sirrah

If money was no object, I'd be flying the real deal On topic: I've never tried one, but with these kind of motion platforms, I always wondered how natural this would feel. Obviously, G-forces can't be simulated, but with a 1G turn, the seat should actually stay about straight. Watching these YT videos, you kinda always see the seat bank during turns. I wonder how well this is simulated. I can imagine though, that helo flying (where inverted flight is not something you normally do ) with such a moving platform, would be beyond awesome.

No, traffic currently can't be manipulated. This has been requested and wished for many times.

Is this still the case? I'm pretty sure that I saw a walking infantry unit recently when I was playing Ground Pounders' "Weasels over Syria" campaign. I haven't been able to reproduce it myself in the ME though, so I might have dreamt it after all..

Awesome pictures! Thanks for sharing

As others said; Best advise is, to choose the aircraft you have the most affection to. Also, you're asking this in the Viper subforum, so most answers here will probably be biased in favor of the Viper

In term of avionics/weapon systems, pretty much the same learning curve I'd say. When it comes to flying: Both are super easy, as in; you'll hardly ever manage to get them into uncontrollable flight (or you're doing something really strange) Personally I find AAR in the Hornet much MUCH more easy then the Viper. But then again, I have made much more hours in the Hornet.

Wow! Some impressive spotting there!

In contrary to this report, the new launcher on my pc always starts DCS in VR mode, even if I select it to launch in pancake mode: Anyone else seeing this, or is it a bug on my side? Edit: Sorry, just saw it was already reported earlier here: (feel free to merge)

Ah ok thanks mate! (Looking at images, I estimated it at about 90mm, so I was a bit short)

Unfortunately not. Although I'm not too impressed about this year's participants list (I'd kinda expect a bit more of 75y NATO), I really wish I could go to the arrival days. If only, for "the smell of bacon and egg baps mixed with burned fuel" in the morning . I went to the riat (arrival days) many times around the millennium. I think it was also once or twice at Cottesmore back then. I'm probably a bit spoiled, as back then, the participating countries, aircraft and the quantities were jaw dropping. I still use my grainy pictures from then for my desktop background. To whoever is going, I wish you lots of fun!

Sure, I can somewhat guesstimate (the base will be slightly bigger than the screws' diagonal). Though it would have been easier and more accurate if someone already knew, or if it was stated somewhere on the RS website.

Tried their website and the manual, but it only states the screw dimensions.

Just came here to see if this was already reported or if it's just an issue on my side. "Happy" to see I'm not the only one Hopefully it gets solved soon. Thanks for sharing the temporary "alt-tab" work around! Saved me having to force-quit an MP session a couple of times today

Same issues here Considering how many people here seem to have similar issues, I'm a bit flabbergasted how this new feature passed ED's stress testing..

Does anyone here perhaps know the exact diameter of the FSSB base? (so the outside border of the aluminium) And am I correct when assuming all Realsimulator FSSB versions have the same dimensions?

Wow! That's quite a promising statement , as Sinai is one of the most detailed maps imho (at least scenery wise) Please do share screenshots. I haven't bought Afghanistan yet, mainly due to lack of time (and I need to restrain myself in buying everything ), so I came here to check out the first reviews. This thread appears to have big opinion/verdict contradictions. I'm not convinced just yet by what I've seen and read, as this thread mostly contains negative reviews. But perhaps all the folks that are positive about this map just didn't bother posting their opinions here just yet

If a blow-over protaloo is added, it should come with this sad looking "darn, now I have to crap in the bushes again" infantry unit. null

Welcome to the forum @ahdav Could be several things, like: Are you using the "pickle" button to launch? (not the trigger) Is your HARM display set to SOI? Did you hand-off the target info to the HARM? (cage/uncage?) It's a lot more easy for people to help you, if you share a short track file to your post. You can save a track file after you quit your mission and attach it to your post here. (Also, there's a dedicated F/A-18C sub-forum here: https://forum.dcs.world/forum/130-dcs-fa-18c/ )

Did you try under UI layer controls?

Ah ok I thought the 3 (I actually thought 2) minutes were only needed to cool the IR seeker head

But those gyro's don't need several minutes to "align", do they? Don't they just spin up almost instantaneously when electrical power is added?

Ok cool. If true, that's very good news!

Although I get what you're saying (I'm also a VR pilot body fanboy ), the lack of a pilot body at EA release is not holding me back from pre-purchase. It might take a little while, but eventually ED will add it. What is holding me back though, is the complete lack of information on ED's logistics plans. I know a lot can be done by scripting already, but I don't have those skills and I personally think much more is needed in DCS core in terms of actually making cargo/troop/vehicle transportation more useful. I was really hoping to see some info about that before EA release. The day the Chinook was announced I thought "yes! day one purchase!". I've pre-purchased lots of modules (so yes, I know what EA means) and never regretted it, but this time is really different in terms of how little is shared/previewed. But I don't want to rain on anyone's parade here I'm sure it'll be a lot of fun flying this beast! And I can't wait to hear/see any of your verdicts/reviews

From the CH-47F purchase page on ED's website: Reading this "to do in early access", I think it's safe to conclude it won't be there at EA release. (I don't want to be negative, but looking at the F-16CM, A-10C II and Ka-50 III, it could very well take years to be added. It usually is very low on the priority list unfortunately. Though, iirc, the Hornet did receive it quite early on, so everything's possible)

Sorry, of course you are right. Mavericks don't have/need internal INS alignment, but they do need time to get "ready". But I understand that in the Viper, these processes keep continuing, even when another station is selected. Quite convenient