Skysurfer

Ok, just had the same happen to me as well - procedure was as always and as normal - the handle was pushed in and stuck at 68 DEG while the wings were sweeping in AUTO (MTS reset pressed multiple times obviously just to make sure). Then once airborne the handle would all of a sudden re-synch with the CADC schedule and work normally again. Seems liek something broke in this last update. Mine was from a hotstart in SP after starting up DCS for the second time.

LMFAO

Will we actually get a new SC Stennis model or was this scrapped?

The Viper is fairly easy to learn and understand as well once you bind the HOTAS properly but it's also partly due to the fact that it's really raw and lacks a ton of functionality as of right now - can't really compare it to the A-10 in that regard.

The current Viper isn't really a Viper. Maybe I'll like it more once it's out of EA.

Yeah sounds like it isn't in the spider detent and/or pushed in. Could you maybe record a quick video showing what you see?

Did you bind it do an axis? You need to also pull it out of the spider detent to drag it with the mouse.

So, now that the map is officially "complete" in terms of airfields and locations - can we have default kneeboard charts and airport diagrams with this map? Since ED's maps like PG and Nevada have these already. And I know that you can technically mod this but something official and simple would be great. Thanks.

Again, not true and I don't know where you get this idea from. The Iranian "confmed" kills are very much confirmed by the west and multiple independent sources and the unconfirmed grey area is much larger. And that Tornado guy was just a dude who knew nothing about the Tomcat nor the Phoenix (why should he as a brit and no US sec. clearence) and was probably "proud" about his fancy F3 or ADS. It is a subjective opinion not based on the facts at hand. Again, there are literally hundreds of reports, trials and accounts for both the A and C models proving this. The missiles design criteria even dicatate this. But we really are getting offtopic at this point.

yeah exactly and that gate should even deal with beaming targets rather well, in theory.

So TLDR leaving the aspect switch in NOSE for pretty much all intercept scenarios should be the way to go? Unless someone is literally in a hard notch/beam and/or running cold?

Also, can you include the closure gates for each aspect position of said switch in the manual for reference?

That too, you'll need way more GCI for good SA. On the other hand you'll be able to differentiate types based on your RWR readings.

Oh boy, here we go again...

Yeah this looks like a ME preview issue. If it's fine in game then I don't see this is too big of a deal.

That might be true in the 70's to late 80's. Not disagreing there - but that doesn't in any way mean there weren't capable of intercepting these types of targets with a reasonable success rate.

Well, no one is bringing 50 bombers every day, that's just as silly of a math question. But I get what you are saying. Since for DCS weapon stocks don't really matter this logic doesn't apply here. The point is, the 54A was very well capable gainst fighters and cruise missiles as cited from various documents, trials and SME's (not to mention the Iranian use of it against all kinds of fighters) - but in its infancy stocks were limited and primarily meant for those bombers, yes.

On your screenshot there are no Phoenix rails, which are needed afaik.

Indeed. It offers a ton of intereting options and will be the first true soviet full fidelity jet in DCS. Even the 14A's radar is "too good" but that is 70's tech. And the Phoenix would sure as hell been used against any air targets or threats as well as cruise missiles. But depending on the ROE's you need to get VID first and so on maiking the 7M a more suited option. And once we get the F-4 it'll be even more interesting.

Well, against a Block 50 Viper or Lot 20 Hornet it most certainly isn't. But against say a Tomcat (A) and even era-specific 18C's with 9M's and Sparrow's it's gonna be just about the biggest threat in the visual arena. Sure, if the Migs get shwacked in BVR that's it but given how easy it is to defeat missiles or stay undetected in DCS that's not really an issue. A properly flown A can still put up a great fight against a Hornet or Tomcat and especially an F-4 once that comes out. But I agree that the FC3 jets will be much easier to employ and win with since they are so dumbed down.

Make sure to set the fuze to nose/tail.

Unless it's calculated on a plane basis and isn't just some effect casted by the carrier unit since it should have a slightly different effect for each unique airframe.

No, on the hydraulic pressure gauge next to the engine instruments, you have FLIGHT and COMBINED hydraulic system indications and it should say "COMB" for the combined system. Simply reference various real A/B/D Tomcat cockpit pictures or videos, or the NATOPS.

Also, once you tackle the B EIG, make sure to correct that typo on the hydraulic gauge reading "COMP" intead of "COMB".

Good stuff! Really glad to see the AUX and BRAKE PRESS gauges be finally modelled. Can't wait to test the new deck and hook physics on the Forrestal. Any update on when to expect the early and IRIAF A's as well as more liveries and some livery fixes for the current A?