have well extended into the same time frame as the Super Hornet imo. The one thing the Navy sorely misses with the Tomcat is loiter time, which as one can imagine, is very crucial over water. The Tomcat also was the more stable air to ground platform and outperformed the Hornet in that sense, minus lacking the newer bells and whistles. But, it was not to happen, so it is what it is. As for DCS, everything we have so far, is still well within both a real and fictional timeframe for the -B. Even once the Eurofighter drops, it will be still within or close to those limits.

Excellent, thank you very much! Then I would say you were correct in assuming it is a bug. We will look into it. Thank you for all your input.

I double checked, and I was wrong, it is indeed 1.5, not 2. @Callsign JoNay please try this for me, set it to 2 (that is on the outer marker) at 230 kts, and let me know what you get please. thank you! Thank you, you are right, I interpreted it wrongly.

I know you guys are growing impatient, and so are we tbh. We, too, want to get it done and out of the way, I can assure you of that.

We'd kindly like to ask you all for a bit more patience on the matter as we're trying to resolve underlying issues that will allow us to close this chapter on FM development. Thank you ever so kindly!

Matters little, as two different instruments, with completely different symbology. From the manual I gather 2 needle deflections from center, so twice the width of the needle from center, as in centerline, not the edge of the white center marker. I may be wrong though or interpreting it wrongly, so I will double check. nullnull

Great post and comments. Thank you.

One needle deflecting represents a 360 in 4 minutes. You're indicating about 2 needle deflections, and you say it is 180°/min, or 360 in 2 minutes. Aka, no bug indeed.

Aaah, the gold old restart PC fix. Well, you know how they say, sometimes the simplest things solve the most complex issues. Glad you got it to work! Happy flying and reviewing. BTW: if you watch Tomcat tracks, avoid using the Jester menu. Better even, host your own server and watch the server track instead of the client track. Jester and Multicrew, combined with how tracks work in DCS, make them usually go bananas when combined.