andyw248

I have the same experiences: When I'm not fast enough to startup, the entire flight (4 a/c) gets stuck at the threshold, plus the 4 a/c from the other flight. When I'm fast, the first element of my flight takes off, but my element as well as the 4 a/c from the other flight remain stuck. One workaround is to "breach the chain of command" and just pass by my element lead and take off before him. It will then be difficult for me to find my flight, but it appears that my takeoff unblocks the waiting aircraft, as I see them in the air later, once I have located my flight.

Interesting piece of trivia: The F-5 is living on in the aggressor role and even gets avionics updates: Garmin G3000 selected for Department of Defense contract to modernize fleet of US Navy and Marine Corps F-5 aircraft - Garmin Newsroom

I too feel that the P-47 is super sensitive on the pitch axis, to the extent that is feels "jumpy". I use a stick extension. I don't recall being mentioned in the original sources on the P-47, such as the training films. Had it been so sensitive I think they would have mentioned this. I don't think the P-47 is too sensitive around the roll and yaw axes though.

Awesome! I'm ready to place my order

EDIT: Actually my below statement was wrong. These were actually F-14B's (or "F-14A+") - VF 101 received their A+ models in April 1988. But I'll leave the post up because the footage in that video is really an eye candy for F-14 lovers. --- On the topic of F-14A's taking off at MIL power: I just came across an interesting video showing F-14's doing carrier qualification on USS Coral Sea in late '88 or early '89. As you can see, they are taking off without AB. Since this was carrier qualification their fuel load must have been within carrier landing limits, and as you can see they didn't carry any ordnance.

I can repro the bug as well. Not realizing that this is only a problem in the channel map, but not in other maps, I posted this in the wrong forum thread: In that post I have included a screenshot of my settings. Interestingly this works correctly in Stable 2.7.5, so until it is fixed we can still use the channel map from Stable 2.7.5 (if we have enough HD space, and as long as we don't upgrade our stable installation). I also tried to create a new mission in OpenBeta 2.7.6, but this didn't help - the terrain was still dark outside of a circle around my current position. I haven't tried the winter map yet.

Same here, setting it to 30. This makes it feel similar to flying small airplanes in real world on most of the days in moderate climate zones. Not as brutal as around real world desert airports though, for that you would have to set it higher, maybe 60 - but then it also depends on the time of day, in the morning there is usually less turbulence while at noon and in the afternoon there is more.

Is this similar to what you saw? 282261-openbeta-276-dark-terrain-outside-of-a-circle-around-current-position

In 2.7.6.12852 Open Beta the terrain is too dark outside of a circle around the current position:

Same here in 2.7.6.12852 Open Beta. Interestingly the Bedford truck casts a shadow, but the static P-47 does not: S Settings:

This is a great contribution, very helpful. Thank you for making it!

I agree, and it's not just the external sound. It's also the engine sound as heard from the cockpit. Why is there such a gap in the engine sound between idle and low thrust? This is particularly apparent when taxiing - slight throttle movements make the sound shift back and forth between idle and low thrust. Is this what it sounded in a real Viggen? I'm not sure I've ever heard this kind of "step". In most aircraft the progression in sound intensity is linear (or maybe logarithmic), but not as discrete as in the Viggen.

In the United States and Canada, navigation aids like VOR, ILS, and PAPI are on all the time. On uncontrolled airfields, where they may not be on to save energy, they can be activated by clicking the microphone on the airport frequency multiple times, and then all airport lighting will be on. I think I just found out why the above is not true in DCS. Reading through Chuck's excellent guide for the MiG-21 (which I just purchased), I read (in his section dealing with PRMG): "As in real life, PRMG systems are set for certain runways only, not for every single one . Tower Controllers in DCS will allow you to use certain runways in certain conditions only (bad weather and great winds for instance) . As an example, PRMG systems will not be available if you have no head winds . However, PRMG station will be available if you have a strong headwind ( 5 + m/s) or low visibility, which will trigger the runway 090 in Krasnodar -Center to become the “active” (available) runway . If a PRMG beacon cannot be detected (even if you entered the right PRMG channel) in one of your missions, maybe the runway is not “active” since weather conditions do not require you to use a PRMG system ." This makes sense to me: In the Soviet Union, nav aids were only switched on when conditions required it. But when new maps came out, such as Nevada, Persian Gulf, Syria, Marianas. etc., the team didn't realize that in other parts of the world nav aids were just left on 24/7. I think this just needs to be fixed. It's kind of odd to impose a restriction that was valid for a certain region and a certain environment to all the other maps that were added in the meantime.

This is great! Thank you for making them.

Good points. I guess it was less reloading that made gameplay smoother.

Are you talking about server tracks or client tracks? Client tracks record what you do while flying the airplane, and when you replay the track they reapply what you did but obviously that's always a bit off and the offness is cumulative. Client tracks are recorded when you play single player, and they are also what you see in the multiplayer folder on your computer. Server tracks are recorded by a multiplayer server. You will have to set up your dedicated server and run it - just download the dedicated server from the DCS download page. It will record what your plane did, not the inputs that you applied, so chances are it will replay correctly. You can also tell the server where you want it to write its tracks. Watch this if you want to learn more: It's an awkward workaround compared to other sims but better than nothing if you want replayable tracks.

Totally agree... Going from 16 to 32 GB of RAM was a game changer for my FPS too.

Same here. When I tick/untick it is gone for the duration of this flight, even with multiple approaches. But when I restart the game it is there again.

PAPI lights at Tonopah Test Range airport (Silverbow, TQQ) appear at the wrong end of the runway. Repro steps: Create mission and set wind so that it comes from 145 degrees (which means it blows towards 325 degrees): Time of day: 22:30 (night) Wind 26,000 ft: 8 kts, 325 degrees Wind 6,600 ft: 8 kts, 325 degrees Wind 1,600 ft: 8 kts, 325 degrees Wind 30 ft: 4 kts, 325 degrees Add a player aircraft to start from ramp (cold start) Start aircraft and set correct radio frequency (257.95) Taxi instructions will be to runway 14 (which is correct for the wind) Taxi to runway 14 Notice that the PAPI is not lighted Take off and fly around Contact approach and report inbound Wait for handoff to tower, and request landing You will be cleared to land on runway 14 Notice that the PAPI at runway 32 will be lighted. The PAPI at runway 14 will remain dark. Fix: PAPI activation should be inverted.

I noticed that too. I believe it's the same in the IL2 BOS mission editor.

Wow that was a great interview, thanks for sharing the link! So if I understand this correctly there is a server recording that is available in multiplayer because the servers that run multiplayer missions have that recording?

The culprit is probably the complexity of the tracking/replay functionality. It seems that it records everything that is done during a flight (i.e. click this, click that, move this, move that) and then re-computes the impact that all these individual actions would have on the flight path etc. This makes the "Take control" feature possible, which allows me to take control at a certain point of the track and see what happens if I had made a left turn instead of a right turn etc. Personally I think this is an edge case scenario. In comparison, just tracking the 3d-coordinates and orientation, plus the status of certain items (like control surfaces, pilot's head etc) of each object at a certain rate per second should be much easier to implement and be much more reliable to replay. And it would satisfy two important use cases: learning by watching, and making videos.