Akula

I'm not saying the pilots depend on the drag to hold the jet in place I'm saying they use the little resistance there is, even if it's a teeny tiny minuscule amount of resistance, to *help* them hold the jet in place, that's all.

I think you're right. The force pushing back against the jet *is* small and negligible but I'm sure pilots use this as a tiny tiny brace. If it wasn't there at all I'd assume there would be more throttle inputs just to keep the jet on speed. I think of it this way. You can lean a hammer up against a book if the hammer is not tilted as much. Seems to make sense to me.

So you’re not a real pilot then. Keep trying

Interesting because what I see in videos is the pilot mating with the basket and then using the drag of the basket to brace the jet and help the pilot hold it in position while he refuels. This makes more sense given the fact that at 200-300 knots the bow wave most likely won’t extend past the engines (KC-135). Obviously this is a guess but based on what I’ve seen in wind tunnels during Mach 1 speed tests, the bow wave will extend pretty far out so I’m guessing at much lower speeds it is relatively smaller. Also there are a lot of factors influencing the drag the basket creates. Bow wave, Wing vortices, low and high pressures exerted on or around the drogue as a result of jet wash. One thing is certain though. The way it’s modeled in DCS is nowhere near as accurate enough. It would be nice to make contact and then feel a slight push back to simulate the drag on the basket.

Thanks... This will make AAR much easier so storm, maybe you should uninstall when they implement the change since it will make AAR easier. :megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol:

And you know this how????

Doing AAR and noticing real life footage where the jet hooks up and the basket acts as a brake once connected. Does this happen in DCS? Is there at least *some* resistance to slow the jet down once it connects?

Why didn't you get Logitech's X56? Much better and it costs the same or even less on Amazon I got this one for 329.99 CDN https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B079P6SSHP/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o01__o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 The X52pro goes for 3 bucks less at best buy https://www.bestbuy.ca/en-ca/product/logitech-945-000022-g-saitek-pro-flight-x52-contol-system/12621040.aspx? How much did you pay for yours?

Thanks paradox, I’ll try it. :thumbup:

:megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol:

I'm not sure but I think you can set the pull up cue in the hornet. Don't know how to do it but I'm sure someone here does lol

So here goes... Gonna try the advice in post #65 of this thread with 2 GTX 980's in SLI. I'll be updating the post as I go. Doing this using Nvidia Profile Inspector version 2.1.3.20 Geforce 418.81 So..... After a series of DCS restarts using a variety of incrimental changes it seems that DCS really doesn't like SLI. Forcing DCS to use it involves making the change in "SLI compatibility bits (DX10 + DX11)" DCS WILL use SLI but it will cause a performance DECREASE with a lot of flickering and delay in rendering. I didn't have a look at the FPS because I figured, what's the point if the performance dropped. That said,because "SLI compatibility bits (DX10 + DX11)" has a vast list of profile changes then it may be that one of them will force DCS to use SLI and actually *increase* performance but the question remains which profile change will do it. so far I haven't found one :( P.S. I did all the testing in a fast mission on Caucasus > F-18 Lot20 > Start from runway > Summer > Storm > 12:00 and went through F1 > F2 circled the jet twice in each test > pressed F7 ten times and pressed F10 once zoomed in and out and Quit to Destop. Last update for now. I set the "SLI compatibility bits (DX10 + DX11)" to “0x080600F5 (S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat)” as per the instructions and did the one thing I forgot to do which was press L-Alt-Enter to go full screen mode and it flickered FAR LESS but the flickering was still there. Then I disabled "rain drops" and it was far better but the clouds are crappy and evewn though the FPS is better it still feels like it's running worse. Bottom line here is that there are so many variables at play not to mention my current CPU which is not as beefy as many of you. running an i5 with 4 cores Oc'd to 4.5 Ghz

B- earing R- ange A- ltitude in that order And like Emmy said: “Hot” … Bandit coming toward you “Cold” … Bandit flying away from you “Flanking” … Bandit flying generally perpendicular to you It's really not subject to much interpretation so I hope this helps. I was a little confused by it as well whne I first started. Everytime I'd hear "BRA" I'm thinking BOOBIES!!!! and get distracted :megalol:

Check out my videos and let me know what you would like to learn and I’ll make a video about it. This, for me is a learning experience in itself and I try to make my videos as basic as possible so everyone can follow along easily. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSlhBpxhdTgzGMq29y0ncDQ?view_as=subscriber

F-18 VOLUME CONTROLS FOR DUMMIES Hey guys hope you like this video, I know it's very basic but i recieved a comment about it so I though I'd create a video. Live and learn Enjoy :thumbup:

Hmmmm one comparable comes to mind. Falcon 4.0. It was released under Hasbro, then literally thrown in the trash after the source code was leaked. After that the REAL development began. The community of fans and VR pilots who had the source code realeased patch after patch after patch and the game was improved and evolved to what we have today. Honestly, without those hundreds of patches over the span of 7-8 years Falcon 4.0 would not have made it after Hasbro. It has been in development since 1998 and switched more hands than a Thai prostitute but look at it now. An amazing flight sim that is still in development and loved by a strong fan base. From my experience flight sims are the one genre in the gaming industry that will never be labeled as 100% complete and this is mostly due to the high standard the community holds the developers to.

They made their own if I’m not mistaken.

Didn't bother to read my post did you? Talking about Carrier landings. I have no doubt pilots learn formation flying prior to AAR training. And it's not the same relation. A pilot is going to learn how to take off and land before he/she learns formation flying.

Even in a sim it makes more sense to teach them how to land before teaching them the C1 pattern because in a real jet if the student can't perform the landing running the pattern AT LEAST the instructor can say; "OK, let's just land and we'll go through a debrief."

Precisely, why bother repeating myself when it’s obvious they don’t care to read the previous posts. Maybe those that prefer things to be harder should go back and drive cars that required double clutching..... yes those were the days. And while they’re at it and since it’s just tooo easy, maybe they should throw out all their appliances, you know because making things harder is the best way to learn. I would be interested to see a link to a reliable and truthful website that describes the steps involved in getting a real life military pilot to learn how to fly because I’ll bet it is not how it is in the game. In real life those planes cost money so you can bet that they’re not going to train a pilot to run a case 1 recovery pattern before teaching him to land in the carrier. I land on the carrier with a mile long approach because I need to and I WANT to. Once that skill is mastered I’ll try case 1 and I doubt that the navy would do it backwards just because they think things should be harder and prefer to risk a pilot and a 60 million dollar jet.

See post 91 on page 10 of this thread

See post 101 on page 11 of this thread

Once VR improves to the same levels as modern LED monitors and the detail is pristine, only then will I consider investing in one. From what I've heard the graphics are good but not great so there's still plenty of room for improvement which no doubt will happen. For a flight sim like DCS, this technology is still in its infancy.