Azrayen

Uh?? Not sure of what precisely you're asking... CAS = Canons Air-Sol = A-to-G Guns.

1 & 13: Always let it to 5W, the 25 position is not available / never used on this aircraft. For the rest, after a quick search: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2640983 :book: ++ Az'

And it's doesn't seem weird to me that it does. UNLOAD the bloody thing to let it fly again. :pilotfly: You have Velocity Vector and Energy carets in you HUD. Use them! :detective: Why do you seem to think this isn't already in place? :smartass: Oh, and BTW, I believe "the team" has professionals in it, too ;) Look for "Meet the team" topic :book: AI use a Simplified Flight Model.

This is why I wrote "rule of thumb". It's meant to be remembered by the pilot, I'm not describing how the FM code works. And I agree with you, except that I think power (trust) is not the issue. Drag/AoA is. The load factor differs, but for the rest I'm not sure I follow you...

Errr... you're probably mistaken there. :detective: I agree there is a problem in current FM, as you described it. But it really is related to AoA (and induced drag). General rule of thumb: Stay below 15° AoA: thrust > drag = you can accelerate. Go beyond 15° AoA: drag > thrust. Now, currently, there is indeed too much of an effect; this can lead to ~irrecoverable situations if you find yourself low and slow: you don't have enough altitude to trade when you try to unload (go 0g / lower AoA). As your former F-2000 pilot said, the aircraft should be more "gentle" and remain more recoverable (given that the pilot do what he needs to). :thumbup: ++ Az' PS: AF447 was lost between Brazil and France because of AoA, not speed.

Here you are. :) 1/ PID 2/ PIC 3/ PIC/CCM. If need be, those are taken from a short flight whoose track is also available here. ++ Az'

It's not "lacking" power. About taking off: maintain correct pitch. See attached track, I took off from the highest runway (Tonopah Range) at a high temp of 40°C, with the "bomb truck" load. No sweat. :) You may skip the rest of the track, it was just fooling around with the IFF to answer here then burning fuel to reach the MLW, then landing. ++ Az' Bomb-Truck.trk

Errr... Not quite. You should aim for 14° AoA (use dedicated brakets in the HUD as guidance for your velocity vector). If you're on glidepath and at 14° AoA, then your speed will be the proper one. And its value will depend on a variety of factors (aircraft weight being the most obvious) so it may change at each landing.

The control has different purpose when air-to-air mode or when air-to-ground mode. Hence its name is not CCM which is for air-to-air only ;)

Ah, I see that the recent arrival of an aircraft across the Channel boosted interest for it in the UK :) Nice article! :) Although they share a "family name" and the delta configuration, IV-A and 2000 are completely different beasts. The IV is an oversized (2 times scale) III. The 2000 is 2 generations more recent (III - F1 - 2000). Nevertheless, same company... and tech/mind. For example, the IV was a test bed for the first applications of the FBW tech. It helped later Concorde developpement... and of course laid roots for the later-on 2000's "full" (all axis) / "exclusive" (no mech back-up) FBW tech.

Yes. That would be nice go have (no more than that). Yes. For a good reason: when this was simulated, the aircraft lacked proper braking power. Its landing runs were far too long (leading to many undue runway overruns) and it couldn't hold still (as it should!) at N=100% dry (MIL trust) before relasing brakes and engaging the full AB for take off. I'm glad Razbam chose what I see as the lesser of two evils.

Duplicate https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=184971 Not a bad idea to bump it as we wait for Zeus'news, but still this other topic exists ;)

Wow. Did you have such a bad day? I'm sorry if it's the case. Otherwise, humor is free. As is speech BTW. Good day! :) Yes there are. Better refresh rate (already written above) before launch. And quicker launch as the missile doesn't have to wait for the radar to switch to STT as this is already done. ++ Az'

You pressed Shift key during start-up. It does make SF prompt the activation window.

Surely the answer must be "in 2 more weeks".

The USAF never did that.

No.

The manual is outdated on this. It's a knob to set the VAD. It is not a heading selector per se.

Even in 2.0.5.3521? The one that is out since yesterday? If that's so, maybe you have conflicting inputs => check your options/controls settings. Think Gamepad, 2nd mouse... anything plugged to the computer that may send inputs to DCS.

Au moment de l'achat.

I believe this is on the todo list (nice things to have - when time allows) for some time ;)

We all do AFAIK. Where is the sun? Where is the sun glare? See the link? Oh my, that's a probable bug. But nothing to do with the aircraft. ;)

Old debug thingy to be removed IMO ;)

Right

Sure, LEDs for exterior. But Zeus is also right about NVG-compatible MFDs (not sure if they are/can be LED-based or not, but they exist: I met them :D). Those are (more or less) "blacked out" (and still blurry) when seen through NVGs. Avoiding a "bright (blinding) blurry (totally unuseful) square" in the NVGs. :thumbup: