NoJoe

Looks like the update just went live again. 2.5.2.17978!

My guess is that all we need to do is assign a button on the joystick to the equivalent button on the HOTAS. That's how it has worked on previous modules (such as the A-10); we don't need to program the various functionality. Just assign the button, and the module takes care of the rest of the logic for us. :) (I'm assuming)

Generally the Hornet auto-trims for 1G in flight. But in the landing configuration it trims for a set AoA. It depends on the flaps switch position, and probably a couple other things that I'm forgetting right now; all covered in the NATOPS manual.

Cheers, thanks for the answers and great videos! :thumbup:

Regardless of trim or not, that refueling was SMOOTH! Maverick, you mentioned you use the refueling pod as a reference as well as the left engine of the KC-130; do you also look at its fuselage as a reference, or is that more of a peripheral view thing? And the KC-130 entered the turns very smoothly. Is that new? I seem to remember the KC-135s being a bit "exciting"...

I noticed during the EW BIT test the words "The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog" appear on the display. Shouldn't it be "jumps" instead of jumped? :p That way the letter "s" is shown. "E" and "D" are already shown elsewhere. Then again, maybe it's a easter egg to highlight "Eagle Dynamics". :D Anyway, thanks for the videos and livestreams! Looking forward to flying the Hornet! And as I real pilot I really enjoyed the educational video about the navigation and waypoint systems. The detail is mindblowing!

I can only speak for myself, but I am DEFINITELY buying both! :)

Just a small correction: that would be an angle of attitude. Angle of attack is entirely separate from the aircraft's attitude relative to the horizon; it's purely a measure of the angle between the aircraft (wing) and the relative wind. (for instance, one could theoretically hold a constant AoA while doing a barrel roll). Cheers to everyone in this thread! Lots of great discussion and information here! Thank you all. :) I can't wait to try it out in the Hornet, though I have a feeling my carrier pattern will take a LOT of work to get right.

How do we know the F-15 was at 0 degrees bank? If the plane was banked to the right a missile from below can strike the plane side-on. Also I've been hit many times in DCS by SAMs that came from the side or even a little above (such as when I'm flying at low altitude). I think you're making too many assumptions based on a small amount of information. There's just not enough data yet to make these sorts of absolute statements.

I don't think it would have a measurable effect. Even in the densest parts of the ozone layer the concentration of ozone is only about 10 parts per million, compared to about 200,000 parts per million for "regular" O2 oxygen. Source: https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/assessments/ozone/2010/twentyquestions/Q1.pdf My guess is that there's just not enough ozone to make a difference to combustion in an aircraft engine. [citation needed] :)

I have about 1,600 hours in Cessna 172s as a pilot and instructor, and I can confirm the nose definitely needs to rise during a go-around. However, the act of adding power with full flaps means the nose will want to rise quite a bit on its own. Too much, actually! So as you add power you need to hold some forward pressure on the yoke to prevent the nose from rising too far. Perhaps that's the difference between your two experiences? Once full power is established and the descent has shallowed, flaps are retracted one notch at a time, and the plane is re-trimmed (nose-down trim) for the climb.

Wags mentioned in the video that the clouds are a tweak on the current existing technology, and that they'd be revisiting the technology at a later date. But great video! I'm almost as excited for the new Caucasus map as I am for the Hornet!

The WSO's in the same plane, seeing the same sensor. :) Makes sense to me that it could be a fly or debris inside the sensor that they're mistaking for an outside object. [shrug]

Getting back to the original post and the FAQ: I wonder how well existing missions will work. I'd assume the placement of individual buildings in the new Caucasus map will be different from the old map. But I wonder by how much? I've made a couple small missions where a target is a specific building; that will probably no longer be there in the new map, I'd assume?

If you go into the actual F-14 subforum there are many many posts and news items. Here's the link: https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=395

SandMartin, 14:40 I have no idea, haha. 28:52 He said RAF pilots who flew a captured Bf-109 disagreed that the Spitfire could outturn it. In other words, the RAF pilots thought the Bf-109 could outturn the Spitfire! 30:09 Yep! 33:11 He said "high line-of-sight rate". In other words, the line of sight angle changes rapidly as the other plane flies by. 33:46 Haha, yes, he's referring to Top Gun there. 34:10 To be "up in your chili" means the same as "in your face" or "in your business". In this case he's saying that if the attacking fighter makes no mistakes, he will get you. 34:33 I'm not sure.

Agreed. All the technical differences in the world wouldn't save me. Pit me in an F-22 Raptor against a well-trained pilot in a MiG-21, and I'll lose every time, if I'm honest. ;)

My guess is that a fan is shaped the way it is so it will be relatively quiet, but less efficient at producing thrust. Airplane propellers are shaped to be more efficient, but at the expense of being louder.

Awesome! Good work, and thanks for sharing the video!

Maybe it's just not ready for public viewing yet.

All I ask is to watch some poor saps plow into the back of the carrier tomorrow. :P Though I hear the arresting wire physics are pretty cool... Maybe we'll see a bit of both!

And how! I dropped some GBU-12s from 15,000 feet. They never even saw it coming... :D Also gave them some good BRRRRTTTTTTT!

I just spent an hour flying the Blackshark around, trying to halt a German armored advance through Normandy. This map is wonderful for low altitude flying! Turns out I'm a terrible Blackshark pilot in combat though... One of the tanks managed to shoot my rotor mast off while I was hovering 1km in front of it, trying to slew the Shkval. I got what I deserved. 10/10 would get rekt again. Now to try the same thing in the A-10 from high altitude. :D

Hehehe, I like how their website describes the F-35B as having "short takeoff/vernicle landing capability (STOVL)" http://www.beaufortairshow.com/f-35b.shtml :P

Thanks! Though Google Translate sure makes my head hurt... :P