Skysurfer

I have seen this happen in MP to a buddy. Why does it even spawn you on the cat with chocks in the first place?

Sure, it is getting updates but still has some stupid bugs from day one and stuff like the PBR rework, new sounds and fixes to the pilot model and especially damage model are still pending. Once these are addressed you can absolutely call it out of EA - will it be perfect and totally bug free? No, no one expects that and such is DCS that it'll probably introduce new bugs down the road but it sure will be a solid and polished module. The problem with the Viggen is that HB has two EA modules in the pipeline at the same time and it kinda has been abandoned at time due to the Tomcat development. I do hope they'll learn from this.

No. This is very much not true. Especially once FBW comes into play.

What I wrote above, negative static stability in roll in the landing config.

Yep, current "bug" so to speak. It's the intake houl that is only really accurate when on the ground.

Negative static stablity on bank, yeah.

Can this and the shimmy issue on the nosewheel please be addressed? This is really like the only thing that is kinda gamebreaking right now.

Or the Ranger.

I dont see why not - its basically the same plane without the TRAM and with an integrated boom mechanism. I would expect it to be.

Awesome! All I ever dreamed of for DCS, honestly. I am sure it will take several years just like the Tomcat but just to know it's coming eventually is quite nice. Together with the F-8 this is going to build a really nice 70's to 80's ecosystem.

No I get that, 10-20nm would be more than enough. For LGB's the accuracy doesnt matter that much anyway, just wanna put it close enough and lase it in.

Would sure be very useful. Shouldn't be too difficult to implement honestly - could run off of any waypoint entry method with a specified bearing, range and altitude. Because that way as long as you have external lasing (either from an AI JTAC or a player in another plane, at range) and once the GBU-24 gets all its modes and a proper flight model you basically have a tremendous standoff and alpha strike capability on the Tomcat.

Exactly. Not like we don't already have a "Frankenhornet" which is completely fine by all means - it has its benefits. But ED need to stop sticking to the whole "2005 Lot 20 Hornet" thing and simply admit that they dont have the time or resources to implement two weapon systems that originally weren't on the featurelist and were not part of the project. Personally I don't really care about not having the GBU54 or AGR-20's, it's just ED's reasoning behind it that doesnt make any sense.

It can and they do but ED refuses to implement them because "it is not representative of a 2005 Hornet" - even though they already have JHMCS MSI options and other features that go way past 2013.

Today I have experimented with some lofted LGB deployment using a JTAC and the computer target delivery mode. Now, I understand how IP bombing works in singleplayer but how do you go about it in multiplayer when you dont have a human RIO and need to use Jester? Say I want to take out a high digit SAM system and can not use the manual designation method, thus relying on an IP offset delivery. Because of that I have a couple questions. 1) Am I simply missing an option or is IP bombing + offset not implemented yet with Jester? Is this planned for the future? 2) Is the maximum offset range really 99 miles, which would allow for a far away IP so you stay out of the DLZ of said high digit SAM sites? Would love to hear some thoughts.

To make it more realistic I guess.

Yep, the new "fonts" messed up the brightness when you are zoomed out or in the default view even. Known issue.

I think the current issue with them is that they either never go active or dont act as active missiles once the lock is broken. I.E. the WCS estimated track isn't really a thing.

Welcome to DCS World. Enjoy yor stay.

It 100% is too fast. You can do M1.45+ at sea level far exceeding the operational 800KCAS / M1.2 limitation for said alt. Just lack of damage modelling and consequences. There are also no performance charts or data for said speeds - for a very good reason.

Reference 7:05 and onwards.

EA-6B, KC-10, Mig-17, F/A-18E/F, C-2

Then go send HB all the documentation you have, maybe they'll change their mind.

Also the ejection seat arming handle being always "disarmed" in the mirrors and the COMB pressure readout on the hydraulic panel saying "COMP" instead (typo).

It's 20nm afaik. Will depend on RCS mostly, dont think ACM modes have necessarily fixed lock ranges.