WarbossPetross

The other simulators. Because competing on the free market is also a big no-no.

And, say, if I want to create a markpoint while taking target elevation into account, should I press and hold trigger while I designate the markpoint and release it then?

Happened to me as well. That's because A/G weapons are not selected by default when you select AG mode. You must select your bombs via the Jester menu (because more than one A/G weapon type may be loaded), hear him flip some switches and that should work. The easy way to check whether it's selected is the release queue on the right side of Lantirn display since it's only displayed when something to drop is selected.

DCS engine treats bombs and missiles differently. In engine terms GB-6 is treated as a missile so the SAMs engage it while LS-6 is treated as a bomb and therefore is ignored.

ED's official stance on IR optics on Ka-50 (they won't make it).

That would be F-5S with glass cockpit, new radar and Amraam capability. Not what we have now, to say the least. Also why do you want to turn it into another Falcon or Hornet?

FTFY

When I load up the Shark I'm sad when I look at all the non-functional switches on the back panel. I don't care if they're used only for maintenance, I'm that guy. Pave Penny can be functional on the battlefield and honestly it doesn't look like a whole lot of work to model based on what we already have, so why not give it a go? It's also used on the A-7 and is based on AN/AVQ-11 Pave Sword tracker used on F-4, and we're (hopefully, eventually) getting both of these planes.

I can't speak for everyone, but when I hear a foreign language spoken with accent (allegedly) attributed to my native language this can only be funny for so long, after that it falls somewhere into the band from annoying to obnoxious to offensive. I say make a proper clear voice-over by a native speaker with subtitles. And if somebody decides to learn the language in question in order to understand what's being said, so much the better!

Does that mean him speaking Farsi or English with Persian accent? Because the latter would be the cringe of the year!

Some people have been doing it longer than that though.

Why just the Hornet, the Hog and the Harrier use the exact same maps. Jeff also has the option to use these as well as vector maps, none of which are particularly legible for me.

And the carrier burble, cockpit glass fogging, the TRANSONIC CONE still missing for supersonic planes ffs... All actually present in existing third-party modules, and the source code is in ED's possession so they don't even have to invent the wheel, but here's a simulation of a virtual room for virtual conversations that you and the bois absolutely cannot have on Skype, Discord or whatever right as you actually fly the thing in your limited 2-3 hours after work or study.

When the SARH missile launches the radar switches to constant wave emission to light up the target so that the missile antenna catches its reflection. Every RWR in the business unequivocally interprets that as a launch. Not sure if it's the case for the Amraam though since it's hardly needed in that case, but there is a chance radar designers simply didn't bother changing what already works and introduce the logic of checking whether it's Amraam or Sparrow on top of all the calculations already involved.

When playing against AI also bear in mind its avionics is sort of generic and not what you have in a playable aircraft.

Another offender is MiG-21, the commands are all over the place. Ka-50 is closer to standard in this regard, didn't notice any differences in other modules.

Absolutely. I don't always support multiplayer balancing in a simulation game, but when I do I want to avoid the half-modeled F-16 fiasco, what with the AWACS radar and WTF else, but this may actually harm Jeff if other planes have no such restrictions. You forgot the transonic vapour cone, can't believe Jeff is still the only plane that has it!

Are you trying to say on a Tomcat forum that these things are not one and the same for you?! Torches and pitchforks!

Thanks for the tip, I just looked them up, they seem to be currently out of stock though.

In official manual on page 338 and in Chuck's manual on page 663 it shows an option to designate a waypoint as a bullseye. To get there on HSI choose DATA/WYPT, choose the bullseye waypoint and press A/A WP on a left OSB so that bull-to-TDC and bull-to-target coordinates are displayed on the A/A radar screen. Not sure whether it works for ground targets though, also see the post above.

Great choice! Jester can be really helpful, and when (not if) you get your hands on the Hornet you will find that some control logic carries over, more so than with, say, F-16. The arcade machine in the back may cause some issues but if the manual or in-game tutorial won't alleviate them (like it happened to me) there is the NATOPS P-820 manual on radar theory, available here: https://www.cnatra.navy.mil/local/docs/pat-pubs/P-820.pdf Not exactly for F-14 but the theory still applies.

I understand the hesitation, but in my view, unless there's money involved there is nothing to decide. The planes are really that different, analogue vs digital era, over the top A-A performance and massive bomb load vs ability to do most of that and pretty much everything else. For me the kicker is that I have no HOTAS (only a joystick with four buttons and a throttle wheel) or head tracking (in my country it costs as much as a VR helmet and still through the roof). This in turn means my SA is almost entirely dependent on the game itself, and that means either HAFU symbols at the screens, HMD and what have you... or literally a guy telling you who's where, even if it's a bot, and I find Jester much more useful in WVR because HMD still requires me to move my head (with a keyboard). Not helping matters is the Hornet's radar or missiles or whatever since until recently I had the hardest time hitting targets in BVR with the Hornet (I do much better in other planes including Tomcat). So all of that leaves us with two drastically different ways of going about things, and even though I'm trying to get the Hornet to work I have a much easier time in the Tomcat (yes, even with the radar from the back seat). Also sometimes it's nice to just push OSB's and get results but at some point the process gets somewhat stale...

2014 but here you go anyway.

After the update TWS contacts are somewhat harder to acquire with the Jeff radar and break track with hard maneuvers (yours or theirs) at over 40 miles distance, and that's against the sky. You may test in the BVR quick mission.

Magnitude 3 then, they develop the module. No, pun intended! It's just that in TWS the radar is forced to divide its attention between multiple targets and look at their anticipated location to check whether they're still there, so if the target does some of that pilot sh-t it may effectively disappear and break the lock so you will have to reacquire.