Eihort

Just to tack on to this, I've been getting the SA-3 showing up as a "2" on the RWR. I was looking all over with the Pod trying to find that trailer with super satellite service (FAN SONG) and all that was there was The Burning Scareman (LOW BLOW). Tacview clearly showed there wasn't an SA-2 anywhere on the map.

Unless I'm on crack, they are. I've used them in multiplayer.

Ooo! Ooo! Dr. Dr.! Can I see a bug splat for X-band please? Around 9gigish?

The ranging radar on the SA-13 is a continuous wave and therefore will trip your RWR as that's a very large and steady signal and very directional. The command links between missiles while detectable, aren't discernible as to *which* particular aircraft the missile they're guiding goes to. Giving a pilot too much information is just as bad as not enough. You don't want an entire strike package and escorts and SEAD etc. to all flip out when 1 missile is launched at 1 aircraft, everyone thinking it's headed for them. Not to mention this is really easy to use as a decoy IRL with stationary emitters. Effectively, the designers of the RWRs intentionally ignore these signals to prevent pilot information saturation. This is one of the reasons the SA-19 is so effective, is that if you can passively (via optical) get az, el, and range close enough to generate a track, the only warning you're going to have is the missile launch itself to key off of.

This is my only gripe so far with the company. It's nearly impossible to get accurate news on when stuff is available much less it actually being so. I managed to jump on one when they were available around Xmas, but for a while there I was worried they still wouldn't necessarily ship until I got the notice today. It's a bit of a minor miracle they finally got the US web store to get a waiting list, instead of the random "Well just subscribe to the website." I kinda wanna throw my money at the monitor, not get a newsletter that some accessory is out for a stick I don't even own.

I know that they're different and why, and I was able to figure it out in the end. The problem is that they're inconsistent inside the game for absolutely no reason, and it's confusing.

Options, Controls has the following labels in the drop down: MiG-29 MiG-29C MiG-29G Mission Editor has the following selectable: MiG-29A MiG-29S MiG-29G No idea why these are inconsistent, but it sure made me have to scratch my head as to which aircraft had which set of controls for a moment.

I was too busy noticing that the Kuznetsov model they've been showing in videos for nearly two years isn't in game yet.

Try and replicate it now with a 4k main screen resolution.

Did some more testing. This is a 4k resolution issue. Nominally, I run this type of setup with a 4k monitor and a small dell 1024x768, to which I have velcroed my Cougar MFDs to the corners. Here are shots of my windows monitor layout, main settings screen, and my MonitorSetup lua. _ = function(p) return p; end; name = _('A10 Jon4K'); Description = 'MFDs for A10C'; Viewports = { Center = { x = 0; y = 0; width = 3840; height = 2160; viewDx = 0; viewDy = 0; aspect = 1.7; } } LEFT_MFCD = { x = 3836; y = 0; width = 379; height = 373; } RIGHT_MFCD = { x = 4496; y = 0; width = 369; height = 367; } UIMainView = Viewports.Center With the above setup, I get the blurry MFCPs on the second monitor, and perfect A-10C MFDs with the exact same setup. If I adjust everything to where my main display is now 1920x1080 with a 1024x768 tacked on, and do the math and move the numbers in the MonitorSetup lua, the MFCPs work perfectly I don't know what it is, but for some reason the engine is clearly handing the F/A-18C MFCPs differently than the A-10C MFDs when you're in 4k vs 1080.

The A-10C capture and the F/A-18C capture are from that second monitor via windows snipping tool, with no changes between aircraft or settings. Just loaded one up, and then the other in the same session, with the same config files. Again, this is with no third party software like helios or anything else. Also going to +1 the request for all your settings.

They're still using it in all the latest videos, though, like it's actually in-game.

I want to emphasize that I am not using any 3rd party software what so ever to have these MFCPs (left and right) rendered on another monitor. This is simply config file editing. I have the display setting at 1024 every frame, and changing that setting doesn't seem to do any good. For the A-10C, it works splendidly. This is what the other screen is showing. Inside the mainviewport, everything is also fine: However, on the other monitor, it looks like I need reading glasses or something: This is the only aircraft I have this problem with. Any ideas on how to fix this without using any 3rd party software?

NO ONE POSTED CAPTAIN SKYHAWK?!

The Flankers are not small airplanes.

I was getting a little annoyed as the backseat has been very scarce in all these videos and features. I'm planning on being a dedicated RIO so I was kinda wondering what I was going to be working with.

Had a gear malfunction, collapsed on landing, and did the repair function. It picked me up, fixed everything, then dumped me right back on my nose without lowering the gear.

I think we all know what this is, don't we folks? Source: http://www.drakenintl.com/catalog/aircraft-inventory/mikoyan-mig-21bis-probe-equipped

Anyone? Beuller?

EDIT: Okay, apparently some aircraft now have a "Horizontal View (Mouse)" and "Vertical View (Mouse)" as controls and others don't, so it's going to be dependent on the aircraft. Case in point, I couldn't control the F2 view with the MiG-21bis, but could do the J-11A just fine. The 21 has Horizontal and Vertical designation and the J-11A has the "Camera" options. Some standardization would be nice across modules, just saying. :/

As stated. In the F10 map on the Caucasus you have to zoom in so far on the F10 map screen to see the MGRS and Town labels that it's virtually useless. I have a 4k screen and they don't pop up until I can only see one square at a time. What makes it worse is about every 100nm of scrolling or so at that level to find the box I'm looking for (on my 4k monitor it's 12.28nm across according to the ruler) the entire process hangs for about 15 seconds. Is there a way to adjust this I've missed or is it a bug?

YAY!

I created a mission leaving from Groom and the QFE was right in this range. It's not exactly uncommon on the map and this is just incredibly frustrating, considering I'm exclusive to 2.2 right now until 2.5 hits. It's really hard not to sympathize with the negative comments when this has been around since August and only two weeks ago was finally acknowledged for change by Heatblur. Something made for fun and tongue in cheek has made the aircraft virtually unusable under common conditions.

+1 to female voices please. Also, some way to add our own voices. Even if we have to record the voices ourselves, and split them up into individual files to fit an exact structure so we can have some automated tool ED supplies and say "GO" and it makes the sound pack for us. Then it will randomly assign it to pilots, or maybe we can even specify specific nationalities. I think it would be neat to have a multitude of voices available as mods.

._. The P feels like a cop-out so that they don't have to do MP seating or reply on AI to make a chin gun work. Still waiting on MP for the Huey.....