blkspade

Short of rebinding, a sort of work around is to double tap and hold to by pass the TIR key trap.

I was pretty sure this AI behavior was changed a while ago. Unless they changed something in a recent patch, they had made changes to where the AI was relying on sensors and cockpit line of sight.

Unless something has changed (Don't fly the A-10 much anymore), the A-10s sensors do/did pick up an IRST lock, but displays as an 'L' as if you're being lased. I'd assume that is from the IRST doing laser ranging.

This is pretty much how I feel about many of the modules that have come out. They lack utility in the sim as a whole. Every module is released in its own little bubble, primarily with a single player experience in mind, but often that is even incomplete. Something like the P-51 was a half measure, when there was zero way apply it realistically. No contemporary opponents, allies or assets. The F-5 in sim boils down to a less functional super sonic A-10. I only own the A-10C to lessen the curve in A-G for the eventual F-18C release. At least MiG-21 had proper AI competition from the start. A-A modules need contemporary dissimilar PVP opposition to be truly complete, because AI will never be good enough. F-5 basically completes the MiG-21 (or rather each other), though the F-4 would probably have been better.

He's not really wrong here though. Eagle drivers take 3 bags for 1 of 2(3) reasons. They either intend to loiter, or to stay in AB as long as possible and thus emptying them pretty quickly. Some probably do it with zero logic behind it and just don't know any better. The first 2 atleast have a plan/intent to drop them as needed. Changing how they react under load is as such inconsequntial to the pilots descision making process. If the bags flew off the pylons under high load, you'd be doing us Eagle drivers a huge favor.

So in the mission editor the Aim-9M is completely missing for the F-15C, and also pylons 3 and 9 can only load AIM-120Bs and AIM-9P5s. The 9M seems to remain in missions where they are already loaded, but are otherwise unselectable in ME or in-game reload screen.

This mistake people keep making just keeps driving me crazy. CPU load on multithreaded CPUs is a useless value, that does not indicate any sort of headroom for gaming performance. Firstly that percentage represent total CPU package utilization, and low numbers indicate unused cores/threads. Games that aren't specifically written with multi-threading in mind will never max your CPU, but that percentage represents a maxxed core/thread with nothing left to give. Everything your computer runs, maxes out the "CPU" for the duration the work requires, as far as the number threads it can address.

Yeah, this issue is a contributing factor to me rarely flying online lately. Somebody let me know when its fixed.

This is probably because they're used in training scenarios that focus on BFM. Eyes take precedence over avionics, and its a very small aircraft.

Not according to to USAF pilot accounts.

As far as Iraq goes, they were primarily flying Mig29As and Mirages, with battle tested pilots. Those aren't exactly all that inferior. The mig were considered to be huge threats WVR.

Did you really create this solely to troll the other thread?

I mention this quite often it seems. The AI stopped 'cheating' when they made them actually rely on sensors. Their sensors work as they're supposed to with limits intact. Though I'm not sure that holds in the case of the Mig-31. So basically you're doing it wrong, which is most likely the PRF setting. You need to be in high PRF to achieve max detection range.

You have to actually shut them down (even though they already off) before they'll start up again.

The spring is really strong when its new, but I feel the larger factor is placement. Its more strenuous if mounted on a desk that is somewhat high. You will probably want it on a surface at or below your navel.

Both the life and fuel systems are broken if they can't account for client and sever side crashes. For the lives, something like 1 roll back per 1-3 hour(s) when a player doesn't land but is not killed, would cover a player against a client crash without making it exploitable. Conversely, no limit on roll backs under the same conditions if the mission doesn't complete its 3 hour run. Similar logic could be applied to how fuel is subtracted from (and added to) airfields.

Umm wasn't it in desert storm where the F-16 was both the first to use the Aim-120, and get a kill with it?

Why would I be 2nm from the bandit? Well partially accounting for pre-merge, and how easily you can come seriously close to a bandit and neither of you sees each other. Some things are more of given when you are specifically training BFM, as opposed to an open combat environment, and you still have times where you can be looking at him the whole time and he's suddenly gone. That also tends to be the point where you can't clearly see his aspect, without having him locked. I used 2nm as an example as that is around where you'll start to see a Mig29 as you're entering the merge. I specifically use the old DACT missions to practice things like maintaining visibility and IR missile denial/avoidance (and random BVR stuff). I once had a heater mission setup against an F-16, and no amount of "doing it right" in the world is going to keep one visible post-merge. This was before the super visible flares and afterburners, which probably aren't sticking around. I had something similar vs another Eagle which in hindsight leads me to believe it may be easier to visibly track the Eagle. You know why I want stick my bandit in my hud more often not? Because most engagements in an open combat environment against humans will absolutely dictate the need to, as to have any idea where the bandit is and what he is doing. If you're head-on and fire your "BVR" missile 'within (in)visible range' and then crank (like you should), looking out of the cockpit you can only see if he reciprocates (ET), flares, or your missile going stupid while the motor is still going. All of which you need to be doing. You then you check if he's going for the notch, to see your radar going into MEM mode, which is your last chance to use your hud to know where to zoom else turn and run and wonder if he has recommited in EOS. Or worse, you engage him at hide and seek, and with any luck you at least hear each other and begin looking for might not be dirt/dust on your monitor. You are more likely catch a glimpse of him in the corner of the VSD than in the sky.

Oh, yeah? Visibility is questionable at 2nm for the larger sized fighters, and gets worse as they get smaller in size. Basically anything that isn't a flanker or eagle. Against humans, you don't even always have the same clouds. To some extent you could zoom, just to get tunnel vision and have nothing but the cockpit scratches to try and determine buffet. As Blaze mentioned there is zero sense of speed, along with zero peripheral vision. You can quite easily bleed speed into a turn and not hear a single beep until you're already too slow. Or you're at the opposite end on the spectrum trying to keep a randomly semi-visible dot in the non blackening part of your screen. I'm clearly not saying you should be glued to your HUD, but you can't pretend people don't have to fight the sim just as much as the bandit.

That's not really fair to say when we have a sim where planes can literally turn transparent WVR.

First of all, while some people will say don't bother with AI (even if they are a fellow squad member) I find this to be bad advice. Especially if they haven't kept up with the improvements ED has made to the AI. Human behavior is very dynamic and you can't really know why they did this or that at any given time. The AI while stupid, is reliable for extrapolating certain information from missile engagements. Particularly if no one is giving you hard numbers, or when ED changes performance characteristics. I use tacview with single player engagements mostly. For instance, they will always fire at Rmax, but never HOJ (which gives you a burn though range). Rmax is dynamic, tied to altitude (greatly), flight speed and closure rate, but also really low Pk. That knowledge is easily used against human pilots of like aircraft tells you if they fired with intent to kill, or to attempt to move you from an advantageous position. Knowing the urgency of the threat can guide your actions thereafter. Also anything you can repeat defensively against the AI's missiles will work against human opponents.

While I would so much love for there to be a tanker, the lag/warp issues would make AAR near impossible.

Your first problem with mutual support is that you should never be that far apart if you're supposed to be flying together. The next is learning to use BRA calls (Bearing, Range, & Altitude) from a point of reference (bullseye/WP). That requires a degree of visualization of the airspace in conjunction with the HSI.

It should be noted that GG's info on ECM vs AI is inaccurate. It works on AI the same as players up to burn through range. They won't fire at the usual Rmax. The only exception I have seen to this is against the MiG-31. That may be tied to an apparent catch where it doesn't seem to work if activated while already inside of Rmax (AI will always initiate at Rmax), but still outside of burn through. Which is also the case for SAMs.

Because Seagate's have notoriously high failure rates. Its so bad people with decent ones likely to outlast their warranty are truly the exception. I've pretty much always gone with Western Digital myself.