zaelu

It also turns itself off after take off... :) Normally it's on because you are suppose to test the FBW, isn't it?

Yes the video shows older type of fuel tanks or ordnance but the idea is simple. The test pilots test the envelope of the aircraft for all operations. Then the real life experience adds and rules for operating the aircraft are written and amended. But, if we already have a lot of experience about bad separation from aircraft of payloads in normal situations... why would we risk our life in an abnormal situation? If we are limited to 5.5G with tanks, flipping the limiter to A/A mode just to be able to pull maximum Gs and not pressing the nearby Jettison All button makes little sense. I don't know exactly how they are locked to the wing but imagine it has more than one locking system and the tank ruptures one lock and remains attached to the other and because of the turn it twists and hits the wing. Just one tank. Now you have a dangling tank, a damage/bent wing and asymmetric load. Imagine how hard the guy in the back that is trying to shoot you down is laughing :D .

So you disagree with the fact you would be able to pull only 5.5G? :D The switch is just near that big jettison all button... For your safety... after flipping the switch... while jinxing graciously, sure... press that button. Real physics is not limited to few aspects like a simulation. look: As I told you. One tank left on one wing or stuck on only one lock while turning and destroying your plane is a far worse situation you've put yourself in than the fact you let one bandit sneak behind you for a sneaky gunkill.

dcs_manifest.x86_64 files can appear modified even if they are not modified directly. I observed this after trying to install some mods with modified ground objects. Example the "improved static Mi-8". With that mod installed you will fail dcs_manifest.x86_64 although that mod does not affect the file at all. I suppose that file is not only read from the HDD/SSD but also filled with things from mods and the IC makes the check at the end and... Bam! In your case Ironhand it could be something similar but not exactly what I gave as example. But your file might appear modified even if you clean install the module.

+1 And +1 for planes with shields for engine intakes :P

Yes. One snapshot is done per profile/config.

Many thanks Starway!

+1 for this suggestion.

+1 It would be nice that instead of drop down lists maybe some more modern interfaces would slipstream the selection. Example. Click an airbase and aircraft options appear around the airbase name like a rose radio/option menu from current games. Also Side switching prohibiting should be build in the standard game without advanced scripts loading by the user. The server creator even if its just one guy hosting a temporary server and not a 24/7 almost dedicated server should be able to enforce this very simply. Each player that connects to a server must give its DCS Multiplayer Unic ID to the server (silently without player intervention) and after side selection be locked on it until server restarts or changes the mission if such is the wish of the host.

When your game fails IC you can click on the red icon on top of the server list (the one that signifies that you fail IC) and a window will pop up showing you what exact files are failing the check. If you have only Starways mod you will see only one failing file. That shadows.lua. The mod does not depend critically on that file. That file just fine tunes some shadows to fit even more on Starway's take on how the game should look. The mod still looks 99.9% the same without that file. So yes, it's safe to delete it.

Sometimes I got crashes while building an archived mod. It didn't destroyed the archive, all was OK I just needed to restart OVGME so I didn't wanted to bother you. You think this issue with the snapshot was related? Must be located in C:\Program Data\OVGME\Profile(Config) But you should use the function "Compare" which becomes active after doing the snapshot. edit: Here it is. But it's a dat file so I don't think you can "read" it and the compare option/function

Even in DCS as we can see in the first movie posted in second post the tanks are not separating instantly, always nor both at the same time. The mess you would be with just one tank under one of your wings would be far greater than the one you describe above with sudden enemy in your close six ready to gun you WW2 style. Just wait until the physics of max performance 9G turn with one single tank under a wing will be simulated in DCS M2K and we can discuss that scenario again :D .

Specifications are one thing, operations another. If the tanks don't break the plane I'm sure the mechanics will break your legs. And if they don't... you will be grounded anyway. :D Many things can go wrong while jettisoning stuff normally. Trying to make things break off the wings by violence when you can simply push a button is madness. If your life depends on the 9g turns you can do without the wing fuel tanks your life doesn't depend on the fuel you still got in the center one. Press the big round black/yellow striped button because that's its role. It keeps the IR missiles for this purpose only. Dispatch the threat with internal fuel then either refuel with the tanker or go towards friendlies and eject as close as possible to a safe zone if making to the base is not possible. Anything else is just GTA stunts.

Yes, theoretically. 1. With INS you set the offset point from one waypoint as the target. After the preparations you come low towards the target and follow the cues on the HUD. When close you pull up keeping the trigger pressed. The system makes all the calculations and somewhere at somepoint when you climb it will release. 2. With CCRP is the same but you go and mark the target first with your TAS diamond reticule then come low, follow the HUD cues... pull up... squeeze... system will release automatically. 3. With JTAC laser should work almost the same. Follow the 9line. Mark the target with the HUD diamond, call for lase, come low... pull, squeeze, system will release... bomb will pick the lasing and... boom! Theoretically, I didn't tried yet... I'm still trying to perfect the INS bombing first :) .

Could be. I don't remember to be in the manual but I think I saw something about it in some tutorial, maybe I understood wrong that. Anyway. in 2.04 I tried to INS bomb and no go. When I see the cue I press and hold but the bombs are instantly released.

:thumbup: Thanks! The more the merrier. Maybe RAZBAM chose one of these instead of the latest one that is too transparent.

Technically the INS bombing should do this. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2841863&postcount=1

I don't think you can. You were suppose to bring them back as they are expensive and in case of emergency/dogfight you drop them all. Also they are pretty aerodynamically so you have no problem with flying with them empty. The big ones under the wings look badass also... like boosters... too bad they eat two big missiles.

Well... for the same reasons we change the coordinates of 00 Waypoint... it shows an error of 1-2 meters at the cold start. I thought maybe it's important to start with a first waypoint as precise as possible. But apparently you can't change that altitude. You can try to edit it but when you press "insert" it reverts to the preexistent number.

So can someone that tried in 2.04 confirm that it works? For me the bombs are released immediately as I press and hold the trigger. The cross on the ground doesn't update. I can't enter altitude for 00 waypoint (not the offset BAD)

Well, OP asked for some jet in general iirc. I'm sure F16 resembles more a Mig21 than a Cessna 172 would :) . It's all I could find with a quick search. I see you found one with an F18. Both show that such violence may ensue in an upset jetfighter. What I wanted to add was that in a simulation such "departures" might be very difficult to model, for example BadHabit's youtube recording showed the Afterburner light and happy all the time the plane did its thing. I'm doubtfull nothing would happen with the engine in those circumstances and if it hicks then flight dynamic would be again affected. And many other details can complicate this simulation in such extremes beyond the purpose of the DCS.

Question. This sequence: 1. Select the weapon that you want to use: BL1/BF1/BF4/BF8/EL1. (See Bomb Codes note) 2. Set Master Arm On. System switches to Ground Attack mode. Is mandatory? I mean if you press first the Master Arm it will not work anymore? Because I am trying to do in 2.04 this and it simply doesn't work and thinking about what I could do wrong I remembered I pressed Master Arm first.

I'm not saying Mig21 FM is perfect but at the end of the envelope we should be a bit indulgent. Not too much but a bit. Look at this F16. Sure it has asymmetric load but this is also real thing moving through real air and not some numbers going crazy at the edge of some mathematics formula. Still it is scary if you were to be inside.

So others (read ED) should complicate their lives instead? How about steam users? Should they complain to Steam or ED? Or both? And how it would be easier or more convenient for the majority or at least for people in your situation (which frankly doesn't make too much sense)? So they will have to update to a different location on another disk then move the update files to the final destination them selves? Then complain to ED if something went wrong? As other said... SSD writing is not a problem anymore. So you either have the space or you don't. If you don't have the space you simply cancel the update. Move the DCS folder where you want (I recommend copy) then change the target addresses in the shortcuts located your desktop to your new locations and then run the update again.

Exactly. Maybe watching the ACMI file in Tacview will remove the kite like thing also. Seeing a plane simulated on the edge of envelope with a fix external camera can be confusing. Seeing it from fixed reference with the ground could change perspective on the bug.