LowGlow

Are these letters abbreviations for something?

OK, works for me now with the Sparrow. Thanks! I do a pilot lock on for that, the Jester way through menu is a bit awkward for me in low/medium range. I actually expected that Jester would automatically STT a target when I select the Sparrow, but OK.

Well, some kind of simplified solution would already be a huge improvement. The debris parts are already visualized, so a load of work has already been put into this field. I guess these object could be used for collision detection. But again, at least flying directly through a detonating airplane should cause some sort of damage.

Is it only me who thinks that low proximity frags should be correctly modelled in DCS? Right now, you see people shooting other jets down from just few meters away all the time, then flying through their fireball without getting any damage at all. That simply feels odd. No real pilot would voluntarily do that. I think this should be addressed in DCS, when you shoot down another jet from low proximity, or fly through its debris (after having shot it from adequate distance before), or when being too close when your own bombs denotate on ground, you should accordingly be punished by DCS with damage to your jet. How much damage and whether you might get luckily away with it sometimes, that's open for debate. But always getting away with it for free, that should really be changed IMO.

I got that, but I did provide real footage of a Viper clearly showing that the Viper is capable to perform a knife edge, which means it can sustain attitude with 90° bank without the nose falling down. Do you agree that this claim is backed by provided evidence? Then the 2nd part would be providing you a track replay of how we tried to perform a knife edge in DCS. But that would still require you to acknowledge the initial claim was correct, that it is possible to fly a knife edge with a real Viper.

BTW, how do you make these videos appear embedded on the forum? I only see options for inserting a link or embedding a picture, but not an option to embed a video.

+1

Got it. And yeah, after some more tests with your hints, I get a substantially higher hit ratio. Seems like the Phoenix really wants height, whereas an AMRAAM especially wants speed. BTW I couldn't fire the Sparrow when entering medium/low range. I guess I have to manually tell Jester to STT the target before being able to fire the Sparrow, right?

You mean Jester closes the Canopy when I begin with the startup procedure, and opening the canopy is not supported at all, right? At least I don't find something in the Jester menu to tell him exactly to open / halt / close the canopy.

Probably a bit OT, but why do I have to manually trim the pitch sometimes, e.g. after emergency jettison a heavy loadout?

Really? It never happened to me that start 1 would fail. Under which condition would that occur to you?

I toyed around with this a bit. In fact I did not see any difference in behaviour, no matter if anti-skid is on or off, except that you would get a warning tone and anti-skid error lights on, but slippery seems to be the same. In the Hornet it makes a huge difference whether ant-skid is on. Maybe it's really not implemented yet for the Viper?

A load of useful info, thanks guys! What I didn't get though, why avoiding the 20-30nm range window?

No thanks. I only use HOTAS and VR headset. That's all I needed for any DCS module ... so far.

Interesting, a complete new way to acquire a target lock, and nobody has made a video about it yet.

So you mean there is no anti-skid, or are you saying that you cannot disable anti-skid?

I just started to play around with the Tomcat in BVR. I am yet struggling with a very bad BVR hit ratio with the Phoenix missile, only about 20 percent or so even with dumb drones. Can someone share some hints on effective use of the Phoenix, e.g. typical firing range window, altitude difference to target, speed, angle, ... ? Something else noteworthy to know?

Disagree. Opening and closing the canopy is a base functionality. Users of a full fidelity model should not be obliged to buy additional hardware just for that. And with the necessary RIO communication in the Tomcat, you already have enough functions to be mapped to hardware buttons anyway. Most users don't have hundreds of buttons, so you map those features that you need to access quickly and often. The canopy functions are therefore a perfect fit for point and click instead.

I have a push button linked to the Tomcat's AP Toggle binding. My understanding is that each time the hardware button is pushed, it would toggle the AP Enabled flip switch on the left side of the autopilot cockpit panel. However that binding only reliably enables the AP Enable switch. Flipping that switch back to off does often not work that way, no matter how many times I push the hardware button, the AP Enabled flip switch would remain in its enabled position. I first thought that this was probably intentional, like that the AP could not be disabled under circumstances. But when I point click on the virtual AP Enable flip switch it always reliably pulls it back into its off position. So I guess something is wrong with the binding. For reproducing: this problem occurs to me reliably when the Tomcat is still on the ground. In the air it often works, but sometimes it also stops to work there. I haven't figured out what makes it to stop working in the air.

Maybe I am missing something here, but I literally see the canopy open/close buttons on the right side of the canopy frame, so they are not hidden, are they? And even if that's what I am seeing were not the realy canopy open/close buttons, and the actual ones are somewhere hidden beneath. So what? Why not making that clickable? I mean it also has the labels Open / Close / Hold there already.

I mean the buttons on the right side of the cockpit which cannot be clicked. I dont think it makes sense to map this to HOTAS, which I only do for functions that I use frequently. I am only playing in VR and have no problem whatsoever to just adjust my look below the canopy frame e.g. for clicking the Field/Carrier switches vs. directly looking at the Canonpy frame buttons. If somebody feels that way, maybe 2D players, then please make that at least an option. Thank you!

@BIGNEWYAny feedback on the additional info provided?

Is there a reason why the canopy open/close buttons cannot be clicked by the pilot? Will that be implemented?

Interesting, I wasn't aware about this modding tool. Thanks! I play around with these when a find more time. I'm curious whether that label mod would also fix the readability problem with the RIO upfront buttons, because those don't have white labels around them, but rather labels on or inside the buttons.

Hmm, so that mod needs to be installed into the DCS directory, not just in the user's saved games directory. Which means it needs to be reinstalled manually with every DCS update?