GrayFox23

Guess pictures tell more than a thousand words, here is how a kneeboard hint could look like: null For verification, this is how the real world approach still looks like today (mag numbers changed over years, but the absolute shape of the approach is the same): Also makes it quite clear why the approach is like that - when your nav aid is offset, you always need to come up with a compromise: either end up with the correct heading, but parallel to the RW, or with an angled heading like at SFAL.

Just finished the campaign and I'm really impressed - the missions feel realistic (of course with the historic scenario and research you put into it), but at the same time entertaining with all the custom voice-overs and triggers. Things I noticed so far: 1) The pre-flight "Mission Planner" gives away trigger zones and general spoilers - I know mission makers often are incoherent with this, but I suggest either adding a note that players are not supposed to look at it, or even better hide all the "non-intel-known" things (there is a boolean setting for hiding elements in the "mission planner" view) 2) In M2, I did manage to land but was wondering about the crazy angle - turns out there were two things coming together (and fully looking into the "why" took me quite some time): * It seems you modified the approach chart delivered with the game which states a final approach course of 270° magnetic - which is correct for 2019 with 3° E MagVar * But the mission is set in 1982, for which DCS models 6° MagVar - already giving a 3° E error * Then this specific approach seems to have a peculiarity where you should always come in at a 4° E angle right until the runway threshold (runway is at 269° true and the DCS 2019 chart has an approach course of 270° magnetic + 3° MagVar = 273° true) * for real life verification check link 2.24-3 at www.falklands.gov.fk, which states 271° for 2025 with 2.2171° MagVar - so again making you come in at 273° true while the runway is at 269° true - this also becomes very apparent when zooming into the approach in navigation tools) * In sum this currently results in a 7° E error even when perfectly flying the charted approach, which at that visibility is extremely challenging. So I suggest reducing the plotted courses by 3° to conform to what a 1982 approach chart would have looked like and maybe even adding a note that the approach by default is planned from a 4° E angle Overall a great campaign - rivaling some paid ones and definitely better than some stock ones . (hope my #2 does not sound too nitpicky, I had fun researching those details and might be wrong - always open for inputs/clarifications)

Flying race quads in real life, I tried this mod today using my actual remote and I'm really impressed by the flight model. (especially since DCS was never built to simulate those kinds of flight physics) Sure for experienced flyers it might still feel a bit "floaty" and powered down, but considering how hard it is to learn the proper axis/throttle coordination with quadcopters and most DCS players will control this with their HOTAS setup I'd say you found a perfect compromise (also looked at the special options to maybe give it more kick, but didn't have more time to experiment with those settings yet). Overall very impressive pulling this off within DCS!

Its still this problem: So either modify core files for FC aircraft (will break IC, so best only apply if you know what you are doing and/or using a mod manager to quickly apply/remove the fix). As stated here, loading into the dependent FC aircraft also works but is a bit annyoing...

It is a funny coincidence that I started using this mission just some weeks ago (v.7.3.x), thought "wow, this is very well done" and now there is an update. Only flying F-14 (and T-45), so if I read it correctly the update doesn't affect me too much, but still wanted to give out a big thanks to you :).

Angels 32, love the clouds

Just finished the campaign and gotta admit I really liked it. Like the C-101 in general, it really teaches you stuff and enforces good airmanship (the IFR navigation in mission 1 was already discussed in this thread, but also the combat missions later on when you are just given a VOR radial, DME distance and intel picture of your target - at first they seem daunting, but then you realize its really all you need to find any AO ). Mission 10 especially is brutal (but from the briefing and voice comms its also made clear that it is supposed to be like that). I lost all my wingmen at the first engage because they are immediately shot down by the AAA trying to do traditional dive attacks (poor guys, think they are supposed to be the fighter pilots I trained before , but then again I know the AI problems are in the game engine and can't really be affected by mission makers). The most effective way to take out the 4x AAA seemed to sneak up through the valley at ground level, short pop-up, taking out a single AAA, then back to ground level maneuvering left/right to (hopefully) evade the fire of the remaining AAAs that at this point have turned towards you. Even then I had to fly back to base and rearm once, since your rockets and gun seem to require multiple 100% on target hits to fully destroy them. (or maybe my aim just is that bad...) So in general a wonderful campaign that really tingles the "I feel like a better pilot now" feeling when you succeed. Everything seems to still work as of late 2024, its mainly the last mission that might seem disproportionately hard - but as I wrote even that might be by design to force you to get creative.