Azrayen

1v1 head on, iso alt and AMRAAM-equipped F-15C? No way you have a chance, and it's realistic, so it's meant to be reproduced in DCS. Not 1v1? Not head-on or iso-alt? F-15C with Sparrows only? Then you're beginning to talk... ;)

(worth precision: at this time & technology level; indeed MICA (smaller) have a datalink)

Probably true, too, indeed :) But it still can loft (a bit?) which it doesn't do in DCS (no more than the Sparrow, by the way).

You don't have 1700L, only 2000L in DCS. 1300L is fine by me. Of course, more would be nice. But hey, that's a simulator, not a whish-granted game. More would be nice IRL too. Climb, you'll drink less.

I mean Jx values seem too high at the moment. I assumed that reducing the AB thrust (if that's the way to fix the problem) would probably reduce the MIL thrust too. I can't comment on MIL thrust at take off since comparison were made against RL videos = always full AB. But, to get back to the OT, current super-cruising capabilities feel too important too. I don't have much data on this, I can just tell the aircraft should be able to barely supercruise (that is, M1.1 or 1.2) > FL400 with 2x Fox 2s.

Mhmm... I don't think so. AFAIK, there is no reply. The datalink is one-way: fighter (radar) to missile; not the other way around. Remaining time calculation may be adjusted following target maneuvers, but not much more ;)

OK. Engine is too powerful now, should be fixed soon. Take care, non-AB take-off will become more difficult (as they should be). Fuel itself... well, it's realistic! And you just need the AB to take-off (cut it @ 250kts) so... Use external tanks too, it most often what's done IRL!

Bonjour, Un template c'est un patron, ou un modèle en français (pense couture). Un patron pour réaliser des livrées. Ça ne se place nulle part directement dans le simu. Ça s'utilise avec un logiciel graphique. Les livrées produites, elles, pourront être ajoutées au simu.

What for? To have an "exploit" at hand?

No. Quite the contrary in fact. MIL = 100% dry thrust (no afterburner)

Battery power? ;)

AFAIK core mod files are part of DCS World for each and every installation.

Yes.

I disagree PiedDroit. VENT (ventilation) ; engine is spooled (a little) but no start plug ignited (and no fuel delivered). G or D ; select which start plug will be used for ignition (ground start). VENT/G/D is correct.

The PPA is not yet functional.

You shouldn't count on that too long: Razbam said they will implement more realistic fire limitations for the 530, and that would include the need for STT to be allowed to shoot. ;)

Probably true but... why waste a 530 against a heli anyway?:D

That's up to the players, really. Simulated GCI doesn't exist indeed, but human GCIs do. Using LotAtc for example... It's a all new game. ;)

Nice, use of the police light (from the reat seat) at 4:13.

I edited for more precisions about EFF.

No there isn't. There are laws about the "drift" (not sure they're implemented now) but there is no manual switching. ALL (short for allegement, declutter) is for... declutter. EFF (short for effacement(*)) has no function in real war scenarii, and serves as a master arm when using simulated weapons (this is not implemented in DCS, so no function for EFF). (*) in this case, effacement (de la sécurité armement fictive) has the meaning of "cancelling" the (simulated) master arm safety i.e. allowing the simulated shot to take place.

Turn them off, then :D

No, that's not a good advice. Doing that won't force an update every time.

Extend them manually in case of engine problems, during approach & landing, to increase safety margins vs critical AoA. Retract them manually in case of auto-logic failure (for whatever reason) that would leave them extended when they shouldn't. That's all.

I beg to differ. At the very least, energy bleed was too low previously. I have yet to obtain confirmation about how it it now, but don't take previous versions as a reference.