DD_Fenrir

https://www.seawings.co.uk/images/colour charts/British Aviation Colours of WWII.pdf

Further information. https://www.rafweb.org/Squadrons/Sqn Markings/Sqn_codes3.htm I've been asking for years for this to be corrected on the Spitfire: And even pointed out this very issue on the Mossie THE DAY THE FIRST WiP SCREENSHOT OF THE EXTERNAL 3D WAS RELEASED: Nice to know one's efforts to assist developers fall on deaf ears, time and time and time and time again.

+ 1 squilluion!

From the limited sources I have found their were some issues with getting the AIM-120 to separate cleanly from the Cat in certain circumstances that didn't trouble the AIM-7. This is and the required avionics additions were slated to cost $1bn to modify all aircraft in the fleet to support. With the Cold War ending, the fact that the Tomcat already had a powerful Fox-3 missile and a need to provide the fleet with a long range bomber to replace the A-6 it made much more sense to use those funds to provide the Tomcat with the ability to self target and self guide precision munitions - hence the LANTIRN pod. Heatblur have made the right choice not including a non-operational missile. If you can't manage with the Phoenix, AIM-120 is not going to bring you any benefit.

Quite. Sounds very much like he thinks that a BVR fight against me in my F-14 involves driving straight at me until he's in RNE range of his own missiles - in which case he's only got his own (considerable) ignorance to blame when I repeatedly blow his naive butt out from under him.

Bear in mind the Spit will want to weather vane into the wind so any crosswind component and she'll want to point her nose at it.

Yeah, as I suspected - the truth is much of the buffet in the Spitty is transmitted through the elevator as the turbulent wash from the stalled inner part of the wing (wash-out ensured the tips were at a lower incidence and helped to retain aileron control when the root was stalled) washed over the tailplane so the majority of the buffet was felt through the elevator axis of the control column, which is, I can vouch for, accurately modelled by DCS - but you only feel it if you have an FFB stick (which I am fortunate enough to own). There are some visual and aural clues but not having flown w/o FFB I'm not sure how useful they are to non-FFB owners. Now the CH stick pots are not renowned for their control resolution, so this maybe part of your problem, particularly in the Spit where mm of stick travel make a difference. I applaud your choice of the Authentikit spitfire stick; though simply for the greater throw and stick displacement per g that it will automatically provide rather than any experience of the product. I hope it provides you with a better experience Finnster, because I have to say, whilst the Spit can be quirky compared to the better harmonised controls of say the Pony, Jug or Fw, once you have a controller you're happy with and the axis curves set right to give you an authentic stick displacement to critical AoA, I find she can be a delight to fly and certainly a very different beast than the 'head-of-a-pin' animal you described earlier. Good luck, let us know how you get on with that Authentikit product; I would be curious to see what both it and your experiences with it are like. Edit - ever considered a buttkicker or a one of those feedback seat cushions? I have never owned one but some guys really like them. Perhaps worth considering vis-a-vis the FFB issue. Got a track or a vid Cats?

Curious as to the particulars of this phrase - it crops up several times in the Reforger campaign. Does it refer to a pre-briefed climb rate particular to that mission or is it slang for a standard power and speed setting?

Or you could make the carrier the second unit of a ship group then should you wish to change the location of your carrier you grab the first ship of your mini-fleet and move that instead. The ME is pretty good actually and far more intuitive than some others. But much like the rest of DCS it is evolving content and sometimes it gets a little behind as new features and functions appear in the base game. At this point you have two options. Whine like an over entitled bitch about how difficult your life is and demand that someone fixes your problem; or get stuck in and use it as opportunity to learn and innovative. Improvise adapt and overcome.

Now that's what I'm talking about. Would you consider offering them to ED as replacements for the defaults Reflected? Those and your P-51 defaults are leagues ahead of the ED ones.

If you like factory fresh finishes, then yes it's certainly a nice clean aeroplane.... but those roundels! Yuk!

HB have told us that the WCS cannot accept re-prioritization from Jester - there's no real life function to this on the AWG-9. What a RIO can do is select specific tracks to not attack. Even then the WCS will auto prioritise what is left with no way for a RIO to adjust except for selecting next target.

Anyone else getting a rather anemic looking 88mm flak shell burst since the last patch? These used to look authentic, dark menacing little clouds of death that would linger, fading slowly whilst their bretheren thumped into existence around you, appearing to stalk and trace your path through the atmosphere. Now they appear as a few spotty grey flecks of smoke and disappear almost instantly. Just me or was this one of the performance concessions made by ED recently?

Yes. I think the confusion come from on spawning in game where the initial position is 2 divisions nose up. The reason being is that the trim tabs have unequal angular travel. 7° below the elevator chord-line (for max nose up trim), 20° above (for max nose down). The gauge however is equidistant between fully nose up and fully nose down, with the needle at the three o'clock/horizontal position exactly between representing neutral trim. Ergo when the trim tab chord-line is aligned with elevator chord-line (i.e. the trim tab appears flush with the elevator) the trim tab indicator will still show about 1/3rd up. This how ED have modeled the datum for neutral elevator trim position; with the tab aligned with the elevator. This is how we spawn in. However this is NOT neutral trim. Most aircraft are designed as closely as practicable to find their trim neutral point - without trim input - at cruise speed and power settings with a less than full fuel load. I would be surprised if the Spitfire was not the same. Even when cruising straight and level, the elevator itself is significantly displaced down from the horizontal stabiliser. When I asked Yo-yo himself as to why, as an aerodynamicist, he thought this was the case, he said to to account for the wings downwash. So it appears to the observer that the Spitfire, during cruise has elevator nose down input; however this is the neutral position of the elevator (or as near to it as airspeed and power settings allow) and to maintain this position the trim tab must be displaced above the elevator chord-line to maintain it's relation to the horizontal stabiliser's chord-line. Ultimately it boils down to the fact that most pilots approaching the Spit were - and still are - unaware of this peculiarity of geometry. They went by the Pilot's Notes and the gauges. Ergo the first and correct assumption is that Trim Neutral is the midpoint between both extremities of the trim gauge. Anything else would be hugely disingenuous if not downright dangerous to a new pilot and as such if any such peculiarity of interpretation of that gauge was required it would have had to have been explained within the Pilot's Notes.

Er.... no. Neutral elevator trim is needle horizontal. In the the experience of my squad those with spring tension joysticks should trim one division nose up; those with FFB sticks one division nose down.

And Matt Wagner just released a video showing jamming effects on the Hornet Radar.

Whatever. The only shrill tired voices peddling the same old tired manure with absolutely zero evidential data to back up their rancid little attitudes comes from your rabid band of delusional fanatics - as resoundingly proved by your OP. Because if you understood anything about the ECM jamming in DCS is that tactically it provides you with little to no advantage at all. You always get burn through before realistic max weapons range and any advantage you may have thought you had by altitude masking can quickly be negated by healthy application of the left hand on the part of your erstwhile opponent. It's pretty damn useless to everyone. But, no, of course, you're right, it's EDs personal vendetta against you cos you like Russian aircraft. Seriously, do have any comprehension as to how asinine that sounds?

Waaaaahmbulance please on aisle 2. Ooh, it's looking serious - better bring extra tin foil hats as well!

What controller hardware do you have Finnster?

As I would expect it to be. Most of the guys I know who struggle with AAR aren't interested in that environment anyway! Non-issue - there is exactly the same metric when it comes to visual aid spotting icons; and what happens with this? The server operator decides what audience they wish to cater for and tunes their icon setting accordingly and ergo puts up with the pros and cons of that decision. Easier AAR could be implemented in an identical function. And who's to say the functionality could not be developed to allow both types of operation from the same tanker, so that it's an F10 radio option as you approach pre-contact to give you the easier AAR refuelling zone at this point? Or if you don't want it, to continue as normal? Or have two tankers, one set to easier, the other set to normal, in the same server? This whole idea is to provide training wheels, to give some people who struggle that half-step, a sense of accomplishment that they've reached a mid-point, that if they have sufficient skill to keep their aircraft in a narrow enough portion of sky to get this far, then maybe they can develop further enough fine motor skill to push on and go the basket/boom proper. That's my point; these aren't newer members - some of these chaps have been flying DCS for years but found AAR so challenging after hours and hours of attempts they refuse to even entertain the thought of trying. Yet these are members who can otherwise operate the jets very well, get bombs on target and hold their own (mostly!) in a dogfight. Enabling an Easier AAR feature on our server would allow some of the more proficient hands the nuanced complexity of flying longer ranged missions and doing AAR without having to exclude those members who, if it weren't for the AAR restrictions would love to take part.

I agree on the last part and is not the way I would wish to see it implemented. However with some intelligent cogent and considerate software design it is not impossible to design an aid system that could be both selectable, scalable and used as a progressive training aid towards accomplishing actual probe-in-basket/boom-in-receptacle AAR in DCS. I outlined my proposal on a solution that could accomplish that already:

How gregarious of you.

Where do I challenge that specifically in my response? Nowhere. You're reaching to find a valid argument and are conjuring phantom axes of argument on my behalf. The greater question here is why you are so threatened by a training aid that could potentially help those who find that leap to AAR too challenging and could use a leg-up? If - as a user selectable option and equally easily activated or deactivated by server operators - there was an easier AAR option that specifically does not dumb down AAR for your personal edification, there is NO logical or rational reason you should be so against this as IT HAS NO EFFECT ON YOU. Get it? It's that simple. If it is implemented intelligently and my squad-mate chooses to turn it on, in his SP mission to practise his AAR, your precious little immersion bubble won't suddenly implode; you won't suddenly find yourself with 360 degree radar and 50 missile auto-replenishing loadouts and clown-plane FMs. IT HAS NO EFFECT ON YOU.

And I shout "narrow-minded" and "gatekeeper". Considering the evidence presented to the contrary, how bloody dare you pompous ass. Though having said that, it's unsurprising that your capacity for any other viewpoint than your own is so limited; comes from having your head so far up your own posterior.

What a bunch of hysterical drama queens. Do you have any sense of dignity?