Azrayen

Sorry but this is not correct. What would happen is this: Either the M-2000 pilot would be able to get the JTAC (or buddy lasing aircraft) to change the code it lases, either he would in fact, have to go home (or to another JTAC) without dropping anything. ++ Az' PS: A hind? Wow, thanks, always loved that chopper. Just kidding, I'm already out.:D

I agree with you. The purpose of the Jammer ACTIVATE input is to make sure that you have all you need to get the jammer jamming. So it's OK to have it make 2 things: - power switch to "M" (if not already) - selector to "[]" (if not already) Now, if you use this input a second time (i.e. using it as a toggle), then I think there is a mistake (in current input code). No. You would use the selector back to VEI. Zeus, could you look into it? That's #35851 :)

AnnaNass, I understand your priority ("have it quickly"). I don't share it. Mine is more in the "have it right" mode (even if it takes more time). Fly safe :) ++ Az'

I disagree. We need to have a way to get the JTAC's laser designator and the bomb codes to be the same. You suggest to get a way to change the bomb code (which is not possible IRL). I suggest to get a way to have the JTAC adapt its designator's code (which is how it's done IRL). Both ways work. One is realistic. DCS being a simulator, aiming for realism, I suggest the second one is better suited. Don't you agree? It's not about "preventing" you to get the GBUs usable on public servers with AI JTACs. It's about getting it working in the most realistic way :)

Not at all :) There are currently 3 available control inputs: - MAGIC select - AA GUNS select - PCA select => i.e. neutral position Simply map each of them on the Warthog's boat switch, with "PCA select" as the center one. NB: I'm not sure of the exact wording, going from memory here. I could point that there is no such thing as a "Magic 530" :D But more interesting would be to write that there is no "single click 530 select" button in the real aircraft; so it sounds OK to me not to have one in the sim. :) As I wrote earlier, select 530 through PCA (there are inputs for this if you want to map them, would be the 2nd one of the bottom line). Then use the inputs simulating the throttle switch (described just above), knowing that the "neutral" one means "back to previously selected mode on the PCA" => if this doesn't work (I need to check thorously), then it's a DCS M-2000C bug. ++ Az'

You're correct :) From Escadron de Chasse 2/5 Île de France at Orange air base.

It does. And it's a mistake dating back to 2015. Not important to fix until real feature is implemented behind this knob.

Absolutely :) I do tend to base them on facts, too. Have a nice day :)

Nice idea by BST, could be duplicated here. But it wouldn't solve your issue with the JTAC either. Indeed what's needed is your last minute change :)

I'm not sure it will be (it's not the case IRL). Best would be a way to ask the AI JTAC to use compatible codes.

Thanks, wasn't sure. I used TARGET to do that. And no script, GUI was enough.

This is as wrong as it is badly written. You're talking about the 2000-5F used in France. Kev2Go is talking about the 2000-5 (or 2000-5Mk2, or 2000-9) exported or projected. You're both mostly right. You just don't talk about the same aircraft. ;) Don't assume too much. Valid remark for other sentences too, by the way.

Guys, it's like the real aircraft. You select 530 mode. Then you use the throttle 3-way selector: - priority A/A guns - neutral = return to PCA selection (in this case: 530) - priority MAGIC Perfect on a Warthog (if you fly with this HOTAS) with the switch just under the airbrake switch (forgot its name).

Markpoints are buts too, so you can select them the same way to be shown on VTB.

I wouldn't.

Yes, that's what he was speaking about. And it's already reported.

What for?? WP altitudes are mostly on the ground. Radar will be set to avoid the ground (and enhancing detection) as much as possible. So what would be the logic behind implementing such a limit?

Not that I'm aware of. Not sure it's worth it, by the way... (apart for "N", which is useful)

It has not. :)

Hi There is no heading selector knob in this aircraft. So what you get is OK. The knob is for a feature which is not available at the moment = no use just now. Uh? It worked last time I tried it (like 3-4 days ago)... Do you mean friday's update broke it?

I would guess the "mods & apps" section is better suited for this :) https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=89 Perhaps there is already something there BTW (didn't check, just guessing).

Can't remember precisely; various memories from discussions/readings with/about crews, mechanics, manufacturer people... etc. I even though that the "Chocks: placed --- parking brake: Off" was part of the stop C/L but I couldn't find that while checking, so maybe I'm wrong. Agreed. :) SOPs are tied with an aircraft and/or an air force. Disagree. If we're to talk about the 2000, chocks should be standard for ramp starts, and parking brakes for hot starts (having the parking brake set to On is part of the "before start" C/L). AFAIK you're right to say that chocks are not standard in DCS (I think some aircraft have them, others not at all = "missing" feature). I would prefer chocks to be implemented wherever needed, rather than parking brakes set On all across the board (this would lead to 2 things to fix rather than 1). Interesting, thanks :) As jojo said, you probably fly naval aircraft. Those things tend to use strange airbases, which are moving, rolling, pitching... so weird :D No chains on the M-2000. Chocks yes. To be removed as part of the before taxi C/L. This is also true for the M-2000. :) ++

No. Chuck is right. Except there is a non-selectable range between the VHF and UHF ranges of the V/UHF radio. In this non-usable range, IRL, you have non-aeronautics related frequencies, e.g. amateur radio, satellites uplinks, maritime VHF, private traffic, emergency services...

I agree with you in general, but the radar is less a problem, IMO. Big +1, with Fire's caveat! I would add a 4th point: there is less danger close to the ground in DCS than IRL, due to relatively low ground forces density in a "typical" air-quake server mission. Perhaps just adding randomly and densely placed efficient SAMs/AAAs systems would "raise the deck". I disagree. You only consider public servers with symetric missions and no (or not enough) "rules". Those lead to "exploits", but those are not the only way to fly ;)

Yes there are, but I don't think we can have them (not public data), apart from the "subsonic" limit posted by jojo juste above. Let's assume perhaps? AoA: Max AoA in CHARGES mode is ~20° IIRC. So of course this is our absolute max. I suggest adding a safety margin of 2-3° minimum so max AoA around 17-18°? Min AoA: dunno if it's useful? See Load factor below... Load factor: Min: It's probably safe to say that you cannot have negative Gs, at least for non-rail-launched weapons. With a safety margin, I would say that G should be above 0.5 when releasing. Max: About the upper limit, I guess it depends on the weapon. For all air-to-ground weapons, the aircraft itself is limited to 5.5G, and we know that CCRP principle is to "toss bomb" somehow, so G>1; without more data, I guess we can keep 5.5 as the max. Speed: Min I guess somewhere around 300kt? Delta winged aircraft love speed, let's give them some. Max M0.95