Skysurfer

I guess if ED keep messing with the lighting every patch this will keep breaking every time. Pretty annoying to have this for almost 5 months now.

I'd even say that apart from the CCM the Phoenix is in a pretty good spot right now.

What did the targets do? Did they dfend properly? Beam and chaff? Again, I fired several 54's against a buddy in a 1v1 training environment and a couple on a PvP server. TWS A worked flawlessly even. Show me a tacview and the launch parameters then we can analyze those shots.

Had some kills in MP, TWS and STT, seems to work reasonably well.

Negative no customs skins as far as I can tell.

Flew the A on multiple maps and on MP with no issues, doesn't look like it for me.

Yeah, the VDI and TID are pretty dim during the day, as well as the instrument lighting.

OK, just did some tests and found out how to reproduce it. Both the 7F and M will not guide in either P-STT or PD-STT beyond 10nm. Once you are within 10nm, regrdless of mode they will guide no problem. Reproduceable 100% of the time and this is without ECM or chaff.

Completely agreed. There is still so much missing and to be fixed on the base 14, let alone the ALR45 equipped early -A model, which was supposed to arrive "not long after" and "later this winter".

True but you'd think they learn from their mistakes after the 10th time and stop giving these firm promises like "roadmap next week" or "out of EA by March" or even assuring the Forrestal by the end of 2019, while it's nowhere to be seen in 2021. It does get tiring after a while as a paying customer and long term supporter.

Doesn't even have to be civilian. There are plenty NATO 29A's still in service, even the 9.13 is flown for example by the UAF. There's maintenance and aerodynamics manuals + the GAF evaluation documents, which is more than enough to build a decent module along with some SME feedback. I'd say the original 9.12 (29A) is probably the most wide-spread version and the best choice, even though the 9.13 (29S) is slightly more capable, despite the R-77 (RVV-AE) never actually entering service or being used on said airframe. Regardless, it would be an incredible addition to DCS redfor and also open some people's eyes on what it takes to operate in and navigate in said airplane.

No.

One can still click the guarded buttons through the cover. Been an issue since day one.

To keep it short and basic, in reality you'd always be flying in at least a flight of two (have a wingman) and it would be 2 vs multiple (at the very least two). Missile employment would be the primary means of engagement, counter hobs is a real thing and negates any kind of typical "BFM" geometry as well as defensive BFM only lasting a few seconds until you either die to a heater or your wingman kills the guy. There's obviously a lot more to it than that.

I think this has something to do with the "new" TWS logic/code as it only started happening after TWS-A was released. I recall the entire year before that there were no such issues with TWS or RWS - never seen duplicate contacts, let alone a trail of tracks before that.

+1 I don't get how this is server side dependant. Make it the default state.

The only thing that is missing now is a slight radar range adjustment and better performance for the 29S. I see 10-15% being thrown around, which seems reasonable. Oh and improved cockpit instrument lighting and separate binding for flood lights would be cool too.

Was this not fixed in the hotfix?

What's the current status on the SA-5? I think it should have fairly high prio given it is a much needed asset and SAM system that can be used on most maps and bring great value to most missions.

Don't get your hopes up too high, stuff like simple typos or wrong engine instruments / not animated gauges that were reported from day one still haven't been addressed. As well as missing external textures...

This would come in very handy for carrier deck states and recovery ops. Additionally maybe even a trigger to de-spawn said units. Would sure be awesome.

Some features are modelled some aren't. And even those that are aren't really well documented.

It may be an art, skill and "sport" in the DCS community but it couldn't be farther from reality if you wanna simulate real air combat.

Grumman Ironworks baby!

Yeah it might have been that different squadron had different techniques, maybe even differences on the B/D cat. The footage speaks for itself I guess.