Azrayen

Indeed. And as simulated weapons (better than "fictive" ;)) are not implemented in DCS, this button is not implemented either.

As Zeus said :) In fact, POL is a "master mode" (as are 530, MAG, CAN...) of the avionics. So we should not be able to select both POL and MAG, or POL and 530... etc. It's one or the other. While 530, MAG and CAN allow for firing a dedicated weapon each, POL is there to get ~ the same features (radar modes... etc.) as 530 without having selected any weapon = without ability to shoot something. ++ Az'

That would multiply the size of DCS. At the moment, not so many missions are multi-language. So instead of X missions we would have X times Number_of_available_languages missions. That will change once multi-language missions are implemented across the board. Also instead of Y flight manuals we would have Y times Number_of_available_languages manuals. I don't feel it's the way to go, to solve your "problem" which is not that common. A better way would probably to be able to select which language to use per module, but that also would create problems (at the moment, many modules share the same localization files in the sim, for example input translation). So not gonna happen soon. Finally, a simpler way: get two copies of DCS! I use DCS release in English and DCS open beta in French. Double the disk usage but works great (and I'm one of not-too-many people who, like you, likes to use different languages depending on this or that). You can do that, or use 2 copies of the same "branch" (Release, OB or OA). Regards, Az' [edit] wow, basically same answer as cichlidfan; we posted at the same time ;)

Salut, Pour faire court : non, c'est impossible et si tu essayes ça ne fonctionnera pas. Rem: Attention quand tu cites un N° de version, là tu risques de paumer les gens qui voudraient te répondre. DCS existe actuellement en versions 1.5.6 et 2.0.5 ; DCS World 2.6 n'existe pas (pas encore ?) donc ça ne va pas évoquer grand chose à bcp de monde... je suppose qu'il s'agit de la version de DCS_updater c'est à dire le programme de mise à jour (séparé de DCS en lui-même et, de fait, n'utilisant pas le même versionning), actuellement en 2.6.19.8 ++ Az'

It's as precise at start. But you'll drift more. And you can always update (when it's not buggy)

For this specific need, I use Target. Target allows to asssign a command (PCA select) to the center position. DCS (DirectX in fact) only recognizes the forward and rear position.

Matseye, I'm not trying to "assign" blame. TomCatMucDe, different philosophies? LN seems to want to do things a bit differently, more autonomously. This has advantages... and their contrary.

I don't know either. I was refering to real A/C which displays CAS.

The FBW limits you - without overriding the elastic stop of the stick - to 9g above corner speed, and to 29° AoA below corner speed. Now, my issue isn't about g. Here: (click to enlarge) In pink/bold, I highlighted the curve from the public diagram (which also is estimated, by the way). In pink/not bold, I "crossed" the part of your black curve that is offset re: this diagram. No.

Hi, Why is your black curve so much away from the diagram you take as reference? This leads to think at first glance that there is a big gap between "expected" and "measured in DCS", when the gap is much narrower in fact (and at some point reversed). Thanks :) ++

I wasn't talking about fuel. I was talking about the RL plane being able to manage either 530s or A-G weapon (one type), not both during the same flight.

Teach you kids to summarize it for you? :D (hat, coat...)

AFAIK no ETA was ever published. I think that BAP-100s and properly modelled Belougas would require ED to (write and) include necessary code into DCS "core" code. If I'm right, then "when" is up to ED. BAT-120 I don't think it's on the list.

Meeeep. Not really. I mean you can (in DCS) but you shouldn't (if you wanna do it "like in RL"):D Nevertheless: Indeed:thumbup:

Hi, I don't remember those things... would be nice i you found a link to an official announcement :) ++ Az'

It does more than that. In fact it's the other way around. "Default" heading for the INS is by geographic north. Using the DEC (declination) value it calculates the heading by magnetic north.

I noticed that too, and wondered the same. Did not dig into it to find the info, though. Yet.

Hi. Magnetic declination? 6° is correct for Caucasus.

Mecanically speaking, dual launcher on wings pylons are OK. I'm not sure all the wiring is there (different for 12s than for 82s?)? And I never saw this on a real aircraft: where would you put the fuel? Most "bomb truck" M-2000s fly with the 541/542 2000 liters fuel tanks.

Hi. No restriction; except running out of fuel ;)

Also you can use 530s, or you can use (one type of) A-to-G weapons. Not both at the same time. System limitation (old "computers"!!)

Indeed CoG issues. + gear vs rear bombs interaction (not the same size as an 82!) (I'm talking aerodynamics) + wiring probably not made due to previous reasons. + separation tests (launch tests) not made or not positively validated (idem).

Not yet

Interesting :) As an usual method with this plane for CCRP is, AFAIK, to pull the stick to the stop (to avoid overflying target) = having max g when release (5.5 in "charges" mode)... it's a bit annoying that precision suffers that much. Perhaps it's normal... after all, bombs are dumb (and when I fly, so is the crew). :D