LorenLuke

You might get a singular lase ranging blip in real life IF they use it, but that's wildly different from a laser beam that HAS to be on the entire time the missile is flying towards the target.

Except the fact that the TOW has an IR strobe on the back that the sensor on the launcher uses to steer the projectile. This means the only way the target knows is to either see the missile or have the missile miss, and the target sees the strobe. By contrast, a lot of (though not exclusively) the Soviet and successor stuff shoots a laser beam that the target (aiming it has the proper warning sensor) CAN detect and see, as the back of the missile itself basically has a laser interferometer to guide it on to the target. So while the practice of how to aim a SACLOS missile is consistent bergen the two types, the actual mechanism, including what something like a Hokum or Apache can pick up a a target, are very different.

Step 4.5, SSS Up to select the Maverick.

But can I buy a shirt without a module? I didn't see an option for that.

Just for clarity as an intended Steam purchaser- Are the shirts only available through a key purchase for ED's store?

Probably the best way to frame what it did (granted, DCS players may not necessarily adhere to this practice) is similar in some ways to JTAC. For a squad, the biggest ordinance they can carry might be a recoilless gun, or a 60mm mortar. But you give them a radio, suddenly it's like having a bunch of Mk82s in your back pocket. So in a way that the bombs on the jet are the JTAC's, the Kiowa can command the Apache's ordnance. So with a flight of 3 with typical loadouts, the Kiowa might not be thought to have 2 Hellfires, but 26 (2+8 from each other aircraft). Obviously, if they want to break off and do their own thing, you can't stop them, but scouting for targets and directing fires as the 'Hunter' part of 'Hunter-Killer' teams is absolutely what this aircraft is designed to do.

May 21st, 2024.

So, a couple things it has that the Apache doesn't- APKWS laser rockets, and Stinger missiles. While the Gazelle might have the Mistral, you can't load anything but those on the aircraft, while the kiowa has two mix and match pylons of two missiles each. Additionally (though more extreme), the OH-58D has its observation equipment above the cockpit, like the Gazelle, although much higher and above the rotor, allowing it to observe from cover, giving it surveillance and coordination capabilities beyond what we have. To your questions of working with friends, let's look at two points raised- 1) Laser Designator. Theoretically, you absolutely can do it as described where you lase for missiles the whole time. Alternatively, you can use the laser as a 'hey, look here', they use the LST, and then one on target, you slap their back and say 'go crazy'. 2) Talk on/Coords. You absolutely can do this, and I believe Kiowa supports MGRS (and Apache only supports 8digit MGRS input), so if you're very close together, you're looking at 2 letters and 6/8 numbers to hand off. With a good crew, it's not terribly difficult or time consuming to do. And finally- Both. By generating any target point(s) for them, they can turn them into an acquisition source to throw hellfires at in a high arc from behind cover, and then you lase the targets (also from behind cover), and you can engage units in the target zone without retaliation.

Only one player can control the aircraft at a time, and all the control inputs inside the the vehicle are repeated in the other stations (the controls themselves are animated to match the inputs, regardless of who's controlling the aircraft). You can request control of the aircraft, and the controls are handed off to the other player, while the controls of the first person who was initially controlling the aircraft no longer work (until the controls are handed back).

Or maybe just till next year, since people are all worked up expecting it to come out.

I think those expectations should have been set when wags said it would be coming in the 'may/june update'.

I suspect it will not be in tandem with the Kola release. However, to be fair, Wags did say May or June, implying late May/early June, which is in line with the 6-week update patch schedule. (Video Timestamped)

There's nothing stopping you from trying all of them safely even if it comes out on May 31st. Unless your wife and/or loan sharks are tracking your purchase history.

I guarantee you won't lose any more time preordering it and waiting, compared to waiting for it to drop and buying it then.

My issue with this whole thing is just how much of this whole thing doesn't make sense. And I do mean the WHOLE thing. You talk about accepting money, or the like, but that just feeds the narrative that swirled this whole soup sandwich. You have the issue of payment and demonization of ED, with some of the RB devs claiming not to have been paid for some time, despite the product still being sold. People come out to say 'Oh, Nick Grey is stiffing RAZBAM to go buy another airplane'... I'm just surprised there's not more 'Famously quick-tempered Ecuadorian CEO might have made poor decisions, blames others' narratives floating around. I mean, if people are going to go full speculation mode, I'm surprised there's not any 'The third party got managed into the ground and the head dude stiffed his employees and blamed their client to cover his own posterior' rumors. As for going 'tit for tat', mind whose statement started this. I don't think it'd be defamatory to describe the more-vocal party here as 'hotheaded', and there's a not-insignificant amount of evidence to this fact. If he's truly been wronged, what legal ground would enhanced by such a public statement? Why have a public statement, if you have rock-solid legal/contractual standing? If he has the receipts as he claims, just deliver them (to your lawyer or to the public, doesn't matter... just be consistent). But while the ED reply (probably not most professional, but still far more restrained) calls the whole thing a 'breach of contractual obligations', then we find out one of the devs mentioning a Supertucano project that (via those same devs' wording) people speculate to have used ED Intellectual Property in some unauthorised way. If someone took my work as a contractor and used it for someone else, I don't think anyone would say I shouldn't be upset and seek remedy. Perhaps not-paying isn't the answer, but I bet you whatever answer exists is there in bold print in the contract. Which, unless there's ANOTHER provision to void itself on breach, I imagine it's still in effect with all the relevant parts in play. All of the claims about what's even going on are based on the slimmest of information (which no right person could call 'evidence') and yet you have so many people up in arms based on simply Zambrano's say-so. I pieced together the handful of statements out there. I could be wrong, but I don't think the conclusion I arrived at is that crazy. And this still doesn't address ultimately that it's not going to just be ED that suffers over this. You'll have both the community in terms of trust, and the other 3rd party developers being held to even HIGHER standards, because some other company was being stupid about their contract. And for the breakout 3rd parties, that money could be the difference between having the fleshed out module people would love, and them going under because everyone wants a guarantee of more for their purchase price than they otherwise would have.

The biggest thing is that this whole thing is all so tragic for the community. This single statement by Ron has created this massive rift between the ED playerbase, and ALL the vendors. RB can say 'We want to assure you that it has never been nor will it be our intention to abandon our products', but I don't know how 'We're not adding features, fixing bugs, or doing jack until this is resolved' is in any way a commitment to your customers. If I were to buy the Strike Eagle or the Harrier today, where's the ongoing commitment to me as a customer if your development is paused? Hell, if your BUGFIXES are paused? If they want to complain about non-/partial-payment for all their work... can they explain to me how they'll now still happily take (near) full-price for a project that they've not exactly made clear they aren't just going to walk away from, half-done? You know, besides 'I'm totally not doing what my actions are saying'. And even worse, because of this craptacular behavior, now people are gun-shy. Those angry at ED won't buy another ED module, and those that have seen this infantile temper tantrum are so stunned by the idea that something they bought for full price could be abandoned half-completed, they don't want to buy any module until it leaves Early Access. What does this do for the SANE third parties that are already ED partners? Folks like Aerges, Deka, Heatblur? What about the NEW ones who haven't even built their customer bases here, and arguably need that money the most? Grinelli, MilTech, Red Star, Flying Iron? All these people are affected and ironically, that single RB statement about developers not getting paid may lead to far more of those developers not getting paid because a famously short-tempered CEO acted out (because of circumstances I personally believe were wholly catalyzed by his own poor actions), and now every customer is paranoid of another developer doing the same thing; and EVERY SINGLE OTHER THIRD PARTY DEV has to suffer as a result. It's just a goddamned travesty.

Because if the main delay they took more than a month to fix didn't exist, it'd presumably be released a month sooner than May.

YES! THAT!

I believe the C-Scope also displays the icons on the TADS, as well, but I'm not 100% certain on that.

Unlikely, though this was said back before the patch was moved to April 10th. (Timestamped video.)

Currently, there's no synchronization for multicrew, though depending on updates and what's included, that may change. Given that there's no synchronization at this time in game, only targets you have personally scanned will show up. However, if you're the only human player in the aircraft, scanning vehicles from the back seat, and then moving to the front seat will still have them present on your FCR and TSD until you start another scan.

Piggybacking off of this, though you can't have the radar scanning while you use the TADS, you can still bring up the FCR page with the icons for the detected vehicles still shown. In this page, you can use the cursor to select a particular target (or place it over the NTS text) while the TADS is slaved to the FCR acquisition source in order to look at targets on the FCR. Note that this data will degrade and become inaccurate over time (especially for moving targets) and you'll need to switch to the FCR and rescan in order to refresh target locations (which I believe will require you to reset your acquisition source back to FCR when you switch back to TADS).

IIRC, it'll try and move to face forward any time it's not active, but it'll still maintain its initial scan heading during a scanburst, or during a continuous scan.

SRS only seems to be able to detect the position of the cockpit you started in. So while it may follow adequate rocker position from the pilot seat, I believe the only way to detect the positions in the CP/G seat is to be slotted into it (rather than start as pilot and then swapping seats).

FCR range only goes out to 8km for moving targets. Stationary targets show up only within 6km.