Azrayen

;) The "multiplayer" is probably part of the explanation indeed. The host had not the same feeling of "this is useless" as us clients, at the end of the flight. :) I won't presume whoom issue it is, but agree with the rest.

Yes, kinda, but not implemented yet. = = = = = CptSmiley was working on the AP recently. IIRC it was even WIP. I guess limits will be reviewed once the "core" modelization is OK (other limits looked weird last time I checked).

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

Thanks, reported :)

It was vs AI. We didn't had recollection of such an issue on Caucasus either, jojo (we didn't test it yesterday cause no time available then). Thankd for your input. :)

This is the difference between "you can" and "you should". As ZHeN said, you can switch to A/A (or CHARGES) anytime. And the aircraft will obey this. But you should stick to CHARGES at all time except when your payload is: - clean aircraft - air to air missiles (any type/number) - centerline fuel tank EMPTY In other words, as soon as you have: - fuel in the center tank - wing tanks (full or empty) - any kind of air-to-ground payload => then you should be on CHARGES The CONF light respects those rules.

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?

Flood lights? What's the relation with AP test lights (= this topic)?

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

Yeah, standard pressure. You point exactly what I was trying to say: All aircraft having the same setting. That's what we don't have IIRC in DCS today, as: - AI aircraft use ME altitude ("true" altitude) (if this is always equal to standard pressure altitude, then my point is moot, but the ΔZ we discussed here let me think it's not equal). - human aircraft use standard (if they think about it) or let their altimeter set at their departing QFE/QNH (most often than not: people who don't fly IRL or on other sims like FS don't have the "setting altimeter at transition" reflex). BTW I don't know what's the TL in Russia, but here in Europe it's much lower (and variable) than the FL180 of America: around 4-6000ft depending on the location & weather.

Then you probably use a facilitation option somewhere (DCS option, aircraft option in ME)?

Oui :)

I don't believe DCS simulates the standard QNH (1013/29.92/760) ; if done, this should help I guess ; perhaps with the next ATC management system (hope...)?

Razbam said they're aware, but other items have priority in the bug-fix process.

Or use [me] button in F10 then DON'T move the mouse while you read coordinates.

Uh? An offset waypoint is just that: a point whoose location is defined not by his own coordinates, but by an offset from another point coordinates.

Yup. Something is wrong, you don't have the correct TAKE OFF (DÉCOL / décollage) config. It checks several things, you probably missed a step in your check list (guess: FBW test or neutral trims).

I also have doubts about the HUD/HSI, saw a weird discrepancy last night (not always present), didn't had time to fully investiguate yet.