Azrayen

It does.

I strongly doubt you, then. :D

We'll know when Razbam implements it ;)

^ this. Different radar. We have RDI. It doesn't have air to sea mode. Greek 2000EGs have RDM+. More such info here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=147288

No pedal, it's if engine N > 80%. Specific mode for run-up (point fixe).

A cold and dark aircraft should NOT have its parking brake set.

Hi hi, Didi elle va te poursuivre celle là :D

Bonjour Neon67, OK je t'envoie un MP. :thumbup: @ caramel : oui, Groove a utilisé sa baguette magique :) ++ Az'

:thumbup: Réponse itou :)

Yes. Probably because the version modelized by Razbam also uses the Eclair control box (on the left of the cockpit) so it's WIP. Yes. It's "Arrêt" but otherwise OK. BR electrically powers the jammer system, but do not activate jamming itself. That's the "3 point turn switch" job. BR = M + switch = "VEI" >> normal way of flying. BR = M + switch = "[]" (or "PCM") >> when you need jamming; return to previous state when you don't need jamming anymore. BR = A >> when on the ground, or when you're sure you won't need jamming soon (e.g. simple navigation flight, no combat use of the aircraft). "D2M". Otherwise OK. No difference at the moment (it's in the manual, by the way...) and no difference planned in the future AFAIK: EW phenomena making this mode useful are not modeled in DCS. ++ Az'

Well, given that Zeus is working on the radar now, there was no point in publishing numbers for the M-2000 yet. Anyway, the test is simple, you can make you own if you wanna. My method: flying the fighter myselft, having the target as AI with options set in mission editor so that it flies straight ahead and does not react to my radar + using DCS pause as soon as I get something (radar contact / STT capability) and LotAtc 4 DCS to get range measures accurate and replicable.

Probably the Oxygen Flow Indicator. Yep. It's white, it's not a light. ;)

Yes. But if I understood correctly what Zeus said about it, Razbam doesn't intend to develop their own air-to-ground radar, they are waiting for ED to make such a feature available; as ED is doing it for the F/A-18C, it will probably take some time (monthes). As far as I'm concerned, the RDI being mostly an air-to-air radar, I feel I can wait. Nope. No such thing. Yep. I don't think so. Last version of the FM matches a lot of available sources and got praised. There is still a bit of work regarding ground handling (even if it's already much better than before) and auto-pilot, but overall it's on the good path. This FM is probably more difficult than other because it needs a supplementary "layer" of complexity: the aircraft is unstable, and needs FBW to be flown. The CoG was adjusted several weeks ago, but then other linked features needed to be re-done. It would indeed. Probably some did it already, but not on public forums (or not in English) ;) Well, I hope it's not a matter of national pride, because that wouldn't be the way to go. Setting this aside, let me write just a few remarks: 1/ Perhaps the most important thing: as of today, the MiG-29 in DCS has a SFM. And the M-2000's EFM is still being tuned (AFAIK not on performances but we never know). So it's not "fair" to try to compare those planes at the moment in DCS. The real comparizon would be much better once the MiG-29 gets its PFM, and once the M-2000's FM is out of beta. 2/ MiG-29 vs F-16 was documented (post Germany reunification); bottom line is MiG can be dangerous in CAC. 3/ M-2000 vs F-16: in CAC, the M-2000 can take quickly advantage due to its better ITR and win. But if the fight continues "too long", the STR and lower thrust of the M-2000 makes the F-16 regain and probably wins. 4/ MiG-29 vs M-2000 is not documented AFAIK; but we can assume that those 3 fighters are in the same league, and that there is no one crushing the other ones. This could be a topic on its own (and I'm sure it was already done on fan-websites around the world, but then again, was national pride set aside? Really not sure ;)). ++ Az'

Bonjour à tous, Il y a deux ans, ED lançait un appel aux volontaires pour la traduction FR de DCS ; une équipe a été mise en place à la suite, et depuis deux ans, un gros boulot a été abattu avec : :thumbup: - le manuel de DCS World en lui-même (éditeur), sur la base du travail de l'équipe précédente (qui n'avait malheureusement pas été publié à l'époque) - le simu en lui-même (interface, éditeur, options, commandes, écrans, messages, encyclopédie...) quasi intégralement refondu ; il reste quelques trous dans la raquette et ça évolue régulièrement, mais le gros est fait. - le manuel et les missions & campagne du Su-25T - le manuel du Su-27 ; les missions et campagne sont en cours de relecture - le manuel du P-51D/TF-51D et les quelques missions du TF-51D Bien sûr, vous bénéficiez aussi des missions & campagne du A-10C traduites précédemment par l'équipe C6. :thumbup: D'autres travaux sont en cours, comme le manuel du FW-190D9 ou le site web DCS par exemple. :detective: Mais il reste du boulot ! Si la Gazelle est d'origine en FR+EN (bravo à l'équipe Polychop !), de nombreux autres modules sont publiés par des équipes qui ne disposent pas de francophones en leur sein. Chez ED ou BST, le L-39, le tout récent F-5E, le futur F/A-18C sont de gros morceaux. Et je n'évoque pas les autres tierces parties (indépendantes)... Pour en venir à bout, l'équipe de traduction souhaite recruter deux ou trois personnes supplémentaires, et je lance donc aujourd'hui un nouvel appel à candidatures. Les qualités requises : lire et comprendre l'anglais "technique" des manuels et du simu ; un petit bagage aéronautique vous facilitera la vie, sinon c'est l'occasion de découvrir et comprendre plein de trucs ! savoir déjouer les pièges de la traduction (contresens...) et écrire correctement en français (orthographe, grammaire ; "sa marche" = Nooooonnnn). pouvoir assurer un minimum de dispos parce qu'à un rythme trop lent, on perd le fil ; concrètement il faut pouvoir consacrer 2-3 heures par semaine à la trad (en moyenne) et s'engager dans la durée pour être efficace. avoir envie de filer un coup de main bénévole à la communauté, et obtenir en retour amour, gloire et beauté (offre non remboursable). :wub: Si vous avez envie de filer un coup de main pour le développement de notre simu, et d'aider la communauté francophone (pas toujours au top en anglais) à faire vivre notre loisir, il vous suffit de faire acte de candidature en envoyant un MP, soit à moi directement, soit auprès de Groove (en anglais SVP). Les volontaires se verront ensuite proposer un petit "test" à l'entrée (2-3 pages à traduire), et si ça colle vous serez amenés à signer un NDA avec ED (ça ne fait pas mal : je suis toujours vivant ;)), car si les traducteurs sont bénévoles, ils disposent d'accès à des outils spécifiques et informations en avant-première, dont nous n'avons pas le droit de parler en public (mais c'est sympa, on voit les bugs avant les autres :D). Tenté ? A vous de jouer !! :thumbsup: Questions ? N'hésitez pas à les poser, ici-même ou par MP. :) Vous pouvez aussi discuter avec l'un des membres de l'équipe en place, Cameleon33, Bad CRC, FireHuey, Quent et Luzi, ou des anciens comme Cedaway, Maraudeur ou Psycho, pour ne pas avoir que mon son de cloche. ++ Az'

Well, this is consistent with test we made on FC aircraft and comparisons with the M-2000C. As Zeus said, the distances are function of fighter(radar) and target(RCS). For example, from above-mentionned tests: Situation = both aircraft @ 8000m (above sea to avoid ground clutter/mountains), head on aspect (+radar in HPRF for the fighter), non-maneuvering, no ECM. Distances in km. 1/ different fighters, same target: [TABLE]Fighter | Target | Detection_distance | STT_distance F-15C | Tu-22 | 219 | 185 MiG-29S | Tu-22 | 138 | 116[/TABLE] => The F-15C radar is more powerful than the MiG-29's one. 2/ same fighter, different targets: [TABLE]Fighter | Target | Detection_distance | STT_distance F-15C | Tu-22 | 219 | 185 F-15C | MiG-29S | 117 | 99[/TABLE] => The RCS of the Tu-22 is larger than the MiG-29's one. => indeed, RCS of targets in DCS: Tu-22: 60m² MiG-29S: 5m² QED ;)

No no that's not what I'm saying. Of course ground masks are implemented. I was only talking about determining if the target is in look-up or in look-down (= is my radar using doppler filter i.e. is it prone to be blinded by a notch/beam?). For this (and this only) I think ED uses a "radar horizon" and I don't think (I can be mistaken) that this radar horizon takes relief into account. This is old memory from FC or FC2. ++ Az'

That's how FC radar are modelized. Makes sense indeed. I'm advocating for this to be implemented here too. Would limit the lock losses when target is at/above own altitude. And seems realistic. FC uses a kind of radar horizon, i.e. not sure it takes moutains into account. Would be nicer if they would be taken into account.

ENT (~MPRF) is a mix of HPRF and LPRF.

We shouldn't be able to use any other PRF than HPRF while guiding a S-530D.

OK you're confused. Starting coordinates must be checked and corrected by the pilot. Aligning won't auto-correct this. It's not what alignment does. What's the issue with degrees and minutes? Simply copy them in your INS... RMK: you don't have to make conversions if you don't want to. Select the "Lat/Long decimal" format in DCS options. Then you'll get (D)DD°MM.mmmm format and you'll just have to round it to the Mirage's format (D)DD°MM.mm. ++ Az' PS: next time, please create your topic in the M-2000 forum. ;)

There is no dedicated trim reset control. But two other features actually do a trim reset (so no need for a dedicated button). 1/ the practical one = the AP standby trigger (which IRL is pressed each time the pilot holds the stick). 2/ the not-so-practical one = the FBW reset pushbutton.

Depends on the need. 7 min QRA: not needed (ALCM will do) 2 min QRA (with pilot onboard): pre-aligned + "réseau d'alerte" used

Salut, Il faudrait regarder si le dcs.log (dans Saved Games\DCS\Logs) donne une indication ou une piste ? ++ Az'

+1 Absolutely no difference for the radar itself. Just a different indication for the pilot. S = I scan "alone", it's nice to know what part of the sky I'm scanning. Z = I'm trying to find a target that a GCI BRAA'ed me, so I know its distance and altitude, let's set my radar correctly with those parameters to maximize my chances of finding it quick.

Correct.