LtCol_Davenport
最新回复 发布由 LtCol_Davenport
-
-
Probably dreaming. I would be happy with just the new hardpoint for LD10/SD10 on the belly and the HMD
Oh well, I don’t know about much other stuff but, I was basically talking about more hard points and HMD.
But given your answer, seems even those are not confirmed in any way, right? -
Are they working on a Block 3 variant or that’s just dreaming?
-
I am also joining to ask for NSW back or at least as an option. I really can’t fly the plane this way, if not starting on the runway.
Also, without pedals, I think it is even more difficult!
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, =36=Witcher said:
This is another module, said plenty of times.
Oh absolutely. And I will also pay full price for it, don’t worry, that’s not the problem.
I will be simply happy to see it coming!
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, =36=Witcher said:
No, no and a thousand times no. The Mirage 2000C can only carry Matra 530D and Magic II. Everything else is just not real. If you want to enter BVR arena use another module.
But the real question is: Will we ever get a version of the Mirage with Fox-3 and a T-POD?
-
On 9/24/2021 at 7:50 PM, IronMike said:
Thank you, tracked for further investigation.
Thanks for the acknowledgement.
-
1
-
-
I didn’t know that.
I did this this basically out of curiosity.
With a friend we asked if the cartridge also have the TERNAV data to make coordinate system works and basically I was trying that, and ended up finding what I found
-
1
-
-
Reporting problem with the data cartridge.
Problem:
The module seems it simply don't use it.
I tried not inserting the cartridge and do everything else as usual. Everything worked.
Waypoint were loaded, the alignment was correct and new coordinates inserted was registered correctly.
Thought:
It seems the aircraft does not check if the cartridge it is inserted or not.
Seems like an "If-Statement" missing, if someone get what I mean.Test environment:
AJS-37 placed on a Georgian airport (if the maps may matter) for a cold ramp start.
In Mission Editor also I added just a couple of waypoints.Started up the plane as usual, when the computer turned on I inserted the 9099 code (without the cartridge) and it loaded all the waypoints planned in the ME.
After take off, I verified the accuracy of those waypoints and they were accurate.
I checked for any TERNAV error code but seems it were fine, at least for my understanding.
Than, I proceed to test if inserting new coordinates gave some sort of problems but it register correctly and saved as new waypoint. Again, accuracy was correct.
Finally, I tried landing, or better, check if the landing airport was in the system and yes, it was.
Conclusion:
This was a short test flight (<10 min), in one map on one airport.
It is surely nothing empirical but I think it is enough to raise a yellow light and ask to you, Developers, to check for it, as this is certainly not a normal behavior.Otherwise, if this is the intended behavior, I would like some explanation and ask what it is the use of the Data Cartridge also.
Thanks.
-
I just did the last mission of the campaign and by the time I get on my TGT waypoint, I got notified the mission is completed.
The 4 plane package taken off before my flight had done all the job.
Don’t know if it is broken or what, but what is, is that I just flight there and back without doing nothing, not really a “last mission” with epic soundtrack in the end let’s say xD
-
Just now, buur said:
In Razbam Discord they mentioned that they will add the function. But without any time plane.
Well...better than nothing.
Thanks for the information.
-
On 8/20/2021 at 11:38 PM, buur said:
At the moment IFF is not directly implemented in the Harrier, but Razbam will make the buttons working (hopefully) in the next time.
I'm looking into it as a personal matter, let's say.
What do you mean it is not working? The IFF and I/P Button and clickable and they have a binding in the .lua file.
Also the "IFF Function Selector" works and have a binding.For some reason they just do not nothing in DCS nor SRS/lotATC.
I mean, there is the necessary to do a really basic stuff as "Turn IFF Off" or better, start the plane with it off and have to torn it on, as in many others, as it should be.
Also other plane has basically the same I/P Button, meaning it can work, there is the possibility in DCS.
Have Razbam sad something in this regards?
-
I know that if there were some ETA in your WIP module, you would already have sad it but...is it possible to at least know in witch year do you think they should be ready?
You think you will be releasing something in 2021 or probably not?
Also, is it possible to have some "order" in witch you think you will release your 3 new modules? As I supposed you wont launch them all together.
So we know at least really roughly what to expect.
Thanks.-
1
-
-
-
I’m interested in this too!
-
Oh...ok, that’s good to know! I can’t test it because I just own FC3, Viggen and Mirage, that is my only full fidelity model with GBU.
Well...that’s frustrating pilot for 30 minute and then miss the target consistently by that small margin without be able to do nothing about it..
-
Hello,
I tried setting up a simple JTAC unit and using some guided bombs with M-2000C.
It work and the bomb track (it seems, because it manovre at some point), but it often miss the target by few meters.
I don’t know if it is relevant but I tried on bunkers and it always miss, and some simple armor unit did just once but it tracked well. Any clue about it?
-
Hello,
I’m start this week learning this module, I red one time the manual and follow the tutorial, plus some YouTube videos, as this point I should know enough about the basic at least.
During training missions it mention (or at least it seams to me) that when bombing, I can select 3 modes, at least with CCRP, TAS (Radar bombing), INS (+TAS) and RS, which, the tutorial, explain as less accurate because it is only based on the altimeter.
Now, my question is, is it possibile to do bombing without radar, only using RS option?
If for example I want to remain as stealth as possibile, want to bomb a stationary object like enemy base where INS is enough and altimeter precision is acceptable since is flat all around the object, can I release weapons without radar ranging?
I try to search it all around but doesn’t seems to be anything so maybe want I’m asking is just silly, I don’t know!
Hope my question make sense to you and that I was able to explain myself!
Waiting for answers :)
-
The actual checklist is in french, the 476th virtual squadron translated and adapted the checklists for DCS very closely .. I suggest to take a look at them:
I can’t open the link :( at least with my smartphone.
I can visti the site e navigate it, but can’t directly download what your are referring
-
NTTR is up for sale on the ED website at $49.99 exactly the same price as the PG map...
Whether its popular or not for the small MP crowd should have no impact on whether they decide to continue to support it or not...
(Realised I'm making exactly the same point as LtCol Davenport!!!)
Yep! But glad to see I’m not the only one thinking the that way..
-
Unfortunately I think the NTTR map (and Caucuses for that matter) are to old to take advantage of the new lighting and map technologies without a major update/rework. I don’t see this happening since one is free and the other, at least based on the MP server list, isn’t used much.
But yes I agree would be nice, we use the NTTR map exclusively for all our training (except carrier quals obviously) in the 476th.
Well...even if I could agree for Caucuses, NTTR can be old, not played a lot, not for MP and everything they can say, BUT (and this is a big but), it is a payed content...and moreover (this is the second big thing) cost the same as Persian Gulf...
So, purely on economic level I see only 2 reasonable think to do:
1) Lower NTTR Map cost
2) Threat it as all other maps that cost the same (for now only PG but will be others)
I think it is not something that “it would be nice but...”, it’s something that it’s wrong if they decide to leave it without updates but sell it at the same price of everything else, that’s bad commercial practice IMO.
I mean, with planes they do, as the module gets older, generally they lower the price and also by quite a lot for certain aircraft, even up to ~25€.
So yeah...don’t know why they are testing maps in this why for now..
Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk
-
Yes, exactly like Emmy said: in the 1980's, good luck finding out much of anything, beyond a Janes book page. In those days, finding actual fighter jet manuals... near impossible off of a base. And you might find yourself awkwardly trying to explain how you got it, and why you felt entitled to having it. The Cold War had a LOT of military things, even things seemingly of zero importance, were considered SECRET.
It's a very different world today where a member of the general public can just google a military weapons system of high complexity and strategic importance and just download the relevant manuals, and a company in Russia can get access to US miltary manuals and no one bats an eye... (well except for that one unlucky employee, but I'm just talking generally here.)
You are referring to the F-16 manual sold by an ED employee, right?
-
+1000
lol ahah
Yeah...would be nice from ED just say a simple “yes” or “no”.. :(
-
And thank to everyone for sharing their opinions, seems all of you agree, I’m glad to ear that :)
-
I don't believe the content of MFD screens are all classified - nearly all MFD pages for many many aircraft including Hornet, Harrier, and Viper are publicly available in NATOPS or equivalent documents. The Harrier's documents for example, which are unclassified, show pictures of most MFD pages in some form or another. Same with Hornet's.
I would venture to guess that pilots who claim they can't show the screens in videos because of classification are referring more to specific content on those pages like GPS coordinates or weapon stores information or sensor ranges that may inadvertently pop up in front of the camera, and they don't want to risk that classified data being shown. But it's that data, not the layout or function of avionics, that is protected.
Oh that’s really interesting! I didn’t know that!
Anyway, if you are interested, there is for example on YouTube a cool video about a pilot that explain all the cockpit of the F-15 except the MFD claiming that she cannot turn them on.
A-4E-C Nose Wheel Steering missing.
在 How To Mod for DCS World
发布于
Take note. I have no pedals unfortunately, I have no space for them.
I even bought (for my dad) the L-39 (without knowing the steering think) and he called me that he was unable to use it. At first I was confident but after I tried for like an hour, I wasn’t able to taxi the plane, at all. He also doesn’t have pedals.
After the release of this A-4 we both tried again and failed, again, together.
I am probably stupid or not good enough to, that’s for sure since I see people online taxing perfectly but I don’t know what to do. Moreover, have to bound the pedals brakes to the keyboard it is really a pain, at least for me.
Sure, but at the end of the day, this is a game. I know this is not a popular opinion but that’s the truth. I’m not asking something crazy like weapons or whatever. Even if the real plane didn’t have it, I personally won’t find it a deal breaker experience, moreover, people could always choose if using the real differential braking or enable the option.
Honestly, I don’t find it much different to other plane option to change cockpit language, gyro drift, INS ready and such. We are not real pilots nor have the same time has them. It is a job in real life, not for us, I have just a couple of hours per week. At least me.