Jayhawk1971

I think it would be easier - provided both parties had any interest in doing it - if HB consented for ED to incorporate the Forrestal into the paid SC module with all the SC features. The exact same treatment ED is (was?) planning to give the Stennis (one full fidelity version for the payware SC module, while the barebones version remains free to use). Sure, it's probably not that easy to implement in case of the Forrestal (different dimensions may require a different AI pathfinding logic) as with the Stennis, where you'd probably just need to replace the CVN number on one of the existing "Roosevelt" subclass models (plus maybe some minor cosmetic changes). But. I believe it will enhance the appeal of the SC module, and would be a nice gesture by ED towards owners of the Supercarrier who have been (and still are) waiting a long time for any improvements (A-model Tomcat still gets the Hornet treatment!).

Isn't there a number next to the map marker on the F10 map? I never tried to use multiple markers, but with the one it's fairly straightforward with AIRIO: Set your marker on the F10 map, which will be "map marker 1", then tell Jester to set "Map Marker 1 to Steerpoint 2" (or whichever you'd like). So far I've only had to use that feature in one single player mission - where it worked as advertised - so I haven't tried fixed point, surface target etc. Hence I don't know if VAICOM recognizes these (yet).

Well, I wasn't... ...because the poster I was replying to was asking about our curve settings, and I told him mine were zero. He replied back that reducing his curves actually helped, and in the post I assume you are referring to I tried to encourage him to try with no curves. Be that as it may, artificially dampening stick response to make one single task ostensibly more easy (and is it, really?) while sacrificing performance at some other part of your spectrum is not a good approach IMO. It's like always putting training wheels on your bike for speeds under 5 km/h. Sure, you won't be tipping over that easily, but you'd run into significant problems at higher speeds. BTW, I can confidently and consistently manage to do all "tomcatty" stuff without curves and a small DZ on a crappy, 12+ year old G940, a minimum spec GFX card and a Vive Pro. Not due to my natural good looks, superhuman abilities and minty fresh breath (that's a given ), but due to putting in some effort to hone the appropriate motor skills and build the necessary muscle memory. Yes, coming back from some time with the Viper or the Hornet will mess that up some, but that's the way it is. Edit: That's generally a good notion, but to be fair, without previous input by the "curves cosa nostra" ( ), the question about setting up custom curves would probably never even come up for the majority of new players. So at least give people all possible options to give him a chance to try out what will work for them.

I'll just leave this here (boldened highlight by me):

F-15E (hopefully less "beyond" and more "2022") Edit: if we count the Apache, well, then I'm equally excited about that as well.

Also great for left-hand-orbit aficionados. Hours and hours of left-hand orbit fun (at night, too, exclusively)

The Tomcat's controls are analog, so curves are completely unnecessary and detrimental to its performance. It's the best setting for the Tomcat, even if you don't have a flight stick extension. Treat it like a WWII warbird. I too started with curves (it was being mentioned in a couple of guides when I first got into the module, after all), but as was suggested by the "Tomcat pros", I quickly went to zero curves. It'll take a while getting used to the very light touch the (simulated) Tomcat requires, and every time you come back after "cheating" on her with a FBW-module like the Viper or the Hornet, you'll pay for it by having to get reacquainted with her controls.

Zero, zero, zero. No curves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_de_Agostini_National_Park ?

If anyone would go for a "what if"-plane, I'd say skip the D entirely, but embrace insanity fully and make the Grumman-proposed Super Tomcat 21. Or, even better, the "fantasy football" next-gen version (ST-21 Advanced?) with: AESA radar IRST 21 Sniper Advanced Targeting Pod 9X D-JHMCS II towed decoy MAWS SATCOM capability borrowed from the Growler heavily upgraded Phoenix variant (AIM-54E ?) seamless integration of all western BVR missile systems (Meteor!) Warp drive, R2 unit may come in a later patch....

Adapt the campaign from Jane's AH-64D Longbow and Flashpoint Korea. That'll do just fine.

Funny, for me it's the other way round: I struggle with the Viper, because I find it to be incredibly sluggish, especially with the controls dampening coming on as soon as you open the probe door (also, the breakout deadzone isn't helping, either) whereas the Tomcat reacts immediately to tiny inputs.

Adjusted as in obstructed by frame/handle, or adjusted in the sense that the (simulated) HUD-projection is off? Guess I'll have to play around with that next time I fire up DCS. Also, since there are basically two ways to adjust the seating position (the numpad keys, or moving around and pressing the recenter key in VR, which allows one to, for example, "stand" in the cockpit): I wonder if the effect is the same with either method.

Or just watch 104th Maverick's great video tutorial on the subject. Edit: oh, and the most important thing IMO: don't overthink it. Baby steps.

...whereas "Maverick" could barely look over the dashboard. (or did somebody find him a box?). So for VR users, if they want the most authentic experience, would you recommend to raise the head position back to the height of the canopy bar?

I believe to have read somewhere that the "IPD" setting under the VR section in DCS is actually a misnomer, and it actually means something like "world scale". Since I have no real reference as to what the actual scale of a cockpit is, I just left the whole thing off for the Tomcat, which does feel to be right on the money regarding proper dimensions (having never sat in a Tomcat). However, subjectively the A-10 seems to be too spacious, whereas the Viper feels a little too cramped. Edit: I did have the opportunity to sit in the front seat of a CF-18B, but that was a loooong time ago, but I did seem to remember the cockpit to feel smaller in the real thing compared to the DCS Hornet. My Vive Pro has a dial on the bottom of the headset where I can manually set the IPD, which I have measured using a mirror, a measuring tape, liberal amounts of Whisky and a Voodoo Priestess.

So, "more human than human" is definitely not your motto... (it'll lead to "tears in rain" anyway, so best leave that to Dr. Tyrell) [Seriously, though, I'm mostly happy with Jester with the exception of some slightly annoying quirks, which I'm sure will be addressed; Jester LANTIRN was a major step forward, and I suppose some of the "lessons learned" will be used to improve A2A Jester eventually]

Oh, I don't mind his chatter myself. My point was that if Jester got any smarter he'll act more like a real RIO and would be convinced our only job was "driving Miss RIO" around for him to do all the "important" work like guiding the intercepts, acquiring and sorting targets and launching BVR missiles. The only time I yell at Jester to STFU (to no avail: HB, we need a literal STFU command ) is when he is constantly interrupting important (well, scripted) radio calls, or distracting me while in the groove, with irrelevant information like "friendly, 10 o'clock, 235 miles" or "naaaiiiiils" (which of course are friendly).

Just be careful what you wish for, lest your single-player pilot involvement in BVR engagements be relegated to "come left ten degrees" or "speed up".

Actually, I meant zero curves for your control stick, as in completely linear. And you could add a deadzone if applicable (depending on your X-56's precision). Regarding rudder, just add the amount necessary to fly with a centered ball. Trim is essential, as mentioned in the video I've posted. I don't know in which category you fall re. learning: Some approach this methodically by doing whole AAR training sessions. Me, on the other hand, like to tie these "chores" to other activities, so that even if I fail at one task, there are other tasks (usually blowing something up) that I can complete in order to have some fun along the way, and an overall positive experience. It can be a bit frustrating sometimes to try something over and over again with little immediate success. So maybe succeeding at something else keeps the motivation level up. There are some missions and campaigns where AAR is part of the mission, but not necessary to complete it (if you are not in full burner all the time ). So more or less optional. Back when I was learning, I had this rule that I'd try, but gave myself a reasonable time limit or window, and if I couldn't hook up, I moved on. This also had the added effect of increasing the "replay-ability" of those missions. Incidentally, what really pushed me over the "bump" was playing Reflected's "Zone 5" campaign. Where, if you are not going completely bonkers with your throttle management, don't ever have to refuel. But: you are forced to fly formation with the AI in at least a third of the missions, and you are supposed to follow other admin procedures, which somehow made my overall handling of the Tomcat a lot more precise, and immensely helped my AAR-capabilities.

I'd advise against using curves for stick and rudder in the Tomcat. Just maybe a teeny tiny deadzone (depending on how precise your flight stick is). It's an analogue aircraft, so curves are counterproductive (even if you flight stick doesn't have an extension). You could add custom curves to your throttle because many HOTAS throttles lack the range (just search the forums, there are some helpful posts on this). The Tomcat needs a light touch which will take a while to get used to: I usually only steer with two fingers while resting my arm on top of my leg. Do yourself a favor and invest in some form of headtracking; it's pretty much mandatory if you really want to get the most out of this sim. There are other solutions than TrackIR, although I have no experience with those. And don't be too hard on yourself, everybody was struggling with AAR at first. For me, switching from "pancake" (2D screen) to VR was an absolute game changer in this regard. With TrackIR I kinda sorta got it to work after much practice (and after lots of swearing and shooting the tanker in frustration); as soon as I made the switch to VR, it became a lot easier: where at first I tried to avoid AAR at all costs, now I do it even if I have plenty of fuel, just because it's become fun. Depth perception, sense of scale, sense of motion, and leaning around the canopy rail is much easier in VR. The next best thing is head tracking. There are some good tutorial videos regarding AAR in the Tomcat. I've found this to be among the best (albeit a bit dated, because probe drag wasn't modelled at the time of the video; now you need to add a bit of rudder to compensate):