Biggus

I'm not sure that this is intended behavior, and I could very well be doing something wrong, so if someone could test this too I'd appreciate it. I've attached the mission file. A couple of days ago I set out to test the difference in levels of precision with the INS alignment types. I'd assumed that a full alignment would enable me to fly within a relatively close distance of an INS waypoint, and that an ALCM or ALR alignment would degrade this precision significantly. To test this, I selected a VOR station at a distance of greater than 200nm from my starting point and placed a waypoint on it in the mission editor. I made sure the 'stored heading' setting was selected and proceeded to fly the route a few times with different alignment types. No enroute navigation fixes, no additional waypoints. Just take off and fly to the waypoint on the VOR station. I found almost no difference in precision between the different types of alignment. An ALCM alignment would navigate me directly over the VOR station just as precisely as a full alignment, provided I paid sufficient attention to the INS needle. ALR had the same result, although I haven't saved a track for it. Which brings me to the actual apparent difference between the alignment types: Needle behavior. A full alignment was very close to correlating with the VOR needle immediately. Maybe a degree or three away from the VOR station at over 200nm. An ALCM alignment initially had approximately a 30 degree difference from the VOR needle and this difference was reduced the closer I flew to the destination. So long as I could maintain the CAP caret over the INS needle, in nearly every case I could directly overfly the VOR station. I was able to replicate this behavior with a similar flight from Liwa to Lar on the PG map. Is this the way that the INS system is supposed to work? Should every alignment type allow me to navigate to the exact same place with better than 0.5nm precision? F1EE full alignment.trk F1EE ALCM 720 alignment.trk F1EE INS accuracy test Georgia.miz

I think it was Cobra that mentioned that as soon as the F-4E was out, they were getting to work on the naval variant. It might be after the Eurofighter but the A-6 is likely still a couple of years or so away.

Thank you for the updated skins, they're awesome!

I can provide a track if needed, but this is pretty easily demonstrated. Landing and taxi lights will not work when the F1EE is equipped with CT or CR liveries. Test methodology: Spawn on a map set to night. Start the aircraft as normal. Turn on taxi or landing lights. Using the re-arm menu, select CT or CR skins and observe the lack of light.

Yes. But there are also direct keybinds for other AWACS commands. Why have them and not have the declare command? I shouldn't have to use an external program to have that functionality.

Apologies if this is in the wrong place, as it could probably also fit in the controllers and bugs subforum. Open beta patch notes mentioned the AWACS declare function had been added. Given that bogey dope and home base can be bound, I suspect that the intention was to also add a bind for the declare function. However, there is no option to bind the command to a key.

I had a hell of a time with my vanilla 5800X. I had an ML240 that was fine. It died. The two AIOs I bought that were significantly more expensive to replace it were unable to keep it below 70 idling. I pasted and repasted them multiple times but nothing seemed to help. Bought another ML240 and once again, it's idling under 40 most of the time and I never hit thermal throttling. I was never able to adequately explain why some coolers just didn't work when there were very few complaints about them. Lots of hypotheses, no real answers.

Considering nose-tow has been the default naval aircraft catapult interface design since the very early 60s, the Phantom would have shared decks with other nose-tow aircraft for nearly every cruise it undertook. I can't see how this is going to be a significant problem and it would be pretty silly to think that Heatblur weren't thinking about this when they were developing the Forrestal.

Life is too short to taxi long distances. I'm with you! Still excited for the long nosed bird though. But a J or an S would have been my personal pick.

Crosswinds have different pedal designs. You don't actually have to have your feet on them all the time.

I'm glad I'm not the only one to notice how well designed the packaging was!

I'm very excited for the Phantoms (every one of them you make - even the recon birds if they fit into your plans) and the Intruder! I hope that you guys have a peaceful and less stressful year in 2023!

I'm Australian. Perhaps I'd be expected to be more excited about the F-4E, but I'm far more interested in a naval variant. I could be an outlier but I doubt that I'm alone.

Yeah, I expected larger too. I was really pleasantly surprised by how well it had been packed.

Just measured my box. 33x18.5x44cm. Hope this helps.

@Karon's experience matches mine. It's fine when used with the correct parameters and with the understanding that there are issues with both the AI's omniscience and the terminal guidance issues that are on ED's list of things to work on. Please share your tracks with the devs in your thread if you would like your continued participation in this thread to be treated with any level of sincerity or seriousness.

You're a legend. I just realised I haven't ordered the hat switch yet so I'll hold off and spend a bit of time troubleshooting/yelling at my Ender 3 and it's weird hatred of PETG.

Crosswinds. Love mine. Also I'll never give TM another cent.

If I'm not using high drag bombs, I generally consult a shaman and sacrifice the correct number of goats prior to pickle.

Well, I've made a start. The closest thing I had on hand to black was this gray spool of somewhat temperamental PLA+, and being in a rush I printed it with a .24 layer height, so it's definitely a bit rougher than it should be and I'll do some sanding to smooth it out a bit. The detail on the side panels and the knurling of the base nut is wonderful. One thing that surprised me was that the stick is quite a bit thicker than the Warthog and Hornet sticks. I'm waiting on a few things. Trim hat switch and the screws. I need to experiment a bit with springs. @_BringTheReign_, now that I've actually got it in my hands, I'm even more impressed by what you've accomplished with the design. The only suggestion or request I would make is to perhaps include the original editable files for the trigger and trigger housing. Those are probably the two components that will need a little remix to accommodate different springs and wiring attachment methods for the trigger switches. Thinking ahead for the later Phantom sticks, is there anything I should order aside from a second hat switch?

While I don't think it's going to be six months before initial release, I share your disappointment. With very positive looking statements from the team regarding a 2022 release as late as mid November, I really think they've forgotten some of the expectation management that they did so well with some of the larger Tomcat patches. Either that or it is literally in the next patch and the radio silence is purely down to not knowing when ED are going to deploy it. Which is pretty unlikely in my opinion.

Would be good to stick this on my Orion base that is largely sitting idle while my Warthog/WarBRD combo remains my daily driver. I don't think the Winwing stuff uses the same shift-registers-in-grip layout though. Either way, it's getting sliced up and printed today!

Over a month ago, Cobra said that the F-4 was "nearing completion". HB have a game plan and have become pretty decent at managing expectations. It's not 2017. They've learned how to let us down gently when development schedules slip. We're now in the last week of 2022, so with no communication I'm going to assume that release is coming quite soon. It might not be this week, but it'll be soon.

The Mk36 mine is certainly listed in the F-4J/S natops. Might not be quite what you were thinking of. There's also some detail about using the Sparrow against small boats in the tactical manual for the B/J/N. Other than that, the Mk20 was often carried by naval attack aircraft to deal with smaller vessels.

Yeah, my impression is that HB have become quite good at managing expectations. Right now, I'm hopeful that no news is good news.