CaptJodan

Thanks Morkva for the update! Nice to see the mavs working again!

Yeah, I use the F-18 for SEAD. I was kind of surprised because it looks like they included 2 pods, the ELINT pod and I think a jamming pod. Of course, there are 2 slots for jammers along the side of the aircraft anyway so an extra pod there didn't make sense. But on the A-7 they have the ELINT pod and the LLTV pod from the Su-25T. So maybe they meant to put the LLTV pod there (which would have given us the ability to fire mavs) but got the wrong pod? Just a guess. Another thing I noticed was how slow the top speed seems to be. I know the bug isn't very fast, but I couldn't get it to break the sound barrier at low level with a clean configuration. Doesn't seem terribly spry up high either. It's a minor thing because it's just nice to fly something with SEAD capability and the work done to make it able to air refuel and do carry work is great, so I'm not complaining. Still enjoying it! :thumbup:

Thanks for that update Morkva. Been trying to get the F-18C for days and was just coming here to ask why I kept seeing that message. Appreciate the hard work you're doing and the communication as well!

Thanks Zaelu. That explains it!

Possibly off topic but this is concerning sling loads... I noticed the latest video on sling loads. Currently I only see Cargo1 as an option to pick up, but the video shows a different cargo pallet and suggests there are many cargo options to haul. Is that for a later version coming up or am I missing where all the different cargoes are located?

This thread will have absolutely zero effect on things but..... Someday I hope to see news from ED or Leatherneck of a true F-16.

I prefer it that way, personally. The community gives these devs a hard time, with demands and never-ending questions. The devs deserve a little fun and revenge, and I think it's fun to speculate when they drop these hints and watch the board scramble to figure out what it might be. Once the cat's out of the bag, everyone'll be clamoring for the next update, demanding a release date, arguing over performance charts, and some will be disappointed by the choice they made instead of "x" plane, or more likely, just be so psyched for the new planes that it will make the wait for their release all the more unbearable. One day I hope one of these developers will come out with a new plane, completely unannounced. "Surprise, you didn't see this coming." That would be fun to see.

Never going to happen, but I sure wish they (or anyone) would. Been in love with that plane ever since Janes' Advanced Tactical Fighters. Seriously, I don't think there's the demand for the plane for anyone to build it any time soon, but I would be so happy to see that plane in game. I'm thinking one WWII bird of some kind (something for everyone?) and then something to do with the A-G radar. I would love to see an A-6 or F-16. The latter would certainly draw a crowd like the F-14 has. But I suspect a Red plane on this front (back to the "something for everyone" comment). Incidentally, I know Cobra takes great delight in watching the community fall over themselves trying to figure these things out. Don't worry, Cobra, some of us like the suspense of trying to figure it out. Entertaining to watch too.

I was actually surprised to see the wing tip issue still there. Figured with rumors that later builds already addressed the problem and the quickness of the latest patch, I figured it was one of the big motivators for the patch itself. It was an issue taken to heart by those in the know. It's not a complaint, but it actually was the first thing I tested. Maybe they're tweaking the G effects with it so the pilot will have warning too.

Looking forward to giving this a go.

+1 Not sure what the best solution is, per say, but something to remove it in some fashion so gauges can be seen by non Track-IR folks would be appreciated.

In the rush for bug reports, first impressions, and general frustrations that can occur with a new release, it's often times hard to remember how much time went into the project. I have my issues, same as anyone else, but I think there can be no doubt in my mind that this is THE most accurate representation of the BF-109 on the sim market to date. I agree, the Dora was great, but somehow the 109 is better. Probably just a personal preference, but I suspect out of the three WWII fighters thus far, this plane will be my ride for quite some time (I'm still confounded by getting the most out of my P-51, and the Dora, while an excellent aircraft that I still will fly and enjoy when I do, just doesn't speak to me like the 109 does). ED did another great job, and I look forward to the further refinements they make on the aircraft. Definitely an aircraft worth the wait.

I've watched this thread with some measure of confusion. It always surprises me when people have this sense of entitlement. Thankfully not all of the community feels that way. But it seems many people believe they are owed a release date. I applaud DCS for not giving us a firm date. It's still November. That means they have not broken their release timeframe yet. Smart move on their part if you ask me. Given how the community tends to freak out if it's three hours late. If they had aimed for the beginning of the month this also get some extra time to work out any last-minute bugs that they catch. All in all a very good way to do it. Thing is we still have gotten no indication that they do not plan to still bring out the K-4 before the end of November. So my response mirrors a lot of other posters here. Crack open a beer, calm down, and enjoy the outside world. We all know we won't be doing that once the 109 comes out.

I've had this issue for years as well. Wondered if it was my soundcard or something. I still think it might be as it starts out immensely loud when I flip to the F6 view, then will sometimes drop back down to a more manageable sound level. Seems to only be with the F6 view. All other sound regimes are stable. Really blows people out of the room, though.

I think it is important for everyone voting to remember that "MAYBE", regardless of what is really going on. I'm sure there is more than just customer preference that BST is weighing here. Time and complexity of development for the various models in question being two other key factors I'm sure they're having to weigh with their decision. I'm thrilled that they're at least considering other options besides the G. They could have just as easily gone forward without ever considering other options. If they come back with "look guys, we just can't effectively do anything but the G to the DCS standard" I'll accept that. Or if they feel development might be too problematic (access of information, complexity of systems, what have you). If nothing else, this poll at least shows that the community would prefer to have something that can shoot at tanks. Now BST is free to do what they want to do with that information. Personally, I'm taking the approach that this poll may give them evidence they needed to see what the community wanted, and they'll factor that into the other variables they have to consider before making a final decision on which model to pursue. I look forward to hearing what they decide.

I'm imagining that the W will likely take longer to produce than either the G or S, and it's something many flight simmers need to remember. It's probably going to be a major step up in terms of combat systems from what Belsimtek has done so far. Having said that, waiting longer for a more modern W is something I personally am willing to go for. It takes a long time for any module to be produced, and for me having a blue side combat heli that can go into zones as hot as the Ka-50 can is worth the extra time it might take.

This...except I'd probably buy anyway cause I haven't missed a single module and why start now? (and I've enjoyed everything Belsimtek puts out). Still, the G is is a hard sell for me given it's similar role. It's past time to have another true combat helo the likes of the Ka-50. The S is...good. The W would be so much better.

Works with several tests for me.

Happens to me as well. I think it's new since the latest patch, actually, as I've never had this kind of issue up till then. Something to look at? While we're on the subject, cold starting when the environment is cold outside, (-10 or 20 or something) with the autostart has never worked. I'm assuming there is either a procedure that differs from that script for cold weather starts, or prop planes of that era just can't start in bitter cold temps? (this seems true for other planes like the 190.) Any hints?

May not be pretty, but it *is* possible to land on the carrier. carrier.trk

Absolutely. While I don't MP at all, I can understand why many people making missions would want to limit certain parameters like fuel quality as time goes on to ensure accurate or "balanced" engagements. I'm a big believer in options. Pilum's suggestion just makes no sense to me, though. We'll eventually get the Me-262. There's not going to be much "balance" between the 262 and a P-51, but historically those two aircraft went up against each other. If one wants a truly balanced fight, where pilot is pitted against pilot, you face off in the same aircraft. Otherwise, each aircraft will have advantages and disadvantages that any pilot has to face, and it's intrinsically not balanced.

I guess the answer there is "don't fly the 72'' P-51". Sounds like it'll be an option to check, and I'm sure if you're a MP player, there will be fights between the 67'' and Dora. I see nothing wrong with including a historically accurate option (emphasis on "option") for pilots to decide to choose or not to choose.

Fair enough. I'll take the realism as is. It's just nice to see it does have an effect.

Then yeah, took me a looooooong time to find it. I clearly was activating my oxygen supply in other aircraft. Perhaps auto-start takes care of that in other AC whereas you have to remember in this one? I agree. A bit of that G force magic subtly affecting you would go a long way to warning the pilot that you might have forgotten something.

Curious thing during causal flight today. I've never bothered with an oxygen system in any previous aircraft before, but today while travelling at 32,000 ft for a while, I suddenly got transported out of my plane (there were no units to kill me in this mission). The plane eventually rolled over and lawn darted. Looking back at the track log, it did indeed show my pilot died two minutes before lawn darting. I'm guessing this means that oxygen deprivation is modeled? (I feel stupid if it was modeled in previous aircraft, I've never had this happen before). If so, bravo. Serves me right for being a lazy pilot, looking at the manual as I passed over the oxygen system and going "Yeah, that never matters in a sim". Note of warning, though. There's no warning that you're going to pass out and die. Pilots beware.