umkhunto
最新回复 发布由 umkhunto
-
-
On 5/17/2024 at 12:51 AM, =475FG= Dawger said:
Jester wasn’t a RIO. Stupid name from inception.
Too bad HB isn’t taking the opportunity to undo it for the Phantom.
It's tongue in cheek, you know a joke. The system is operated by using gestures through the control wheel. I.e. turning your head to step through the menus. Also, it's a tip to of the head to fans of movies since it references a popular character. The opportunity for word play and referencing a popular character is perfect. There's nothing wrong with the name, and it doesn't need to change.
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, Punkmonkey22 said:
On a related note, i've heard in some of the youtube previews that he tends to come out with outbursts fairly often, ie "Goddamn man, too fast!". Will "silence jester" option remove chit chat and outbursts leaving just mission specific, or silence completely?
That's because the youtuber/streamer took off from extended run off area of the runway, instead of the runway proper. Similar to speeding or taking off on the taxiway. Thus, Jester is working as intended.
-
On 4/23/2023 at 8:06 AM, Shibbyland said:
Maybe it is just me then or maybe I've gotten used to other aircraft and coming back to this one feels weird. I don't think my settings have changed but I decided to increase the Y axis curve yesterday to 20 and that's made it feel a bit more predictable.
It just seems to hit really high angle of attack so quickly but looks like I'll just have to get used to it again.
While we're here tho, do you guys use manual RPM for dogfighting? The combat manifold pressure (I think its 1.35 ATA) seems to coincide with an automatic RPM below that which can be used for 30mins in combat.
Paris and London blitz my poor old RTX 2060. I'm finally going to have to bite the bullet and shell out on a new card.
Outside of a failure of the automatic propeller pitch system failing, there's no reason to control rpm manually, other than maybe landing, and that's only in case of needing a go around. You're more likely to over rev the engine and break it, than gaining any extra performance. Combat is at 1.35ATA and 2600rpm. You can happily sit at 1.42, if temps stay in acceptable ranges. Some pilots historically preferred setting the pitch manually to 11:30 for landing, because you didn't have to wait for the prop pitch to adjust for higher rpm when going to take off power for a go around. I still don't use manual control, because it means I have to keep an eye on the RPM gauge, I just listen for when the engine has ramped up to the RPM I'm used to, and keep an eye on airspeed for the take off.
In combat and other normal operations, unless you have a failure, zero reason to mess with manual pitch control. It's not a 109E-1.-
1
-
-
That will just increase the time it takes for the CTD to happen. This looks very much like a memory leak. DCS should only be able to use the memory that's available. If there isn't enough, it should crash DCS, or fail to load the mission, should be the end of it. What is happening when this crash happens is, it's crashing other applications as well, such as Discord, browser, and SRS, all due to being out of memory. I've had times where it even tanks Windows Desktop Manager.
Simply not having enough RAM doesn't cause that behavior. A memory leak causes that behavior. -
On Syria, after around an hour, I CTD. This is on Syria MP, Operation Levant and GrayFlag. I'm not encoutering the same behaviour on other maps, even heavy missions like Hoggit servers on Caucuses and Persian Gulf. Attached DCS logs, dxdiag and track.
EDIT: The reason I think a memory leak is the problem, is when this crash happens, it doesn't just crash DCS, but it crashes all other applications, such as Discord, SRS, an open browser and even sometimes the entire desktop.
dcs.logDxDiag_20220803.txtGrayflag Syria A-20220802-230837.trk
-
1
-
-
Super Etendard. Can't believe that's not in the list.
-
2
-
-
55 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:
The Intruder's probably flying under the radar.
I've got good vibes.
Iron hand's ma thang.
-
2
-
-
On 6/1/2021 at 7:44 AM, Tank50us said:
2. Legal issues. Heatblur may have gotten a license from Northrop Grumman to make the versions we have, and as such, are only legally allowed to make those aircraft. Creating a version that falls outside those limits would mean they'd lose the license, and ED would have to take the aircraft down from the store (and depending on how hard the lawyers push, refund us and take the module away). Alternatively, if NG told HB "No, you cannot model the D", then that means that under penalty of a severe lawsuit, Heatblur cannot make an F-14D.
This also needs to be put to bed. Not ED, nor the 3rd parties, need a license to make any of the modules. There isn't a legal president at all that will a) either prevent them from representing an aircraft in the sim nor b) make them liable for any litigation. This has been stated multiples by ED and 3rd parties. The bottom line is if they have the data, they can make it. What a license does do though, gives them support from the manufacturer for data and SME input, that's all. If HB had the data for the D, there is sweet nothing NG can do to stop them to produce it as a module for DCS.-
1
-
-
Sounds to me there are a lot of people playing DCS for competitive PVP. Sounds like a lot of DCS players, are playing the wrong game.
-
9
-
3
-
-
13 hours ago, Rick50 said:
I'm gonna engage in wild unsubstantiated flight of fancy... with no lift to see...
What if... ED and Heatblur colaborated to bring us two Phantoms? They develop the core code together, share data and SME resources to get a working "phantom". Then they split off, ED finishes theirs as an international "E" gunfighter, and Heatblur finishes theirs as a Navy "J" ??
Unlikely. Lot of coordination required, lot of trust, lot of additional complications.... but then, making a Phantom module is complicated due to the subject itself, the variants, the details, and though its an older aircraft it's still a very complex system compared to most of it's contemporaries. Sharing resources might be the only way to get all that done in a reasonable timeline.
That said, no, I don't "know" anything. Nor have I seen any such hints. I'm just talking out my buttt!
Rather the F-4S than the J.
-
Terrain mapping radar? Check.
Multi crew nailed? Check.
TF-30's modelled? Check.
We be Aardvarking, bois.
-
7
-
-
18 hours ago, DarkStar79 said:
Why arnt anybody suggesting the JF-17? Its a awsome aircraft, much easier to learn then all other modules i would say. Really good HOTAS functionality.
Its just a very good modern multi-role aircraft! You cant go wrong with it, I would pick that airplane for sure! Its my favorite aircraft in DCS for many reasons..
Because it falls outside his budget.
-
Many people have recommended the F-5, but I feel it's a poor choice for a first module, unless the F-5 is your favourite aircraft. The F-5 is not a poor module. It's very good actually, but it's extremely limited in capabilities.
My suggestion is get the M2000. It's a 4th fighter, with some air to ground capability, but is not as overwhelming system wise, that the F-18 for example is. Since you've already got your eye on the M2000, I feel it's a no brainer to go for it. The mirage 2000 is more capable than the F-5, and has a much more free and paid content available than the F-5, and lastly with the M2000 you will be competitive in most MP servers, both PVE and PVP.
-
2
-
-
According to this post, ED have unlocked the files and are trying to get in touch with Ranger79.
-
Ow, we still love you mate.
-
-
Unless you fly the 31 in real life
The same to you. The current information available is the R-33 is SARH and requires CW to home onto the target. That should trip the RWR.
So unless you have better information for how the missile is guided, then this should be considered a bug. If it isn't a bug, then the rest of DCS's modules need it fixed.
-
Most modern Eurofighter for me, too. There is no reason why the timeframe 2003-2007 can't be expanded to 2003-201x. If we would stick to 2007 as the most modern, our planes would get more outdated as real time progresses. By the way, because the JF-17 is geting block 2 upgrades it is a post 2007 plane as well (2013).
So what if the Jeff is the block 2. This isn't some f2p grinding game where the draw is competitive pvp, where you have to have balanced gameplay. Let the devs build what they want to build.
-
Hello,
The F-14 does not always (about 70% of the time) get a missile launch radar tone from the AI Mig-31 when it launches an R-33. The tone we get from the RWR is only the Spike/Lock on tone. This only seems to apply to the R-33 missile.
This leads to many deaths with Tomcat pilots and has lead to the now-common adage that "if a Mig-31 is locking you, just assume an R-33 is on its way".
I have a track file from Persian Gulf at war, it's 123 Mb uncompressed, however and includes a significant amount of flight time in an F-16C.
Let me know if you want it. I also have a Tacview from the same time.
Reported here.
-
True, I think this is a known issue. However, the Mig-31 having a PESA radar shouldn't even spike certain older RWR's and guide the missile in a TWS-like mode. The R-33 is technically a Fox-1. While in DCS that might not be intended, in reality this very scenario is very likely. For example, during the Iran - Iraw war the Iranian Tomcats found out that the RWR of the enemy Mig-23's and 21's did not respond to the TWS mode at all.
You don't really need a launch or spike warning if you know he's there and have him on radar. You need to build good SA and be aware of possible launches.
It should spike the RWR. The 31 doesn't launch in TWS, it spikes multiple targets, since it can electronically steer a beam on multiple targets. This is not the same as a Tomcat, or Eagle launching in TWS.
-
I mean, you could just taxi at a reasonable speed and remain on taxi ways/runways...
-
A question I have about the RWR, how does it distinguish between Su-27, Su-33, Su-30, J-11 and MiG-29? All these aircraft, use the same emitter, thus you shouldn't be able to tell them from another. AIM-54A and AIM-54C have the same radar. GR4 and IDS Tornado have the same radar. MiG-27, doesn't have a radar.
-
OK, I've further tested the BRM, and the rocket range/speed is somehow lower again. If you fire over 4NM, the rocket will pull very high pitch in the roll at terminal phase. If you fired at 4.8nm+, the rocket will roll ridiculous and likely to miss.
The problem has been reported to the team, the engineer will look into it.
Thx for the report.
Awesome thanks.
-
If you think that's bad, do the mission in the Hornet, vs the 2x MiG-15's. The AI MiG-15 is notorious for how broken it flies. IN fact, you can put the AI MiG-15 against nearly all other AI planes in a guns fight and it will likely win.
Mastering your First Phantom Flight
在 DCS: F-4E Phantom
发布于
So like the Tomcat, turn it off when doing aerobatics?