markom

That's what "early release" implies... At least monthly updates, until glaring bugs are ironed out. For example... the one where you cannot place bullseye, because it's way off the map.

You totally can:

Interesting. All the docs relating to ED's F/A-18 that I've seen refer to the 33,000. I have not seen the 34,000 number anywhere.

For me, the bar for "is there damage" in the game is whether it beeps at me... I don't believe external visual inspection yields the same result as it would have in real life. In other words, thank you for confirming the damage

What do you mean no damage... you can quite audibly hear the wheel damage alert on that carrier trap.

What did checklist page say your weight was? A few "experiments" I did with the new flight model tell me that anything above 34,000 lbs means at least one bent wheel. Under that, anyone's guess. Under 33,000 (which is documented max weight for a trap), as long as you're under -900 fpm, you are good.

Exactly right! That implies some brokeness and a a fast turnaround at bug-fixing. It appears we've gotten only one part of that bargain in exchange for our money :-).

I finally got around to spending time with the new update (also new PC and a few more panels needed to be installed). While I am not an expert in any way about what a real Hornet may behave like, or a real jet for that matter, one thing I noticed and like quite a bit is that the engines are a lot more responsive. In the past I had flashbacks of flying PMDG's 737 -- move throttle lever, wait, hear 'em spool up. Now, it's a lot faster. It's still not as nimble as Viper, but certainly nice. It was fun using the new model for AAR, and I am happy that it didn't change much for me. If anything, it appears to be easier to do back-and-forth dance, especially when I inevitably lose the basket. Never before the model change did I have 4 consecutive "OK" carrier traps, and last night I did just that... So, all in all, I kinda like it.

Make one... it should be dead simple.

51.1789° N, 1.8262° W

+1 I noticed the same.

Sure. Except I don't fly jets, only pistons. But you know... details and artistic license.

Superior pilot is the one whose decisions don't lead to them needing their superior piloting skills That aside, my progress was F-16->F/A-18, and I am really not looking back with much nostalgia. Landing on fixed runways is boring. That said, I don't fight other airplanes :-).

To be frank, that's probably pilot and not the airplane :-).

You can use 'reject' switch for this.

Awesome stuff, thank you so much. Here's another nit... Any chance I can persuade you to drop the page numbers from the PDF? Or at least the checklist pages? I have them printed and laminated, and page numbers interfere with my CDO (similar to OCD, just alphabetical, as it ought to be).

Minor nit for the "Pt. 2" page: OXY Flow OFF should also include OBOGS off (Pt. 1 has both, Pt. 2 should too)

I came here to write "me too" on noticably slower startup times since the last patch.

Going to be smartypants and say that it's your AmazonBasics hub to blame here, but mostly because I already know from Discord

AAR: amazing how the skill is persistent. I didn't use the DCS for about a month and a half recently, and then jumped into the plane and went AAR. It took me about 5 minutes to get it all sorted out again. Learning AAR is a great sense of accomplishment, I have to confess. I strongly recommend it!

Well said. It's really puzzling why folks do this.

Thank you all for helping out. I will still try to do the right thing. Workarounds are great, but see them as last resort. Here I am still hoping ED will add this tiny missing thing.

Well, it's my duty as the user to ask for a missing feature in the wishlist forum

Yeah, you mentioned this before. But that's really not a solution for the problem of the missing bindings. It's a workaround. Thanks, however!

That's the *exact* thing I am asking for. Perhaps I'm doing something wrong?