Muchocracker

The helmet wasn't aligned during your coldstart. They added that function some years ago.

You're gonna have to make tracks and demonstrate it not working for you. I use baro alt to hold orbits over 5 degree bank angles all the time with absolutely no issues

The encyclopedia is not accurate and doesn't reflect what is in the actual LUA files.

yeah this is still an issue even if you use the MFD bypass line. I saw it last night.

the mission may be out of date and still has the bombs loaded using the old fuse system.

Source? It has absolutely everything do with the NATOPS, which makes explicit reference to HALF/FULL flaps settings being a separate set of flight control laws from AUTO that are takeoff and landing focused. Nor is there any stated permitted use of AUTO in takeoffs and landings. The procedure is to use HALF or FULL and increase stabilator trim according to gross weight and Cg.

it is NATOPS carrier launch procedure. The trim behavior is dependent on the flap switch

it's not obvious. The screenshots posted from you and others are all indicitive of cross-wind conditions. Multiple people have been repeating this over and over again. Nothing has been given to suggest there is an issue but you keep insisting on there being one. This is why i keep asking for a trackfile, because this is not going to go anywhere unless there is proof that is repeatable.

then post track and show it dude. IF it's an actual problem then ED has to have trackfiles for diagnosing. But nothing you've described yet sounds like a problem

You're going to have to post tracks of this man, because everything you're describing is proper behavior of the velocity vector and pitch ladder as it shifts with crosswinds.

Scorpion wasn't even on the market yet in 2007 and HMIT wasn't over until 2010.

You can question the selection of timeframe and block selection. Throwing a tantrum and demanding they add/do things are not accurate because of flawed "logic" helps absolutely nobody.

It's a good question lol. 2b is super limited on weapons

Idk what is so hard to understand about this. The timeframe ED gave is end of block 2B just before 3F went IOC. AARGM-ER is not even being integrated until block 4. It has nothing to do with "can" do something. It's if that thing was actually done.

we shall we wait and see

If there is documentation to support that it has the function. It doesn't get added just because something else has it.

you're flying in cross wind. That is how the HUD is supposed to behave, the pitch ladder stays centered on the velocity vector unless you cage the HUD.

i hate using it on anything but case 3's in mode 1 ACLS just because it fights all of my muscle memory for flying on speed.

In the current implementation no, there isn't. And i don't believe we're missing it either as far as im aware. I'd be shocked if it wasn't an added to the rhino later on though. It's just a quirk of how "Designations" work in the hornet. You're not really slaving to the waypoint you're just creating a designation on the waypoint. Once you de-slave the TGP off of it(track modes) then the TGP becomes the designation source.

This kind of project isnt going to be done in a month.

and as mentioned in replies above. It is not modelled.

complaining about BIT tests (that are nothing but eye candy) not being in the training missions. Lol

It's not an in depth IFF system right now. Most of the switchology doesnt do anything. And no you dont get any indications of interrogation. That's not something i know of to be given to the pilot across any airframe. Ambiguous is when there are conflicting classifications between on-board and off-board interrogators. For example you ID it as hostile but the awacs ID's it friendly. It's basically never seen because of the aformentioned low fidelity of the system as it is stands.

You can do some math to emulate all of the spherical earth stuff. Or at least most of it.

The wording of the whitepaper isnt the best which is why i included the clarification that i (fuzzy, admittedly) recalled from raptor. 131 feet drift number used there would be kind of a "nominal" random drift occurance from the increased weighting of GPS into the blended solution. It could at times be better than that or worse depending on conditons obviously. 300 is just the desired threshold to start using it.