WarbossPetross

Working as intended by IRL radar producers who wanted more features for ads so they can sell more stuff. Use the t-pod for guiding munitions and the radar for getting a general idea where's what in instrument conditions, initial t-pod guidance or detection of moving targets.

There will be better ATGMs but they work pretty much the same way as the current ones.

I had the throttle seesaw problem as well when I first tried the auto landing (same with the Hornet, it also has ATC and ACLS is to be implemented later). I did fine later, and I attribute that to the fact that I have positioned the plane better beforehand, both needles and AOA. The closer to required parameters you are when you engage it the less corrections the autopilot has to make so it doesn't then have to correct after its own corrections etc all the way to the deck. Think of it more as a needle-hold mode.

Gabe requires pre-releases to have a date indicated though it can be moved. Steam date is often just a placeholder although it can probably give you a general idea.

And what if somebody wants to see NO weathering at all? I paid for a new module, I want a new module! What's wrong with having, say, a weathered model and a brand-spanking-new model separately? Especially if one of them gives a performance boost. There are modules with two versions of cockpits already, just can't remember which ones.

Probably this:

Good to know! Now I'm hoping they gradually revisit other modules.

Beast mode is gun only. Over 9000 long range missiles is not beast mode, it's... cancer mode, to put it in a politically correct way.

The PICKLE button makes so much more sense now

It gets better, the latest version of SA-15 (Tor-M1-2U) doesn't even need to stop, like, at all. It aims and fires on the move. So does SA-22.

For me the biggest hurdle was the radar with all the manual controls. In order to get good results in the rear seat (or to get Jester to do what you need) it would do well to learn some radar theory, so that you know what each mode does and what that gives you. The in-game tutorial missions failed to explain that to me, but luckily some kind souls on r/hoggit mentioned US Navy training manuals in some topic. I investigated and found them on their own official website: https://www.cnatra.navy.mil/pubs-pat-pubs.asp The one you need is P-820: https://www.cnatra.navy.mil/local/docs/pat-pubs/P-820.pdf It is for the T-45 two-seat trainer (available as a community mod), but the radar basics are pretty much universal.

1. If you mean the tutorial, the instructor sure likes to take his time. For me it was, like, ten seconds before he opened his mouth. Maybe has something to do with loading the level. You may try waiting a little and switching to the rear seat by yourself before you're asked to do so, maybe it will force the script to the next step. 2. Not sure about the tutorial, but I ignore Jester on startup. As far as the pilot is concerned Jester only needs to enable hydraulic cooling, arm the seat and close the canopy, in my practice none of that requires the pilot to wait for him. After that he proceeds with INS alignment and entering waypoints. Not sure about the callouts, maybe he only warns when you approach the border of the flight envelope, so if he's silent then maybe you're OK. I'm also on open beta.

If you enable VS and try to lock a contact it displays it will switch to the previously selected mode but it will already be set up to display said target in regards to display distance and scan zone position. Helps a lot if you want to use Trick While Scam but don't know where to point the scan zone.

There's also a MiG-31 skin for F-14: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3304522/ A guy can dream

Yep, exactly. It's not like we're getting Mi-28 anytime soon, might as well make do with what we (don't yet) have.

Will have to do for the next 20 years or so until we get the real deal.

Maybe it was asked before, but will it have WHEEL CHOCKS? Almost all modern planes have chocks, but props do not, and not all of them have parking brakes, and all we can do is hold the W button for minutes until the engine warms up.

I started the aforementioned mission and noticed that the ground crew does not respond to requests for chocks/power/whatever. The mission editor confirmed my suspicion: the red coalition plane spawns on a blue coalition airfield. I have changed the airfield to red and it worked. Not exactly a bug, just a tiny oversight, hopefully it gets fixed.

May I interest you in U-2 aka Po-2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polikarpov_Po-2 One of the most produced aircraft in history, the original stealth bomber, a plane so hardcore it downed a jet fighter without even firing a single shot - how much more badass can it possibly get?!

Don't know about CEII, but we only have the Yak-52 module because ED was asked to develop it for the customer and negotiated the ability to release it to public. That said, it's valuable as a zero-level trainer. L-39 and C-101 are more of an intermediate level for combat planes with pro level being two-seater versions of the actual combat aircraft, but the first thing a nugget (of any variety, really) gets strapped to after finishing the theory course is this modest fellow. Combat-wise there is the only produced specimen of Yak-52B model with two UB-32 rocket pods but come on

After the Soviet Union collapsed the Warsaw Pact countries and ex-Soviet member states were racing to carve themselves a place within the Western world and economy. For many (arguably most) of them that included NATO membership, which in turn entailed inspections of their militaries by NATO personnel to assess their current state. You can safely assume that all good and bad qualities of Soviet equipment are no secret to anyone who matters. But that was 30 years ago. Russia was in no state to develop any modern tech until about a decade ago, so the technology they had at the timeline of our existing Hornets and Falcons is obviously nothing to write home about. And these are the airframes that ED was allowed to model, mind you. Good luck getting any info on Bars-equipped Su-30MKI. Good luck getting the same for the Super Hornet, F-15EX and what have you. And these are what the modern arms market is about, generally speaking. If modern Russian airframes were so bad why would anyone pay for them? It's all about that 20-year gap in technology and development effort that Russian aircraft production and the current allowed timeline fall through.

R-60 was not supposed to work against ground targets... but it did. Soviet troops in Afghanistan have had to take creative liberties with their equipment, including, in particular, using their R-60 missiles as IR Mavericks at nighttime. It won't work with DCS at the moment because game engine (one notable exception being the sun), but ED has mentioned something about a global IR simulation mechanism, in which case there won't be any reason for both R-60 and IRIS-T not to work like that. A heat source is a heat source, missile see - missile go.

The main advantage of La-9 over La-7 was more fuel and four cannons, flight performance was about the same between them (with Yak-3 being better), so La-9 for Korea alone is hardly worth the development effort. If anything, La-7 would make a pretty close stand-in for both La-9 and late La-5FN.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but there are only so many left to choose from. Skyhawk, Corsair (both of them, actually), Crusader and Intruder are already in the works. So, aside from European designs which I'm no big expert on, that leaves us with the Aardvark, the Starfighter and one particular thicc bird that, apparently, is not to be named by any DCS module developer...

Hey, I'm not objecting against Su-57 and F-22 either, but we only get what we are given. Maybe the DoD of Russia isn't quite ripe for that yet or there is some rolling time cut-off that 9-12 meets but more advanced versions do not. The Bluefor that we get ain't spring chicken either.