Golo

I said before, Im all for disabling cheat features such as labels server side, because it would give an advantage to whoever uses it against non users. But, as I also said before ball overlay is visual aid that does not affect you in any negative way (anything other that your "sense of realism", even tho you cant even see it). I just think it should be on every individual if they want to use it and not to be enforces server wide (private or not does not make a difference to me) either on or off.

It does not retract anything from realism imho especialy for others that cant even see it. And I would use (and Ill probably will when I go VR) it if it was implemented better. Even now I find myself having to zoom in a little at a start in a groove to see ball clearly and I get tunnel vision, loss of speed sense and such. I would use it if ED made it more customisable so I could resize it, move it where I want, change its brightness and opacity how I want and ability to save those settings permanently so I wouldnt have to do it all the time.

What you are basicaly saying is I dont want it because it will give someone advantage over me in very specific weather condition. It does not affect you in any negative way during CASE I, not even during CASE II, not even in majority of CASE III conditions. It only gives slight advantage (questionable at best) to the user during specific CASE III conditions. On the other hand someone who has trouble making out the ball during landing will be affected negatively by not be able to use this overlay every time except CASE III no vis. condition because no one will see anything anyway.

This is and always will be unachivable, there will always be someone with advantage/disadvantage. Unless everyone will fly with same hardware/software configurations all the time.

Well maybe for someone who cant see ball clearly enough on their screen or VR, you have the advantage. I think that is why it was implemented in a first place. I just dont understand why you would ban function that does not affect others in any negative way, maybe gives whoever uses it bit of advantage in some specific conditions. I also dont understand your "realism server" argument, you can not see the overlay if you dont use it so there is no "reality" broken for you, for someone who use it, well they probably need it and its not a biggest of advantage as you said.

Edit: You are on to something here actually. I went through it again a little in NATOPS and there is some discrepancies between it and actual behaviour in game. Fuel feed switch: When switched to AFT position - Left feed of aft and left system starts to decrease quantity and R feed of forward, and right will increase its quantity (if it was lower than max) or or will hold max. When switched to FWD position Left feed of left and aft system will increase its quantity (if it was lower than max) or or will hold max, and R feed of forward and right system will start to decrease. And there is no transfer of fuel between Aft and left and Forward and right systems, not that is obvious to me. What should happen if I understand the description correctly, is that whatever position you select on Fuel feed switch, the fuel feed of that selected side should remain full and there should be transfer of fuel from opposite side to selected side. Further more, I was testing AB effect on feed groups. High engine fuel demands should cause the fuel in box beam tanks to decrease creating pressure drop in beam box tanks that will cause fuel to be drawn from tanks no.2 and no.5 into sump tank, instead of drawing it from box beam tanks. That should result in dropping fuel quantity of L/R feed group somewhere around some 1200lbs and hold as any further fuel is drawn from tanks no.2 and no.5. However in game the fuel in L/R feeds will always decrease to 300lbs and is not affected by any altitude change (tested same on the deck and 30k ft).

Yes, I can see how that will affect other players, that would not be able to see own position. But I fail to see how IFLOLS overlay affects anyone else in any negative way, less that one above, which I would not care about really.

Well, OK fair enough, but it still affect only him and only in very specific situation. Honestly it would not bother me at all, there are other means to land even if you cant see the ball.

This is not like the labels case. If one individual would have labels on and others off he would have an unfair advantage because he would see every other aircraft (label) and they would not see (probably) him. But the iflols overlay ONLY afects the one individual that has it turned on (so he can see the ball) and it does not affect other players in any way.

No, servers should have no ability to enforce this. It should be on individual basis if someone wants to see it or not. Forcing it server side on all, either on or off when if they have it on/off does not affect others in any way is unacceptable. I personally want it off because I use monitor and track-ir and never had problem to see the ball, but others flying in VR on same server might want it on, which I support, but if its set off they wont be able to. On the other hand if its set server side on for the VR guys, I will have it on as well which I dont want.

Why in a hornet? Its not specific to hornet but to supercarrier, why not create supercarrier special tab, I would assume some more things may fit in that category later.

Interesting thing about this I found is (I dont know if it plays trick on my mind or is real), If you startup but leave radar OFF, then the ADI will drift. If you startup and switch radar to STBY and then ON after take off, ADI and horizon on radar scope will drift. But strange thing for me is it does not happen if you start up and leave radar in STBY for the duration of the flight, ADI will not drift, it will stay aligned no matter how many crazy maneuvers you do.

Only silly ass comment here is yours. Instead of bringing new features, it would be in my humble opinion better if they fixed IFLOLS H/E for F-14s, non functioning ACLS, LSO slow calls for F-14 (that gets on my fkn nerves), ball overlay show/hide options, made ATC actually realistic, added taxi dirrectors, wands for night ops, longer wake behind ships. That would bring lot more immersion for me than stupid ready room/hangar deck update. Their priorities of whats important have been, again in my humble opinion totally off for long while now.

I tried but I can not induce the stall/fire at all. I was thinking, could it be something with AICS system? Maybe the inlet ramps hydr/scheduling failure? AICS operation in NATOPS is very interesting and deserves to be looked at. Here is a short snippet from 14B - 2.1.3.2 Fail-Safe: ...If the hydraulic shutoff valve closes above Mach 0.9, the ramps are normally in an unsafe configuration and the appropriate RAMPS caution light will accompany the INLET caution light (Figure 2-5). Above Mach 0.9, the No. 3 ramp normally begins programming below the actuator stow lock. When the fail-safe mode is entered above Mach 0.9, the unpowered No. 3 ramp will eventually move and may cause compressor stalls at higher power settings. The aircraft shall be decelerated below 1.2 IMN, and the appropriate INLET RAMPS switch shall be selected to STOW. Anyone looked if RAMPS/INLET caution light or some other warnings are lit during your described events? Maybe for HB too to check the AICS function/scheduling, just and idea.

Well AIM-9s on station 1A, 8A have drag index 8 (per station), AIM-7s in tunnel have drag index of 2 (per station), so you have twice the drag index carrying 2*9s over 4*7s in tunnel. But even still, I too find the stores drag to be excessive.

For you to get direction there needs to be a signal on a frequency you are listening to. ATC is not dedicated ADF station that transmit all the time, they obviously only transmit when they are taking to someone in this case its working as intended.

According to technical manual for MiG-21, afterburner should not be functioning with activated SPS switches, and flaps more than 30° down. Also when tested on the ground in AB regime, when SPS is switched on, assuming flaps are more than 30° down, AB will disengage.

Well, that is the point of this BUG report, because according to NATOPS it now functions incorrectly.

Then show/tell us the exact paragraph(s) please. And that is just plain false.

Do you have any evidence to back up your statement?

Yes it should be call of the mission designer what aircraft to be assigned to what coalition/country. If I want to do what if scenario/campaign such as that Argentina bought F-14s in 1983 and fought someone with them, I find it downright ******* not to be able to do so. This goes for ED and any other module too.

Thats not in conditions that are required for DLC operation, so I still consider it bug.

Tested in MP, at 20k ft, more or less level, aprox 10k fuel, 2x9s, 2x7s in tunel, XT(empty), from M0.85 to M1.45 took me something over 2min, Its slow but smooth and steady. No wall above M1 like before. Engines were OK. Looks like its fixed, for me at least. Thx HB .

I said it before and Ill say it again, you should not model your radar exactly as IRL by whatever documentation you have on it, because it just does not work for in-game purposes. For example the latency and ruberbanding, it would just not happen IRL as it happens in game, and if you model the radar according to specs we will get many viable shots trashed just by latency/warping/netcode, if I have TWS track and it warps few times my track get dropped and after it will pick it up again as a new track if it cant correlate it back as the old track the missile will be most likely wasted. No point fighting with radar like that. The TWS times for track holding/ correlation of new track to old ones (or whatever variables the radar needs, as was disscussed before) needs to be enhanced for in game purposes. If not that our in game radar just wont be on par with IRL one, where that would not happen.

Its incorrect. Nowhere in NATOPS its says that DLC only works with "antiskid spoiler brakes" switch engaged. In fact its specifically says in pre-land descend checklist for CV landing that "antiskid spoiler brake" has to be OFF, and it also says to use DLC on CV landing. This is the only requirement for DLC to work: 2.22.6 Direct Lift Control. During landing approaches, the spoilers and horizontal stabilizers can be controlled simultaneously to provide vertical glidepath correction without changing engine power setting or angle of attack. Only the inboard spoilers are used for DLC. Before DLC can be engaged, the following conditions are required: 1. Flaps down greater than 25°. 2. Throttles less than MIL power. 3. Inboard spoilers operational. 4. Pitch B and Yaw B computer segregations operational. 5. Operable combined hydraulic pump. Edit: Any word from HB? I really hope it will get sorted out for that coming hotfix.