bkthunder

@Decoy can we have this moved back to the bug section or at least get an update on it?

Yeah but is it broken (i.e. it's bugged and causes issues), or not implemented / simplified? If not implemented, then it means they either add this weight and drag to the airframe, or that we have all aircraft with less weight and drag than they would have with a weapon loadout. IMO either solution would be sub-par for a sim that's all about accurate FMs, but at least we know how it's calculated for now.. P.S. I posted in the main forum, the fact it's been quickly moved to the bugs section probably means it's a bug

How are weight and drag of pylons/racks calculated now (if at all)? E.g. Is pylon weight and drag added to the basic "empty" model of the aircraft?

haha, sure! In English (especially American English) is a way of describing someone who pays extreme attention to details, so nothing offensive despite word "anal" in it ;)

@Kev2Go, nice research, this is interesting information, I'm quite surprised ED didn't exactly model a RL F-86 since they are so anal about features and weapons in their other modules (e.g. the F-5 loadout / avionics are very limited because they chose to model an very rare and specific lot)...

Would be nice to see this to make the F-18 more authentic

Pretty grim for a "combat sim" set (mostly) in modern times... Hope you guys get access to the needed features to at least make the Phoenix guide in a realistic way... On other news it seems ED will improve sam sites to act more realistically, so maybe they are extremely slowly starting to bite the things that really keep DCS back. I remain hopeful, but it'll be a loooooong way.

Wow, I missed this piece of juicy news! This is the best development announced yet. DCS needs this, far more than any module or gfx. As others have said, ECM should start to play a bigger role as well, but all in all great, great news!

LOL :lol: Glad Victory is still here, he's an invaluable source of information and I'm looking forward to more of his insider knowledge once the FM is stable :joystick:

Lol, as if no one had ever reported a bug with missile performance... :megalol: As absurd as it sounds, there are arcade games out there that offer a more realistic representation of BVR engagements than DCS. IIRC the AIM-7MH has been revised in terms of performance, but the guidance logic is still a circus. A-A missiles performance/guidance in DCS is honestly the n.1 issue that keeps DCS in the arcade game realm with anything concerning BVR engagements. Fix this, and no more air-quake.

Off the top of my head, they are implemented in: F-18 F-14 Harrier Mirage Mig-29 Definitely WIP, but on the F-18, for example, they already look pretty damn nice;)

Nothing to do with aircraft, all to do with the surrounding "world". To name a few: - missile guidance and performance forces players into air-quake battles - blast damage is modeled but extremely weak,e.g. killing a mortar squad can take multiple bombs - ground units like BMPs or even AK-47s have unbelievable pinpoint precision and can be more dangerous than SAM sites - aircraft A.I. acts weird and pulls UFO maneuvers etc. All of this forces mission makers and then players to adapt to the environment. Su-27s and F-15s IRL are high altitude BVR interceptors, tell me, when have you last seen such an engagement in MP? Never, everybody is just sneaking around the valleys using Fox-2s. Just yesterday I was on DDCS and people were discussing how AIM-120Cs are ineffective past 8 miles on a flanking target and that Red players need to spam 6-7 missiles to get a kill.

I would say it's no concern to ED either, since DCS is lacking features / has bugs and inconsistencies that hardly allow the realistic employment of aircraft and weapons.

Last time I checked this didn't work, has it been implemented?

The same just happened to me, except I didn't even turn on the TGP. It was enough to change the SEQUENCE 1, 2, 3, a few times and it stopped working...

Mmm....I bet your engines were not really at idle but at ~69% rpm. Just in case this was your issues, read below: the f-18 has a flight idle and a ground idle. When you put your physical throttle all the way back before touching down, you are going to flight idle. Then you touch down, Weight on wheels, the ground idle detent in the real airplane would allow you to move the throttle further back. In the sim, you have to wiggle the throttle forward and back again in order to go to ground idle, or your engines will stay at higher RPM. Many times even if I pull the throttle back *after* touching down, I have the same issue. I am unsure if this is a small bug, or maybe the WoW switch is on the nose gear and that happens to still be in the air while I pull the throttle back.

I doubt they have enough RAM to run DCS :lol:

Glad to see your focus is high getting the FM ironed out despite DCS creating issues. Question regarding airbrake/ trim: wasn't it easier to tune the amount of trim bias, rather than making the speedbrake "aerodynamically" pitch neutral? it's probably not very noticeable, but I guess a higher deflection of the stabs (due to a trim change) would contribute to the total amount of drag of the aircraft when the speedbrake is deployed. P.S. I know this is a temporary solution, just curious to understand the dev process a bit :thumbup:

Thanks for the update and hoping to see this fixed soon :thumbup: For the time being I'm gonna practise carrier landings without any loadout..

Hi, just a question given the bug reported here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=245872 To know the actual weight of the airplane (for carrier landing purposes), should I believe what the aicraft MFD says, or what the loadout screen says? In other words, is it just a bug with how the airplane system calculates the weight, or is the "physical" weight of the airplane wrong?

Just a heads up: the bug where the red strobes would shine in the cockpit of the F-5, UH-1 and Mi-8 has been fixed in the last patch. It was not in the changelog but FINALLY it was fixed. One of the stupidest most annoying bugs IMO. Thanks :thumbup:

The strobe lights on the Mirage and Harrier (but especially Mirage) are by far the most realistic looking in DCS :thumbup:

Thanks! :thumbup:

Please don't downplay it, you ask for evidence, there is plenty of visual evidence in this thread. There isn't only a picutre of a CF-188, did you not see the previous posts? There are a total of 2 videos and 2 pictures (from another 2 videos which can be found on youtube - I can link them here I have time). Plus reports form RL pilot on this very forum and linked previously. Look, here's one more, we're up to 5 videos. controls wipeout with flaps down = full aileron upward deflection. Not asking you to argue with the dev team, just asking you to pass this information on. I understand you already disturbed them once, but honestly, I can't believe this thread doesn't instill at least a reasonable doubt in your mind too...

I was trying to do an ILS approach at Senaki and for the life of me couldn't get the neeldes in the ILS gauge to work. I followed the standard procedure which is to tune the frequency on the NAV radio, and turn it on. I could hear the ILS morse code correctly, so the radio was tuned properly, but the needles don't move at all. Tried messing around with switching on/off other radios, but no results. Wondering if this is a bug..