Eihort

This appears to be associated with your frame rate dropping or the game momentarily freezing to load something. During normal monitor use, it's no big deal, but in the headset, that kind of freeze can cause almost instant nausea, so I think it's a comfort safety feature.

Just go to the controls section in options. The camera controls have their own sub-section, including the ones you seem to be missing as those use modifier keys.

I played the living daylights out of this thing with a wingman extreme. Managed to get a repackaged CD version of it. [ame] [/ame]

They certainly had no problem exploiting alternative interchangeable parts for their steering wheels. Get it together Thrustmaster. Starting to see why RSI took their business for Star Citizen to Saitek.

I may or may not have gone so far as to reinstall Third Wire products. >_>

I shall call this patch.... Death Of The Delta Wings. M2000C is also unusable. :(

Nice!

And they pulled it because there's a large CPU hog bug apparently.

Let us wait some more.... >_>

Will a forgetful a friendly MiG-21bis driver will still show up as enemy if they don't turn on their IFF transponder? Pretty sure they're show as enemy to everyone.

There are some radars that have LPI (Low probability of intercept) where they're difficult to pick out from all the other (un)natural RF noise, and can detect you before you realize you've been had. This is not modeled in DCS AFAIK. Hypothetical SA-3: First, 90km is way beyond the range of the system. Assuming reasonable numbers, it's as nomdeplume said. There's a lot going on there with WEZ (weapon engagement zone) and aircraft interacting. Nominally, all the earlier (single digits) systems require a search radar be attached to them so they know where to look because their detection zones are small beams. They have to know almost exactly where to point to see anything meaningful without attracting an ARM shot. The later systems are much more capable without EWRs attached, but then the later EWRs attached have FAR more range and are more capable (3D vs 2D without additional height finders). IADS Sophistication: Sometimes, all you really need to know is exactly where and when the target will be, and nothing else will be required, said no F-117 pilot shot down in the Balkans ever. The sophistication of an IADS can literally be that simple as someone just picking up a phone and calling another site to give them bearing and range information, or even a predesignated sector they "detect" an aircraft in with their "sensors". Insert whatever you want for detect and sensors. Sort of. MTI (moving target indication) does an excellent job of removing false targets thanks to weather, ground clutter, etc. It's not perfect, but it get's the job done, even if it means that they're vulnerable to notch exploitation. Range Determination with RWR: Good luck. There are a ton of variables against you. Remember, in the western aircraft especially, the distance from the middle is roughly signal strength. It's really a function of "increased threat". It's different for each threat as an airborne system will have much less power at a given range than a ground based EWR system. The system accounts for this. A SA-10 will show "greater threat" at 50km while an SA-3 at the same range will show almost nothing. If the SA-10 is still at 50km and the SA-3 is now at 7km, they might show exactly the same threat level. With the Russian system it's even harder, as you only have decent gradients on direction in your front hemisphere, and the best way to get bearing rate changes is to fly perpendicular. Also realize that the accuracy of an RWR can be off by several degrees and you need to be completely level for the antennas to pick up the signal and calculate everything correctly. In short, the best you can get is "near, medium, far" out of it.

+1

Aircraft flying away from each other and RWR detections: You don't. Not at 180 anyway. There's side lobes and other things that can make detections possible from angles outside the operating range, but they're kind of random at best and usually don't have enough power to trigger an RWR at meaningful ranges. RF Hazards: Yes. This is bad. Very bad. It won't kill someone with short exposure time but it's not healthy. In the case of the sandwich... well, what would a microwave do to it? Exact same principle. This is why a lot of aircraft have WOW (weight on wheels) safeties on radar and laser transmit functions. There are switches to override these so ground crews, in a controlled environment, can work on the systems, but in normal operation, they're kept off for a reason. In the case of Lasers, you could permanently blind someone, even though they're not in the visible spectrum. NCTR: Non-cooperative Target Recognition. One method for this is tickling the engine fans with radar and analyzing the results. Another is looking at the radar return itself. Each of these requires a certain processing time, and in the case of the engines, requires a specific aspect. A lot of how to do this is hush hush. Passive RWR detections and EMCON: So, as stated, an RWR is simply a spectrum and signal analyzer with a computer attached to it. Through various antennas located on the aircraft, it can determine direction of arrival of signals, and with some processing, tell you what system they're from, and what mode the radar is in. The MiG-21bis system is incredibly rudimentary compared to the A-10C and F-15C and tells you a lot less. Now, repeat after me: IN DCS RWRs WILL DETECT AN EMITTING RADAR LONG BEFORE THAT RADAR CAN DETECT THE AIRCRAFT. Use this knowledge to your advantage. This is why both the western RWRs and the SPO-15 have a method of determining the detected power level of emitters to try and inform you of whether or not you may or may not have been detected and/or the approximate range of the emitter. EMCON or Emissions Control is a big deal on the modern battlefield. There are many systems such as VERA that are effectively ground-based RWRs on steroids. Flying around with your radar on in a modern IADS could leave you incredibly vulnerable to SAM ambushes and interceptors guided by GCI. The notion that pilots never fly with their radar off is false. If it were completely safe, they'd also fly around with jammers on too, and they don't, for the exact same reason. There are times where you do want them on all the time so it's not a pure blanket statement. How an air battle is going determines whether or not the risk of detection is worth it. Keeping your radar and jammers off makes the enemy do all the work of detecting you, and that in and of itself can provide you with information as they'll have to turn on their radars to see you. With a decent RWR set, you can react to what they're doing and even avoid detection as you'll see their emissions long before they detect you on their radar. Personally in multiplayer, when there's plenty of other allies flying around as a decent distraction, I keep the radar off and listen to teamspeak to get an idea where the bad guys are and sneak up on them as best I can. Contrails, missile launches, flares, afterburners all make other aircraft more visible at long ranges. If you know where they are but they don't seem to know where you are, you're at a huge advantage. I'll keep the radar off as much as possible, only transmitting to get positional updates as necessary to keep driving towards attack ranges.

When you get your stick, set it up as close as possible to the HOTAS in the A-10C. You'll save yourself a lot of headaches. Tutorials, tutorials, tutorials. Single player practice. Single player practice. Single player practice. Even us experienced players have to do our paces with a new aircraft when we get our hands on it. My typical self-training goes something like this: 1. Fly it, air start from editor. Get a feel. Yank the stick, hard. She what she will and won't do. Stall it. Deliberately depart flight. Recover it if I can. 2. Start it, fly it, land it. Do some go arounds. All the weapons in the world are pointless if you can't do these three things, in that order. Don't move on until I successfully land it. 3. Air start with weapons. Throw an unarmed target out there to shoot at. Figure out the offensive sensors, how to mange my own weapons and switchology. I will have to switch weapons and acquire targets in a hurry. 4. Whole shebang. Take off, engage, RTB. Familiarize myself with the emergency procedures if necessary. Normally it isn't. I can't really recall when I haven't just been outright killed in multiplayer or forced to eject anyway. Still, never hurts to be prepared. These aren't necessarily full understandings of these systems either. I'm -still- not entirely sure how to use the nav system in the A-10C or Ka-50 and I have nearly a hundred hours in each, and don't get me started on how much of a black box that is for me in the Mirage. I know just enough to get where I'm going, which in MP, seems to be good enough.

"Wake up and stop dreaming. We're at the IP." "Yeah yeah."

You change lyrics...

Time of this report: 2/29/2016, 16:15:40 Machine name: JORMUNGANDR System Manufacturer: MSI System Model: MS-7885 Processor: Intel® Core i7-5930K CPU @ 3.50GHz (12 CPUs), ~3.5GHz Memory: 16384MB RAM Card 1 name: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Display Memory: 4095 MB Card 2 name: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Display Memory: 4095 MB

What it's really looking for is a bright flare IR, and then little to no bearing changes, which means the missile is tracking you. However, this is why a wingman flying close shooting a mav will cause the system to register a false positive. Since I know a bit about radar, some of the differences between the modes: RWS: The reason why you'd use this over TWS is that in RWS, you can pick up contacts faster, because you're not trying to build enough information to develop a solid track. If you get lucky and a target pops up over a ridge, then dives back down, this mode will see him if it's looking at the right time, while TWS doesn't see it long enough to develop a track and just drops it. TWS: This analyzes the doppler frequency changes of the transmit pulse over a period of time to build a track to tell you the heading of each contact on your scope. However, you have to have the target stay in the detection zone longer before seeing a display. The upside is, it can build an accurate enough track to launch an AIM-120 without having to fundamentally change the signal from RWS, so enemy RWRs don't know if they've even been launched on, and only find out when the missile itself goes active. STT: Here, the radar is putting out more pulses than the other two modes, which RWRs can pick up on, and determine that you've locked onto them and warn the pilot. More EM at the target, means more EM returning, means more accurate track data to guide missiles. "Guidance Mode": Not something you actively switch to, but what the radar does to guide a missile. By now you want literal moment to moment tracking of the target because you're either guiding a missile, or it's SARH, and needs your radar to bounce off the target to know where it is. The F-15C doesn't need to do this for AIM-120s, but all the other jets and the F-15C for the AIM-7 have to. While spoofing seems like a good idea against a specific target, to make it think you launched on it, you're guaranteed to end up with a counter fire against you, or at the very least you've completely given away your intent and position. You're better off firing a real missile. Also, pilots are already task saturated enough, and giving them a tool by which they could use it, and they themselves -think- they launched a missile is just asking for trouble. No one uses blanks in ground combat, why do the same thing in air combat? A SAM does it, it's asking for a retaliatory ARM strike. Again, better off launching a real missile. The only thing a spoof mode is good for is training.

You can just look down at the switch....

Since I'm late to the party... Everything I read about that HAWK on an F-14 the Iranians tried says they abandoned it very quickly. While they got it to work, the launch envelope was so restrictive it was useless. Supposedly you have to be below 5k and the target over 15k.

Just to clarify what he means by "all the way".... Your radar is throwing energy out there that can be picked up by RWRs much farther than you can ever hope to even see them on your own radar. There's no setting to change your output power or anything else. Your radar is either on or off. Once you throw some RF out there, it's gone, and will keep going until it's attenuated by atmosphere to nothing, or bounces off something. This is why the best pilots know good emcon (Emissions Control), and don't run their radars on all the time every time, and instead learn to use the EOS as much as they can.

Best thing about the Su-27: It will do whatever you tell it to. Worst thing about the Su-27: It will do whatever you tell it to.

It's a B-1RD!

If you want to understand Pierre better, understand his mentor. http://www.amazon.com/Boyd-The-Fighter-Pilot-Changed/dp/0316796883 While he didn't sit down at a drawing board or early CAD station and physically design the A-10 or the F-16, you have to realize that those are both planes the Air Force patently did not want at the time. There had to be studies on the various aspects that would dictate the performance of the aircraft and those are what he worked on. He was also navigating the Byzantine bureaucracy of the Pentagon to help get the F-16 done, and also was the prime mover pushing the A-10 through. For their time, they were revolutionary designs to fight the USSR, who was going to come screaming through the Fulda Gap with more tanks than God, covered by enough cheap MiG-21s and 23s to blot out the sun. In that environment, those planes are perfect. In a modern environment with highly lethal point-air defense, and even better long-range area SAM coverage, they're in deep trouble. Dat slide show tho. AR-15 has more stopping power than M-14... wut? (Okay, maybe with the wound ballistics, but even then, that's a stretch.)