hotrod525

Yeah i went to 60+ pitch trying to match up the alignement, it didnot worked well, so i was woundering if it was "my fault" or if it need some tweak from Raz

Wags show he's video setting in the comms video, it clearly state DLSS

Hello folks, What are your best setting for boresighting NAVFLIR ? Whenever i start "hot", my NAVFLIR feel somewhat aligned, but whenever i do "cold" i have to boresight it. I assume that depending on "pitch" you're either in "coaxial" mode ( at 0) or that pitch "zero" the FLIR to a "known distance" (IE: Pitch 15 will align at 15 nm -- i'm making this up to demonstrate). On the backseat there is a post-it that say "Pitch 1.0" but it dosent feel like it. Thanks'

So in the end; The Datalink system (no matter how they call it and why) will be like the A10C one ? (let me finish) You'll be able to send text message to specific ship ? (its a nice mostly non used features sadly...) [End of the A10C comparaison], Then share threats and points (that you are likely to have if the mission maker didnot hide all units from MFD) and zones, wich is great to deconflict fire. Will you be able to share FCR detected target ? This might be behind the "classified" / "we dont want DCS to be this close to IRL" [paraphrasing Wags wich basicly said they control what capability they put in and how to not allow people to mis-use DCS, was a great interview] I suppose you'll be able to share Target Points ? This would proove extremely usefull for "seaker / shooter" or to increase SA having every one looking at the same thing. Now, he said that you have to send / reply answer (wich is logic since its not continuously broadcasting), how cockpit-mouse-clicking-button intensive that is ? Like if i wanna know where my mate is i send him a POSIT request ? I ask cause if you're are flying alone, flying and mousing is somewhat difficult (well to me, and i know about cursor) lol...

Well he had time to tease us with FCR, could have show us a TSD real quick with an upcoming more detailed video... but your are right, it is named "Datalink Setup". We can see another helo and it's FCR scan (i'd guess PRI + TM ?), could not make anything else out... EDIT : Nevermind, he's "PANNING" so we basicly only see he's ship... meh...

I dont want to be the guy who "complain" but the video made me feel more about a "How to set it" rathen that "what can it do". So what can we send / receive ? Can we see eachother ? Do we have to ping ? He talk about "acknoledging" so the system must be doing the "seen / read" we are all use to. And of course the most usefull stuff probably behind a "restricted barrier" and we surely wont have an E-8 JSTARS in DCS (even AI) anytime soon...

For the "Sake of DCS" i think ED should realy consider the Arty network thing. Being able to send a fire mission to AI and have it done trought cockpit would be an amazing capability

It's a matter of time before we get a "Hey everyone, Wags here from Eagle Dynamics, in this AH-64D video we are talking about the Improved Data Modem, commonly known as Datalink..."

oh, i'll have a look, i've tried with an eclipse schedule and it didnot work but i think it was my fault i might not have been in the proper bearing / angle to see it.

Hellfire usaly one-tap anything they direct hit, is it possible it hit fooliage or surrending ? Or might be bug since update, will try it on my side.

Hi folks, like title said, is it ? I somewhat acheived this purely hazardly (and i was smart enought to not take note... lol), i ever since tried to acheived back with no success, so is it a sun flare bug or the actual moon ?

"Added air target capability for Mark 45 Mod 4 127 mm naval gun" Thanks mate !

So you talk about the High Resolution Mapping ? If so, you can't store map, only "freeze" it / reprocess it / change the scale via reprocessing. Or the RCD (record) function of the MPD ?

acheived some 60+ nm shoot with those AGM88C, GREAT SUCCESS.

Is it possible to have deck gun engage air target ?

how do you fire HARM ? (And Harpoon will we are at it lol)

Yes i know, it still dosent change the situation we are in. Dont get me wrong, i enjoy this game, i have spended my money on alot of modules, i'm not complaining about the quality of it either. But if i have to choose between the two, i'll go for the playability. I agree with you, i'm more refereing to the time invested into it and the actual impact it have on the game. When they could have choose to go deeper on more wanted systems. TADs for A10, MSI on FA18, or whatever features peoples want. We rarely see anyone commenting on sub-system working in the background that many dont have any clue about. May be, i say 'may be', DCS niche itself on a very very narrow field, wich make them super unique but come at some expense, wich turn away people who might have buy the product / or more of it.

Yes, cause obviously i'm talking about far stretch thing that would never happen, just like Mi29 carrying HARM or SU24M carrying StormShadow. Of course i got the point of the purist, but i still stand on my ground. Allowing plane to carry a wider array of possible weapon is more fun. Simple as that. No dynamic campaign, no dynamic weather, missing core features etc. Like i said, i enjoy the realism, i'm just not an absolutist. As much details as they want can be put into sub-system, i do still believe that people enjoy DCS for a wide array of reason and "simulated fuel system / hydraulics" aint one of it. I mean when is the last time you engage the RCVRY Switch in the FA18 ? When is the last time you fly your A10C by the backup knob on the left console ? You see when i'm going with this. As Wags say : they have a finite amount of people and ressource. So they must choose, or in other words, sacrifice and delay thing in favor of the other. Just look at how many third-party stuff we use, LotATC, SRS, etc. Person A : Are you gonna buy A10C ? Person B : I dont know man... Person A : Well, know that fuel and hydrolics are fully simulated, but not the TAD nor the radio, you'll enjoy it so much when you blast AFV looking at those very gages. Person B : Oh woaw, i'm throwing my money at it right now. Anyway, opinions are worth one an other. Have a good one mate.

A bigger Playerbase = Money = Grow = Finaly having features promessed years ago but unable to be delievered due to lack of ressource. May be you enjoy the fact that airplane modeling involve super-deep-system modelin but it simply change nothing to gameplay like a weapon would or XYZ feature present on the said airframe in another country. I'm not enjoying F18 cause it simulate each engine, nor i'm enjoying A10C due to its simulated fuel system. The whole point here is not about doing super-uber-cheezy stuff, is just being less retrictive and more enjoyable to more casual player. You may enjoy you're super realistic flight with your squadron simulating every single procedure etc, but it wont change the fact that youll see tons of people taking off from taxiway in MP. Having known weapon / some relaxed standart that you can enforce in ME anyway in order to attract new player is not asking for WT crap, is giving ED more ressource so in the end giving us a better DCS core.

Still impress by that work' and the rate of production haha! But hum, since you're open for suggestion, would you be interested into making a LAV6 ? It would give some maple syrup flavor to DCS

I'm more into the let's carry AIM2000 on F18, AGM88C to F15E, FIM92 to AH64D, 'Close enought' RedFor aircraft, expand the scope of DCS out of it's puritism that is counter-productive. Let's take the stinger for the 64, I know "US Army AH64D Blk 2 didnot carry / have the wiring..." Yeah, so what ? DCS is a game, it dosent require the US Army to rewire it's entire fleet for ED to give it to us. It would allow people to play different nation (Japan / India / whoever carry the FIM on 64), it would bring more fun, more opportunity and those who can't live with it can simply deny the weapon in mission editor. This apply for many aircraft / weapon, key word here is : DCS = Game, Game = Having Fun, Fun Game = Sales, Sales = ED Grow, ED Grow = DCS Grow. "This software is for entertainment purpose only"

Well i'm late in the debate, but i do believe that "Full Fidelity" is a trap like he said. Of course, i want the closest thing to fly, but let's take AH64 as example, we wont have FIM92 missile because "its not the variant we are doing" while we can get frenkenstein KA50 "3". I mean, either its "FF" or its not, not just whenever dev see fit. Openess in DCS could bring alot... Like let's say : "we cant make a 1:1 SU27 due to lack of document" -> alrigth fine, can we guesstimate is close enought to be enjoyable ? Of course.

I'm not underestimating the missile, i just highly doubt that either "high maneuvring aircraft" or their guns are "obselete" / out of the game. "There is no abolute in combat".

Yeah until it's not. We should remember military error and try not to remake them all over again.

Might be a dumb question but; How in hell, the F15EX can dogfight if the F15E can't. New airframe ? FBW ?