Rongor

yeah well, the problem with this bug is that you currently can't use this function if your airfield is higher than 1428 ft MSL...

If the CPG selects TADS as sight and PHS as acq src, why doesn't he see that PHS' cued LOS cross in the TADS? Also no cued LOS dot is appearing in the FOR box, unless he also slaves to PHS, which is kind of pointless, as you might want to know the PHS' LOS even without slaving

Activating the IAFS tank on on the MPD Fuel format so far works when done right from the startup. If you add other external fuel tanks than things *can* get mixed up. I had cases when only any external fuel tank refused to accept its activation on the fuel page, sometimes even the IAFS rejected the button press in such configurations. I guess you need a trackfile on it. This may take a while. Yet wanted to report in advance to invite others experimenting with it and add to this report.

Thanks!

I see, so it's like a virtual scope frame? Would it automatically disappear the moment no emissions are detected (or ASE is put back to standby)?

HMD - is set by default FCR - not (yet) implemented TADS - not available for PLT as per the manual link - no idea what this does, doesn't show any obvious effect

This rectangular green outline is appearing out of nowhere during my startup configuration checks. I don't know what it's telling me and I can't make it go away...

Currently the T1, T3 and T4 settings for HI and LO altitude alerts and the BARO alt setting reject any input beyond 1428 ft, which incidently is the maximum displayed value for the AN/APN-209 radar altimeter. As this makes sense in regard of setting altitude alerts, it is probably not meant to also affect the BARO alt setting, so maybe you have to review the constraints for this setting and disconnect it from the radar altimeter display limit. It's easily reproducable. So do you still need a track file on this?

No, simply visit https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/personal/licensing/trial/ and enjoy the

Yes it is.

How much will it help to install a Tucano mod when you would prefer to fly jets in air 2 air combat? How helpful is the idea of avoiding FC3 because it may cause problems to memorize all the keybinds, when in fact you have 2 button boxes and a HOTAS and have actually no issue to find all the switches blindly with your fingers while wearing a VR headset? In my unrequested opinion the topic question isn't the best approach at all into what DCS is or can be. Most of the well thought answers so far were necessarily based on assumptions and personal taste. On the way to gather your first impressions of DCS, you may want to ask yourself: 1) start with a genuine DCS module made by Eagle Dynamics or a certified 3rd party studio or with some unofficial user mods of unknown representation value? Which choice qualifies better to demonstrate what kind of fidelity to expect in this simulator? 2) what era are you interested in? WW2, first jets, cold war classics or the rather modern stuff? Each might give you totally different results during your first steps in DCS. 3) Air to ground? Air to air? Helos? Everybody has a different itch. Which is yours to scratch? 4) How well are you prepared for aviation in general? Is this your first contact? Do you have some experience, even expectations? What is your hardware performance offering? How far are you invested in peripheral controls? ED is offering a very customer friendly trial system. I'd strongly suggest to make intense use of it. If you do, you will find answers to all the questions above and even to the one in thread topic. Besides, even if VR flying might be an obvious goal, consider to get into this without VR first. If you are proficient in a module, then put on the VR set.

I don't wonder because there are always some people frustrated with some stuff. That's just the way it is. Everywhere.

<100 GB

Strangely I couldn't find the video featuring this combination by the YouTube search function. Thanks to the link above I found it but it seems to only address WVR dogfight. I don't see how we would get WVR with a Hornet in the first place. The Ace AI Fulcrum will launch on you first with 27T and you wouldn't even get a lock warning on your RWR

I did and one can see that you constantly spam the 'search for targets' button, in fractions of a second. Petro needs time.

"Can't move sight yet" means, he can't see anything because he can't use the sight. You will have to maintain a stable flight attitude for a moment to enable safe work of the sight's gyros. Only then Petrovich will make use of the sight. Isn't all this mentioned in the manual?

This isn't any help if the server is running SRS

In my opinion, if you don't like the detailed study part of DCS aiming to be a study sim, then DCS might not the best choice to play. There are games available for your needs. The complexity of DCS modules is dictated by the complexity of the real world counterpart, the legal access to real world data and by limits of coding and performance. The complexity is not dictated by any poll evaluating the amount of time 'average' players are willing to invest in a game. DCS modules have to offere complexity. Otherwise not only the tag study sim would be questionable but also you would take away the necessary effort it takes people who are interested in study sims to accomplish their goal to study and hence kill their achievement. These days I find mainly 2 categories of players: The first category are using autostart and glance on Chuck's guides how to employ weapons. The fun is obviously in getting airborne 'somehow' and shoot stuff up. Second category enjoys the fun of thourougly studying a module up and down, knowing every bolt and screw. To use this knowledge to then make efficient use of the aircraft is their achievement, regardless if they do combat, transport, CSAR or formation flying. Luckily DCS (so far) seems to cater for both categories of players and I guess ED will continue to do so. There is no need to fight for the one or the other of these two routes. But of course, ya know, it's a study sim

I was killed by a Tunguska a few days ago, sitting in a Hind. I was flying in IMC and the only thing I could see was a bright spot getting bigger. So either the DCS Tunguska uses radar tracking or the AI is unimpeded by visual conditions..

only occasionally it does. We tried it multiple times. CPG was effectively locked out of radio, differences of several MHz were the norm.

We have the same problem with the R-828. Contacted the SRS guys in their discord channel about this ( a while ago), they blamed it on DCS.

Will the windshield wipers actually have an effect this time?

Now in the 4h year, MiG-19 is still in early access

The shop claims it's EA. is it? If it is, how is completion going on?

Just notice how long the Blackshark guys are waiting for meaningful updates and be happy with the lightspeed care the Hind enjoys... )