Skysurfer

Good stuff! Hopefully we can soon arrive on a mostly final rendition of the FM as constantly adjusting to the small changes since release over time can kinda get tiring. Also, I think the thrust update should be included with the drag update as thrust is fundamental for anything sustained, as well as transsonic and top speed.

Based on direct SME feedback. The Hornet sustains way too well and reaches too high of a top speed on the deck. No data since the EPE perf. manuals aren't really public.

Afaik it only works when in lookup. But yeah it should work in lookdown as well so hopefully it'll be fixed...

Agreed. Especially the last bit which you see so much of in your average online server. Only issues with NEZ's in DCS is that ou can fairly easily notch just about every missile at any range right now (esp. once chaff comes into play). Like 90%+ reliability. But it is what it is.

Also, this only works in a 2v1 where the sole Hornet goes Banzai and has no SA or radar mech. Take 120C's into play as well as a two ship and the ER stands no chance - unelss both parties just notch and chaff and it ends in a merge scenerio or stalemate. It is way more complex than if he/they does X do Y.

Simple. Because the T/ET in real life sucks and is fairly limited in terms of launch conditions.

Before posting this, what you should have done:

Nice bait.

Sure, it would be better than the old LNTIRN for sure but by no means as "perfect" as it is right now.

Funnily enough Heatblur's LANTIRN exactly models that effect.

Yeah, sadly this is what it comes down to. It's either as jammable as all other radars in DCS or not jammable at all - in any case people will complain.

Sydly this seems like a never-ending cycle of ED tinkering witht the lighting and alpha channels in DCS, Heatbur adjusting it to where it should be for it to then break once again due to said tinkering.

On speed.

Flaps have a +2G and roll limit but since that isn't modelled...

How is it still not fixed btw? Thought it was at least in the last hotfix.

Awesome stuff! However the shallow water near the coast looks a bit too shallow or clear in my opinion. Directy from above boats look like they are floating and you basically see no water. Looks rarther odd. Reference:

A bit offtopic here but according to some SME feedback I got directly our Hornet has a bit too much thrust (sustains too well and reaches too high of a top speed) compared to the real jet. The current spool times are a non issue, quite frankly and you can simply adapt to it and fly the ball just fine.

Great stuff, Curly! This is exactly how you prove a point and build a rock-solid case (especially in this realm). Good docs you have found there as well! Another thing to note is that our DCS Hornet burns substantially less fuel in max AB than it should (even for the slightly more efficient 402 engines).

Based on pure photo evidence, most if not all ALR67 A's and B's have said ECM blisters. If you look at archived photos for each Tomcat squardron you'll most commonly find planes with them rather than without them, uless we are talking non ALR-67 jets.

Splitting throttles isn't part of the boldface.

What we'll probably end up seeing is a jamming strobe effect on the DDD (raw return) and line of resulting trackfiles on the TID. Since chaff and range/velocity gate pulloff returns aren't a thing in DCS I doubt we'll see those. I do think even the basic jamming strobe + denied lock until 22nm should be implemented asap though.

No doubt. Simply not used to it (nor did I know about this feature until very recently) from DCS. What's the rough margin of error / leaway in terms of AOA when on yellow donut indexer?

You need to set the gauge manually to match the fuel.

That is cool and all but I was more hinting at the fact that you have an AOA bracket and indexer to trim for your desired AOA.

On non-FCS aircraft like say the Tomcat you trim to on speed for a specific power setting and do slight adjustments of power to control your descent rate. Pitch for speed, power for descent rate. AOA in this case is a combination of all 3 variables (power, pitch, trim) - if said conventional plane is trimmed for "on speed" no matter the power setting, it will always stay on speed by means of oscillating up and down until it settles at said AOA. Again, power controls your climb/descent (pitch&power couple moment aside). The Hornet maintains on speed AOA via trim in landing gains (if you want to know more detail, reference the NATOPS). You trim it for on speed on downwind, set baseline power for level flight and control your descent with reasonable power modulation (never go full MIL or full IDLE). AOA, or angle of attack by definition is the angle between the chordline of your wing and the relative wind and is directly tied to how much lift your wing produces. At 1G it will correspond to the desired approach speed for the boat. If only there was a means of telling your target AOA (as well as range) somewhere.... I wonder. The legacy Hornet is flown exactly the same.