jojojung

Is it realistic that I dont need any rudder input while hover start and landings? I think it was different with the old FM, right? I only need the rudder paddles tu turn the nose but not to counter the torque form the side rotor. Or is fly by wire so sophisticated in the UH60L that it does all by it self. What is that Cyclic resistance slider in the special options used for? Thanks!

Anybody know how to toggle the mirrows? I cant find any keybind but in the youtube videos they are active. Thx

Ok I just tryed the new AI ATC 1.05 with no changes from my side and its not working anymore. I didnt know that. Buttons are no longer pressable and you cant even start up the engines. I think an DCS update broke the scripts, right? It seems that the problems are only in the viper. No comms on the channels and frequency. Buttons are not pressable anymore. Closing the canopy but in game the canopy stayes open. But sound and button movement are right. Many many problems with the viper. F18 no problems at all... UPDATE: After a flight with the F18 with no problems the second try from cold and dark also was faulty. Canopy get stuck in the middle and also no comms with AI ATC.

where do I find the "uhf_noise.ogg" file for setting up the brilliant ATC in other existing missions? I found the "DeadAir.ogg" in the sound folder. The "Radio_Trans_Start.ogg" I found only on the github in a wav format. But I dont find the "UHF_Noise.ogg"... Which country do I have to select in the "Sound to Land" command? Thanks!

I checked it again and I didnt have an additional deadzone in the axis control mapper but only the deadzone in the special options. So all axis in the controls are linear and 0 deadzone. I will edit my post above.

Are the deadzones from the special options in percent added up on the deadzones of the input mapper? The deadzones of the special options feels different from the deadzones of the mapper for me.

I have too say that I was struggling with the F16 AAR for some time while in the other sim it was very smooth. I'm using a Warthog Joystick and the DCS F16 was much too sensitive. I had both gradient settings set to "off" and set the deadzone slider to "0" in the special options for the F16. I was only using the a curve with 5 in the roll and pitch axis with the input mapper of the Worthog stick in the controls. That was how I was understanding Wags explaintation. Now I tried with both gradient set to "on" and turned the deadzone all the way up to 4.375 and 5.9 and in the controls input mapper I leave it linear on pitch and role axis of the worthog, the axis in the controls are pure liniar and there is no additional deadzone set in the controls input mapper. Flying and AAR with the Viper now feels like cheating. It is smooth as butter and I have no disconnects from the boom at all. This is a real gamechanger! But why is the recommandation from Wags exact the opposite. They say to set the gradient to "off" and use no deadzone at the special options for a spring centered stick. But the opposite is true... Try it!

Same here

Hey @PeeJott17 I had the same idea today and now I read that you was the last post Will fly with the F104 first Jimbo

Thank you very much, there are no problems at all with this checked. Is it possible to get this option in the F14 too? There is the same pitch up momentum. The strange thing is it is only a thing in HB modules. Would be very great! Maybe its not the big thing to implement it. Thanks!

Really the best campaign I played in DCS. Great! Thank you! In mission 5 the wingman doesnt fight at all against the ZSU near the palace and the ZSU is sniping in the night as always. The mission is to difficult I think, when you have to go with missles and gun in a knife fight with the ZSUs in the middle of the night. But thats only my personal opinon. When the wingman will fight too it might be possible but without you really get shot out of the sky when approching with your limited range weapons. I orderd the wingman to primary task and to defense AAA without any outcome. He is circuling around. DCS must work on the AI for years because it often destroys everything in SP. But you dont earn money with AI bug fixing I think...

Thanks for your Feedback! OK thats very interessting. Do you think this procedure was different in different countrys? Which unit you are refers to? Polish aviation right? Thats even more special because both were Warschau Pact countrys. Do you think its possible? In the east german army it was leaved in MK according to the source above.

I know but its the wrong procedure. Just leave it in MK and it should be right.

I have the same Problem but only on the Germany map.

On this page an mi8 Pilot from the east german NVA explains all the systems in high detail. Its worth to take a look at it. You can translate IT via Google etc. He always compares systems of the Mi8 and the Mi24. On this page the Greben KM2 system is discussed in detail. http://www.nva-flieger.de/index.php/technik/instrumente/kreisel.html He says that MK is the mode to go and gyro was only a backup Mode in case of MK failure, f.e. in case of nuklear warefare and the persumed loss of the MK.

The SAM Radar gets active first time: If the TD Box in the TOO mode is in the bearing of the emitter but the distance is unclear and the TD Box drifting up and down f.e. IT would be more realistic. But the aTD Box Spot on target in a millisecond with the right bearing and distance, that is unrealistic. The CLC can get viable data about the distance when the plane changes its aspect and the Radar stays in thats OK but this will need change in the aspect and will need some time.

I understand your Point but this is not my opion. Its a simulation. I find it hard to tune things up to compensate anything. But think the zoom option is your way to go. IRL the pod would not be so bad, that anybody can't see a target in the mfd. But it is not cystal clear when you have digital zoomed in max.

The thing is, realism standard hast to bei priority for all the modules. Same thing with Maverick alignment for years. I can not be the case that only for the F16 the systems are simulated and the rest is about guessing thing could be right. Litning needs to be downgrade for all the modules.

Which pod are you using? Laser in cmbt mode? Go to list, misc (0), laser (5) and Change AG laser from training to Combat (cmbt)

I think the topic should bei changed then not the discussion should bei closed. because the whole thread is about comparing the Litning vs the Sniper pod. All agreed that the Sniper is modeled very well. The problem apears when you compare the pods. I dont think ED needs more evidence to know that the Sniper is well simulated and the Litning was an early try to get a usable pod inplemented to make gbus etc possible. It was early access not more.

In my opinon the Litning pod should be downgraded. There is no other option in my opinon. The perfect picture though all digital zooms and slew movements is far unrealistic for the AN/AAQ-28. I think realism was the main aspect which differents DCS from other sims like warthunder etc. Sorry for the old eyes or the planes which dont have the sniper pod. But the F16 has its limits as every other planes has this limites. And the F16 should have the most advanced pod in DCS with the AN/AAQ-33. I we all agree with that. To leave a less capaple pod IRL overpowered in this game because some people would be furios is the wrong way when you say "as real as it gets". DCS should be a simulation and when it must be downgraded because of DCS is progressing this is the way to go. If you dont want it, there are many other sims that dont have this claim!

Exactly not Most guys are absolutely happy with the implementation of the Sniper ATP. But in contrast to this realistic implementation it becomes more and more clear to a lot more players that the Litning pod is not modeled well. Thats all, I think!

Yeah I tested the both pod too. And the Litening is far superior then the Sniper ATP. Thats unrealistic of course but thats how it is at the moment. Especially when slewing the pod the Litning has always the super sharp and clear view even with most digital zoom. Dont get me wrong: I like the implementation of the sniper very much, the reality isnt that easy and I like how it is modeled - as real as it gets! But Im afraid that nobody will take the Sniper ATP as long as the Litning is that unrealisticly modeled and that far superior. The Litning Pod needs to be refined in my opinon!

The question is will the lightning pod will be downgraded to realistic standarts or not. The Sniper pod is by far the Most advanced pod in term of picture quality. Now in DCS it is more blurry then the Atflir, Lightning or even Lantirn pod. That is a problem. A downgrade would be good in terms of realism but will starte a rage for those who can not mount the Sniper pod.

I know this is not beeing welcomed in this threat but in this interview they laugh about the flightmodel of the DCS F18C "hornet on crack". Minute: 9:07 My post is NOT intended to crush the "Praise of the hornet" or the Hornet Fans. I like it to fly too. But I think realism should be the first priority this far. Yes, I know we are getting a F35 and yes no model in DCS is implemented like IRL but this was the high standard for DCS for years. At the moment the hornets turns out everything in a rate fight and thats what they are laughing about in DCS. I think this comments are a real oppertunity. Its the chance to pick this up and talk to those guys about the flight model. The good the bad and whats needs to be changed in DCS. Thats a really good opertunity! Take it, ED!