Rhrich

Do the mission work now? I’ve tried it a few times, but nothing ever happens. I’ve tried to just strafe and bomb the bad guys, but to no effect

With all respect: You’re not ready for landing. You’re not the first that’s impatient, we was that in my time long before any PC, so no shame in it. But you need to practice your airmanship first. Set unlimited fuel, load 4000, empty bags and 2-2-2. Then dirty up and fly at 15 aoa. Do that for 20 minutes. When that becomes ok, then start going down 200 feet, then up again. After that, practice transitioning back and forth from clean to dirty and then back again. While maintaining altitude. Then do straight in touch and gos. when you’ve done they for four hours, then you’re ready to try landing. good luck! I: It looks cool (seriously, that is a factor), but most importantly it bleeds energy, oh it also makes it easier to trim and get configured. 2: Whaf you should do? Practice.

The previous poster is correct. All you want to do is to deny the bomber a chance to strike. And, look at it from the other side. The hostile would have to assume it’s been fired upon if it has any indication of 14s. That’s what took out so many Iraqis in their war with Iran. That’s what made the Tomcat so special in the 70s and 80s. It could shoot before others even would see them on their radar (or rwr, the soviet tech wasn’t what it is ingame). Also, don’t assume soviet awacs nearby. They never had many, and they would likely not be used against a CVBG in a full scale war.

You wrote give me, so I assumed you got 12k and started with 4. But you’re saying the fuel totaliser stopped at 12? How much fuel did the tanker have?

There’s a -all- or -fus - setting on the probe. Could you have set it to fus(elage)?

It started with the B(U). Then someone said that the D had what the OP asked about, then another asked if that would have any use.

This is correct They would cooperate. Remember they also had the IRST, and it could be used seperatly. That’s also true of the lantirn. Never flown a two seater, but it does not require much imagination to think of many operational advantages

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this discussion. It’s been very interesting. question: What about the F-5 and the F-16?

Im sorry, but reasons discussed elsewhere I do not share any personal information. However I believe that number should correspond to the distance between your pupils. I got an optometrist to measure me. Perhaps you could do the same if you’re uncertain. Thanks again.

Just thought I would express my gratitude and say thanks Im not saying it looks perfect, but the IPD thing definitely did make it a lot better. Both attitude perception and overall look. I also checked force ipd, do you think that is correct? don’t understand why this wasn’t enabled by default, but I can wholeheartedly recommend mr. Draconius suggestion Altitude, not attitude.

Thank you. I’ve never messed with the IPD, I just assumed it was the same as the «set how far it is between your eyes» thing. Could it be beneficial to change that in DCS as well? A few comments: It’s altitude I think seems off. Distance seems somewhat better (although this is highly subjective). However I believe it’s considerably easier to spot stuff than in real life. Especially from distance and front facing in some planes with smaller front cross section, like 16, 21, etc

Hi all, How do you find the height perception in DCS? I have a Facebook Q3 headset, and I really feel I don’t get enough sense of the altitude. It’s decades since I was last in the cockpit of something decent, and my eyes aren’t what they used to be, but I’ve always thought that you don’t get sufficient impression of altitude and the enormity of one’s surroundings in DCS. But, as said, I’m old so I figured it just could be that. However, just a few days ago I was passenger on a civilian flight in a place covered by DCS. It was scattered clouds as well and I knew that altitude. So, I thought id recreate what I saw out of the window in dcs. And now I’m certain that there’s something off in altitude perception or perspective in DCs. anyone else noticed this? And is there settings I can change to rectify this? (It would not ve surprising if I’m to blame…)

Snort quoted Grumman employees who said it was a 13 g airplane and claimed that he had done 13G. The are plenty of claims of over 11g without any structural damage. In fact so many that I would say it’s verified. Before they had a g-meter that the pilots couldn’t reset it was apparently common to treat the Tomcat as a 9G airplane. Back in the old days we treated those limits more as advisory. In any case, it’s clear that both the 6,5 and the claimed design of 7,5 was more about longevity and an effort to reduce maintenance than concern about structural failure. That does not mean I don’t think a pilot in a stateside LFE pulling 9Gs isn’t a douche, but I would recommend and commend him for doing so to evade a missile over soviet backed <profanity>whole countries.

Its no wonder. Most who might want a grip has got it. And while it might be great in the real tomcat (though I would prefer a different layout), I guess its not that suited to a sim environment where you would want more buttons to compensate for lack of cockpit. the real reason I write here though, is an encouragement to those who own it: Make sure to take good care of yours. The item is quite unique and it’s probable that no one will produce anything similar again for a long time. you might therefore own something more hidden and sought after than MH17s black boxes: A piece of PC equipment that might retain and even increase in value.

I’ve been trying my hand at bombing. First practice bombs, but then the real stuff. When I switched I was surprised how much the accuracy decreased from practice to live. As I didn’t seem to kill anything. However after using the F-keys to follow the bombs down I see that they do indeed hit or land very close, but it seems that almost only a direct hit will result in a kill. I’ve seen the result of the bombs in reality countless times, and there’s not a chance a soft skinned truck would survive a close miss. Am I doing something wrong in the setup? Or could it be lag causing the bomb damage to not go around the animated impact of the bomb?

The F-14 does not in any way behave realistically on the ground. Especially not in wet weather. I’ve had my share of landings in wet and snowy conditions, and fast jets does not preform like that. However, I believe it’s not just the models fault. Some of the trouble people have is probably caused by the fact that the model is sensitive to differential braking. And many people’s rudder pedals isn’t that precise. Be careful, and also consider binding an axis to all brakes.

The headline is a play on «have you tried turning it off and on again?», but in all seriousness: Jester often annoys me because he can’t find targets that should be child’s play to find. However, I’ve found (or think I have) that he is considerably better if when I’m on the deck tells him to turn off the radar, and I’ll keep it that way until we are 15-20nm from the ship. its hard to know for sure, but I’ve run test on a few missions, and as far as I can tell he picks up and hold radar tracks significantly better if I do it that way. im sure that isn’t intentional, but bugs sometimes creep in even the smallest gap. Anyone else noticed this? Oh, and also, and this I haven’t tested, but he seems to preform poorer if the TCS doesn’t have an image. But that I’m not sure about.

Aar has become easier for every patch. Now the basked behaves like a magnet and is pulled onto the pole if you get somewhat close. Unfortunate. Use bomb mode. It makes your speed a little less twitchy and as it locks wing sweep you’ll can roughly trim the plane before you’re perfectly on speed. The key to aar is to match the speed of the tanker. Then use muscle memory for throttle position and give little burst of throttle (or vice versa) if you need to close, and quickly return the throttles to their former position. Also, irl you would prefer to use the rudder for a lot of your correction. In DCS, use what you have best quality of. so, if you have a good stick (say Virpil with extension), but <profanity>ty rudder pedals, then use the stick.

How do you define dogfight? To me, a dogfight is 1v1 guns only, mano a mano. First of all, if you find yourself in such a situation with the plane with the longest stick and radar of all - you’ve failed. However, I’ve found all planes, regardless of AI skill, quite easy to beat in the Tomcat B, except the Viper. Even if I drag him down and slow, the viper still is a challenge, though I almost always beat or draw. In general the AI doesn’t seem very clever and resorts to cheating ( I think) instead of outfighting.

Ive never had intimate contact with the USN, but as a general rule: Back in my time the S in SOP was often taken as suggested. Pilots do what’s most safe. If something happens, the less you have to worry about asymmetric, the better. That’s true even if your engines isn’t two an a half tennis courts apart.

I did. Unless I’m mistaken it was terrible. For example, it didn’t care if I did everything right when I dropped LGBs, it wanted me to drop it according to a script. Did a test: Did everything as stated in the script, dropped when I was supposed to, then masked and went in clouds. The bomb still hit its target. What’s the point then?

You don’t want to go too high in the Tomcat, the wing sweep works on Mach not indicated. So in the thin air your in a severe disadvantage against planes like the flanker or the eagle.

If you read what I write, it’s clear that I’m not talking about jester, but other aspects. If I’m not very much mistaken, you where one of those defending their decisions on worn cockpit interior. My point is that jester doesn’t give an realistic example of flying the F-14 and that it should be easy to improve it. While in other aspects they’ve gone overboard to create what they regard as realistic.

I would like a more knowledgeable Jester. While I understand Jester can’t have «god mode», he should be more knowledgeable than he currently is. For example: When I get data feed from awacs jester should be able to see that feed and point his radar towards the hostiles. I shouldnt need to tell him where to look when it’s so obvious. I guess some will defend this by saying that jester is a glorified way to control the radar, and that I should expect to control it. but the same people often defends the strange ideas of creators by saying they’re making as authentic experience as possible. Well, an unthinking and stupid jester isn’t a tomcat experience. so at least give jester access to and knowledge about the data feed. Also, having nevner flown a two seater I can’t be sure, but I guess the Rio will despense chaff or flare when asked to do so by the pilot (in addition to when he judge it necessary). Give the pilot a way to tell him to dispense it. I’ve said this before, and then someone showed me some PC script that allowed the pilot to press the rios buttons. But that’s not what I’m asking for, and it would be unrealistic since it’s instant. make a key press possible to tell jester drop chaff and drop flare. Ideally leave a unknown time gap between say 0,2-0,9 seconds to simulate reaction time.

Depends on what plane you meet. I would suggest going for a drive. Stick your hand out of the window. Angle it a bit, you’ll notice it pulls up or down. Angle it more and it’ll pull more. Keep going, and suddenly it’s mostly pulled back. Use that as a mental picture. Carve as a skier skis down, not skid as he does to slow down.