bkthunder

I can hardly lock anything up in VACQ mode, other ACM modes seem to work far better. Is this normal or a bug?

Any news or updates on this point? I still get a 4 wire if chasing the ball all the way down.

Oh cool, glad I'm not the only one. God knows how much I've fumbled with MSAA, SSAA etc. to find a solution to this, but nothing really works and yeas, it happens only with the red color!

I was talking about the small "light bulbs" that are attached to each gear leg, those are always on too.

Tried a flight in the MiG-21 yesterday after a loooong time. It's as bad as i remembered, nothing changed. Worst FM of all DCS modules (haven't tried the CE2), say what you want but that scripted stall is just so 1998. P.S. why are the small gear lights on when the plane is sitting cold and dark, with no external power? Are they powered by perennial stalinium batteries?

Does it officially mean that the following effects (in no particular order): - refueling probe effect - hot gas ingestion - instability due to ground effect - instability due to intake momentum drag will never be implemented for the Razbam harrier?

This should be a pretty big one, anyone from ED acknowledged or is at least looking into this?

Very clearly explained :thumbup:

The real harrier has a thing called fast deceleration solenoid, which allows the engine to reach idle very quickly when landing vertically and with weight on wheels. I have posted about this more than once, but unfortunately no one (including razbam) seems to give a damn...

Exaggerating physics to obtain realistic physics, in a simulation??

Flaps geting coocked as well as myriad of other things are not modeled unfortunately. As for the rolling forward at idle, it could have something to do with wheel friction being too high (the M2000 has the same issue at one point), but it is definitely not right and I hope they'll look into it.

Well, that's starting to make some sense now!

Granted I am not the most amazing naval aviator there is, I find that I'm constantly getting a 4 wire when I fly with the ball centered all the way down. To catch a 3 wire I have to let the ball drop a little (~1 unit) in close and chop the throttle, otherwise I just float past the 3 wire. I used to get a lot more 3 wires before, so I'm wondering if anything has changed in this last update?

Which is pretty different from what described in documents and by RL pilots. The Harrier is said to want to move forward and start rolling at idle, so much so that nozzle are kept rotated to avoid rolling forward, and it is even suggested that you control taxi speed just by nozzle roation. From NATOPS A1-AV8BB-NFM-000 page 7-29 More on that, starting up the enigne without enough brake pressure is forbidden unless the aircraft is tied down with chains! From NATOPS A1-AV8BB-NFM-000 page 7-12 :mad:

No, it was another thread containing reports about the outriggers, the small scoops on top of the air intakes etc. But it's been deleted. Funny also that the Harrier is still very much in development, compared to the MiG-19 which is said to be "nearly feature complete", so they should be much more open to fixing stuff on the Harrier than on the MiG...

You miss an option on the poll: "I already do"

It's great that you were able to get info from the AdA on this aircraft. My main concern was exactly that info on the Mirage has always been very limited, and so having a simulated Mirage was always going to be a matter of guesswork. I have to say you did a pretty good job so far, but this direct contact with the AdA really means we get a true DCS level Mirage 2000. This is going to be a truly great module, can't wait for the updates :thumbup::thumbup:

No, it was because a person who understands very well angles, focal distance and zoom posted accurate screenshots showing undeniable differences, and instead of acknowledging saying "we know it, but it's too much work to change the model and re-texture" they said "the model is perfect because we say so" and deleted any evidence. That said, the MiG-19 here looks great, and a lot more polished than the Harrier, and I'm surprised they acknowledged this 3d bug report while they stuck their head in the sand regarding the inaccuracies of the Harrier, which are far more serious.

What people here are not getting, is that: - one thing is releasing an EA product on which a team with limited resources works on for x amount of time till it's finished - a totally different thing is when a product is released in EA, and then after a few months the limited-resources team moves to launching another EA without finishing what they started, and giving limited resources as an excuse for not delivering what customers have paid for. That should be stopped or regulated IMO. And in fact I am not buying anymore EA from 3rd parties who behaved like this in the past (pretty much every 3rd party so far).

Because when someone goes to the length of finding good pics and taking screenshots from the same angle, the whole thread gets deleted...:music_whistling:

Attitude is what you read on the artificial horizon, AoA is the angle at which the (relative) airflow is hitting the leading edge of the wings. E.g. Take your F-15 and climb straight up at 500 knots: your attitude is, say, 70 degrees nose up, your AoA is close to 0.

Seeing how other 3d model issues reports have been rejected, I'd say don't hold your hopes up for this one either. Razbam said according to them the model is perfect and nothing will be changed...

This is correct, the Yak-52 has a fixed trim tab on the rudder (which you can adjust in settings), so when there is enough airflow, the tab is pushing the rudder in a certain direction.

Actually didn't know you could quote someone! Thanks Decoy ;) EDIT: still don't know how to quote smeone...is that like an @mention? Anyway, I'm sending a PM next bug report.

+1