Rainmaker

Your track wont show up for me in my replay list.....

start at 33:00. Bow comments around 36:00

Listen to the AB podcast (on of the more recent ones). The ex -16 guy who now flies with FANG in charlies has directly commented on the exact issue. Likely why the common sight picture doesnt focus on using the lights. send your hate to Boeing, since McD is no longer.

You spiked way past 8....you got what you earned....nothing there.

Guessing he’s referring to the decel before acel…which is perfectly fine.

Yeah, I can only laugh about this.

Well hopefully your joy can somehow raise the amount of explosive in them otherwise…you might be disappointed. And she not fat. She not even big boned.

It is

So a penetrator that will be useful for nothing DCS offers. Just because it weighs more doesnt mean anything.

That the real one is a minimal movement/force sensing and that one is made as a rotary switch. I understand that the force sensing would likely be cost prohibitive, but DX buttons would have been a much better/closer to realistic option. I do not own either of them. The two things that would have probably gotten me to bite on them would have been that switch being better implemented, and their finger lifts having actual DX button functionality too. A bonus would have been the radio switch being updated from the 2 direction slide to the 4-way which happened when they added the extra radio...but that wouldn't have made/break it for me.

100%. I’ll reiterate, my previous posts were not me trying to dissuade anyone from buying it. I’ve got better things to do with my time. Personally, my only real disappointment in it is the way the amt elev functionality is done.

You are looking at something that you dont know what you are looking at. Its modeled.

Elevation wheel operates differently, multifunction switch is different (not 5 way), additional buttons on the left grip not present on the real one, coolie is different (not 5 way). Ergonomically, the design is close, but the functions are different in a few ways. Not saying it's good or bad as it's their way of adding additional buttons on the stick, but it's not what I would classify as being exact as their was either intent there, or a misunderstanding of how they operate IRL. People should understand they are not getting an exact replica.

Okay then. It’s pretty far away from ‘exact’. Happy?

‘Exact replica’ is a stretch. There are notable differences between them.

Yup, my post wasn't directed at you per say, just quoted and added context of how it got to where it got.

I can invite you to go fwd and lat stick in both the C and the E in DCS and see what awaits you. Can assure you it doesnt turn out well. Haha.

What’s the consensus on what its supposed to be? Its original development was built to make unstable aircraft stable. What more is the expectation of it? The -15 is inherently stable on its own in most cases, but also has CAS for some of the same reasons when it may not be as happy.

Keep in mind that there are still ‘ideas’ in the bullpen for stuff like that. Just have to stay tuned to see what can be developed as time goes on.

Fuel/oil…it can all be problematic. In the state its in, you have a chance for recovery vs bearing seizing for example, which could be catastrophic. Same as over-g modeling (stressing the wing tip vs flat ripping the wing off). There was some actual forethought put into what could be considered ‘fair’ from a gameplay perspective when limits get exceeded.

Would be willing to bet there are some inaccuracies to what you recall TBH. There is definitely not going to be anything done ‘high G’ in a negative G sense. And the turn circle of what could be tolerated BY ANYONE doing negative g’s would be in the 10s of miles wide and not anything capable at an airshow.

Its all a bunch/game of hypotheticals, but it also keeps people from being able to do dumb stuff. No different than mach limits, G limits, etc. Like it or hate it, but there is some essence of attempting to implement some realism into to things and not allowing the jet to be flown as if it was confined to the same limits of an aircraft in Ace Combat or whatever flavor of an ‘arcade’ title you want to choose as an example.

It can. But typically the system has ‘old’ PP data from when it last flew. Getting the PP REQ messages would not be the norm, but its still a thing depending on the situation.

Changed a few patches ago to be better in line with what you would see in the real jet normally. The coords can still be overridden with coords from the kneeboard, and should to get the most accurate PP. The jet will have previous coords, but there is ‘error’ built in. Up to the pilot to make the decision to update or, in the case of not needing to be 100% accurate, fly with what’s already loaded to the INS.

Yep, likely a disconnect of what its supposed to do vs what has been coded in so far. None of the ‘dim’ functions of the lighting system have been implemented.