Despayre

All flashing is brighter and dimmer.

Problem solved.

Just so I'm clear, you're basing your conclusions on your memory of a Soviet era document, that you cannot even prove exists, and you feel that's a more reliable source than the actual weapons manual??

I just had this happen online as well. Multicrew. My RIO added weapons and the pod, no joystick... removed them all, I (pilot) re-added everything, joystick appeared. Ergo, at first blush here, seems to be a RIO arming problem...

Blasphemer! You shall be cast out!

If some faded labels that you're gonna have to look around for a couple times before remembering where they are forever and then just using them as you need to, is a reason for you to consider not buying a module... well, we're not the same. When's the last time you fumbled around looking for a common function in your most played jet? Now, if the buttons were randomly generated in different places every time you got in the cockpit, ok, you'd have a solid point.

Which laws of physics are you claiming are impossible that the AI is doing? I think what you're suggesting is, it's "extremely unlikely", and that's definitely something worth training for. I get that the AI is way too good at it, but individually, there's nothing it's doing that's not possible, and the fact that it's *really* good at some things, is balanced pretty well by all the incredibly stupid things that the AI does, like not fire at things, not engage targets when it should, etc, but no one complains about that for some reason...

Not true, because we have tool-tips, which don't exist IRL. If you don't have even a vague idea of where the button you're looking for is, maybe you need to slow down a little. One time, and never again... non-issue, or at least, a pretty minor one, and I believe if you had read the manual, it's very explicit about how to use that test knob. That's why there is a mod for exactly that purpose, everyone can have what they like, including the vocal minority that want more readable button labels.

Oh, you took out the hangar queen...

Yup, got that with the last comment, I wasn't thinking when I wrote that, forgot it was specifically about "binding", not function. (But if I delete my comment now, it'll look like you two are talking to your imaginary friend... )

Nope, according to my wife's cooking, it's still "Turn and burn." (it's ok, like she's ever gonna go on a flight sim forum... )

I just noticed, that for the right engine, after selection, if you left-click, it goes to Neutral. For the left engine, after selection, if you right-click, it goes to Neutral. Ergo, everyone can cross this off now. (all on the assumption you haven't already waited too long and the switch goes back to Neutral on it's own)

Also not a great analogy unless you wanna suggest that the CGI work was done on a commission/"profit split per ticket" basis, which likely would take into account the release of other modules, and would likely be spaced out optimally so as to maximize profits from the sales split (for all planes released) just like how they moved the release date for Top Gun:Maverick at least 3 times to maximize profits and avoid overlap with other big movies. None of which I think is too relevant though, they'll release when they feel they're ready *and* when, whatever restrictions ED has in place, are satisfied.

Why haven't you hired that guy, he's obviously the answer to any problems you're currently working on! </sarcasm>

MT If you open the canopy and then move your mouse to where the mirrors would be, you briefly get the mouse icon turning to the green circle, if you try and adjust them with that, it goes away almost immediately, but then, when the canopy closes, you can no longer adjust the mirrors at all. Noticed it by accident, has never affected my gameplay (but I can see how it could be a problem theoretically), only reporting for completeness.

Tell me you want to complain about something that ED has absolutely no control over, and only use excuses and poor analogies to make your point. Oh, my mistake, I see you've already done that.

I'm having the exact same thought.

Sure, but it's kinda difficult to believe that someone can give meaningful feedback on something they've never seen, something they haven't even finished building yet, and based on assumptions that they aren't already doing what they may have said they were going to do.

Two items, one might just be a DCS thing though... First one: After being asked to arm my ejection seat, it's Jester that comes back with "I'm lowering the canopy.", not JestHer. Second one: I'm getting warned on taxiways that I'm "Way too fast!" except I'm doing 23, although there is a big wind, and my TAS is showing as 38... I don't know that TAS should affect Jester/JestHer while taxiing though... but my guess is, this is not a JestHer issue, since it's a trigger that seems off... maybe...

Not sure what would cause that (someone will though probably), but I did notice you might wanna change the line: x = 1920; to x = 1921; Since x-pixel 1920 should be on your larger monitor still. Ignore that bit. OH! but also... On the TEDAC export you're missing a semi-colon after "y = 0" and I bet that's important too.

Funny, I did the same thing just the other day, and as draconus said, once done, you can't enable NWS anymore until you repair, or hop in another jet AFAIK.

Technically, this kinda feels like an explanation of the colours.

Is it possible the lower 300 ft of that graph is compressed. I'm assuming you're getting the 200' number from the obvious distance below the 300' mark on the graph, but that cannot be right, cuz obviously, where the water starts is 0 ft, ergo, the area from 300 to 0 is all within that lowest unmarked block on the graph (as there isn't enough area to create 3 blocks of 100' each to get all the way to 0). Visually, if you compress those last 300 ft into a single block and you maintained glideslope, I would expect the graph to show a compression curve at the end. No?

lol, I think what Nahen is trying to say is... That plane is still flying today, which means, for obvious security reasons, there is ZERO chance our F-15E is going to be accurate beyond a collection of must-haves and best guesses and observable phenomena. Unless you're supposed to have them, it's tough to even take a picture of the inside of the cockpit, let alone get any kind of specs on what you saw. Yes, you may be able to get a pic of some big MFD's and a general layout, but what those screens can do, or the buttons that appear on them, I don't think there's much chance that's going to be all that accurate. ... but that's just my opinion, and since this is the internet, if I'm wrong, someone will be along shortly to tell me so, and again, being the internet, I'm sure it will be in the most polite way possible.

A Few Moments Later.... Seems ok here. null