PFunk1606688187

Next you'll be telling me to take off without a TGP. :megalol:

The only thing you need in order to be able to enter a new or edit an old waypoint in the Mission database is to have the Waypoint page up on the CDU. Thats it. Changing the Steer Point dial merely changes which waypoint database your steer points can be drawn from. Thats unrelated for the purposes of creating or editing. You can access those databases regardless of the steer dial position. It only becomes important once you want to use those points for some purpose. I think this is an example of how the DCS manual fails at teaching well, instead merely instructing a procedure without explaining what is and isn't required. That procedure is in fact a bit inefficient. It tells you to create a new waypoint, enter the grid, then rename it. You can choose the name at the same time you're creating the waypoint. Its actually a really simple easy thing to do, made complicated by annoying tutorials. If you ignore the button pressing required to get to the waypoint page and change from L/L to UTM then its a short process. At CDU Waypoint page Enter new waypoint name into scratchpad Create the new waypoint (OSB 9/LSK R3) Enter grid into scratch pad Enter grid into new waypoint grid field (OSB 16/LSK L4) Done. And people think the CDU is complicated.

Nope, which is why the lack of chocks in DCS is particularly annoying.

I believe he means the spring mod that significantly increases the centring force. I used the plastic DVD lid method, though there are a few others. In my opinion its an essential mod for the X52, much more so than the magnet mod.

How in god's name do you fly like that. :huh:

Beats me. Anytime I forget to turn boost pumps on my right engine fails to start 100% of the time.

As far as I know the JDAM is one of the most undermodeled weapons in the DCS A-10C arsenal, lacking many features. Its pretty much what you see is what you get, and what you get is something much less sophisticated in terms of its simulation of the real thing compared to say the GBU-12 in this sim.

Yes. Basically you can start the left engine with the same DC pump that is there to start the APU owing to the fact that the APU and that DC pump feed off the Left Fuel System. Since both fuel systems are isolated the Right Engine can't do this automatically.

0/0 on everything. Linear all the way.

I think its more like the nose wheel is being forced into the ground as the force from the engines has yet to cause it to begin moving and up until that point the nose gear is compressed by the force acting on it. Now this could very easily be simply a flaw in the modeling of the ground handling since the A-10C has neither a parking brake nor any chocks available to it in this sim.

Zero sight line (ZSL) — A basic reference line extending through the fuselage of the A-10 parallel to the longitudinal axis of the aircraft. All sight depressions are referenced from the ZSL. Depressible Pipper. The Depressible Pipper/Reticle is a dot at the center of a dashed circle. The circle consists of eight equally spaced dashes and gaps. Using the manual depression control on the UFC, the pipper can be positioned vertically from +10 to -300 mils with respect to the zero sight line, and it is fixed horizontally on the HUD center line and not wind-corrected. and for the purposes of being thorough... Gun Bore Line (GBL) Cross. This cross represents the longitudinal axis of the 30 mm gun. Rather than just interpret the truth, seems more accurate to simply quote it. :thumbup:

Its quite obvious that this is from before the upgrade to the C. There's no mention of SPI or SOI and it doesn't mention DMS when discussing changing the Gun reticles. Also you don't need to involve the TGP to use the TDC. All you need to do is make HUD SOI and you can slew the TDC around and it will ground stabilize on a point on the ground if its within 13nm. The TDC can be used to produce a SPI as well as create a Mark point. The functionality mentioned in the bit you quoted is more or less achieved simply by slewing the TDC to a place. You will then see the point on the ground through the HUD tracked using the INS/GPS. This is pretty much the limit of what the quoted text described. It does say "designate target" but that seems pretty vague since I'm not sure what that ties into the system with. With respect to SPIs and Mark points, under the A's systems I know the former didn't exist but I'm not sure about the latter beyond the option to create one over the aircraft's current position. Thats my interpretation. Info regarding the A-10C TDC can be found on page 365 of the manual. EDIT. I forget if setting SPI with the Mav seeker and then slaving all to it would cause the TDC to snap to it. Also there is if I recall a way to designate SPIs from the gun pipper so I think perhaps you could replicate the placement of the TDC that way as well. Again TGP not required for this.

The APU and the Left Engine are fed from the Left Fuel System, therefore they will start without the main boost pumps so long as the Inverter is on which energizes the DC buses which powers the DC boost pump that feeds fuel off the Left Fuel System. Right engine requires either the Right Boost Pump or Crossfeed to be on to start. I actually don't know if crossfeed with the Left Engine off will start the Right Engine, but I assume it would. All by memory. Subject to correction.

I think you're the type of person who would benefit from using the manual at an intermediate stage of the process. Video tutorials are good at revealing quickly the actual methodology of using the system in context as well as in general. However video tuts are rarely exhausting in detail and depending on the style and knowledge of the creator can have some errors or rather significant omissions. What then you should do is go to the manual once you have a strong feeling for a particular system. This will mean that you aren't overwhelmed with details you have no understanding of. It will mean that when you look at a picture that has every single icon the TAD can display on it you can then identify the ones you don't know, read about them, and integrate them into understanding of the system. You can also skim the parts you think you know pretty well and notice a few things you didn't really understand. I am pretty patient when it comes to reading manuals but since the A-10 was my first modern jet sim ever I had absolutely no clue how to begin to understand its systems and so I also struggled with the manual. I watched fish's lengthy video about the TAD as my main way of understanding it, then went back to the manual. Eventually I became so knowledgeable about the aircraft that I ended up digging through the manual for new things. The CDU was the last step but in the end there's only so much a youtuber can fit into a video. There are lots of really cool little things that I've never actually seen used in a youtube video. Nevertheless, when it comes to tactical concepts you will 100% have to look elsewhere. Even youtube is rather thin on tactical concepts as most players adopt the "whatever works" model. In this respect the BMS manual should benefit you greatly since ultimately ground attack isn't too much different between airframes other than the speed factor which should greatly affect the choice of when to use a given tactic much more than the how. The how is pretty much a universal.

In my experience you can start the Left Engine without the boost pumps because it will feed off the DC boost pump which is energized by the DC bus which is itself energized once the Inverter is switched on, if I remember the schematics properly. DC Boost pump feeds off the Left fuel system so it can support the Left engine which also feeds off that system. The right system is however isolated and so the Right Engine needs a boost pump to start it. Alternatively enabling crossfeed would allow you to start the Right Engine with the Left Fuel System. Again, as I understand it, the boost pumps while not being necessary to sustain fuel flow are necessary to start the engine.

Gun vs APC is highly efficient assuming a 1:1 ratio of passes to kills per target, and then there's the added efficiency of the two target strafe attack where you can nail 2 targets in a single pass. Thats not going to be effective against tanks given the short window for engagement within required firing range.

If its that hard to predict then thats a lot of expensive munitions that are basically useless in any kind of wind condition. As for the MK82Airs, I know from a reliable source that their in-DCS ballistic behavior isn't wholly realistic. Whats more I think you'd be surprised what can be predicted by modern computers.

Definitely. Saving your ammo, and especially your stores, is important especially since every full attack is putting the airframe in danger so if you press when you have no confidence in success its an unnecessary risk. One thing to note however is that when working in a 2 ship element being near enough to the target is sometimes good enough because you can have your wingie tell you about your effect on target and you can use that to adjust your aim if seeing the target is hard. This is in particular very effective when dealing with high winds and you can basically trade wind correction information by saying "I held this far right" and in the end be successful quicker and with fewer stores.

Yet the effect of those submunitions doesn't appear to be representative of the real weapon, ergo a higher density than ought to be needed is required. Might have changed, but I don't use 87s very often. I can't speak to what the real system does but I don't know why the system can't correct for windage of a few parachutes when it can do it for ballutes and iron bombs. It would be doubly interesting is a very expensive WCMD attachment could bring the weapon right to where it should be just to miss by a mile because they can't compute parachute drift when they can compute dispersion of devices that subsequently disperse even more devices that then search and destroy targets in a predictable area of effect. Given any wind condition at all (how often is there no wind above a few thousand feet?) it basically makes high HOF kind of pointless. Its one thing for humans to have to visually correct for iron bombs missing 50m left or right, but wind can carry a parachute quite far when it deploys at 3000 feet.

You definitely want to use 45'+ dive angles against tanks. Against anything else it doesn't really matter as much. You wanna open fire at around 0.8 nm slant range and hold fire for as long as you dare then pull out. Its very possible to kill even T-90s at that high angle. Against BMPs and the like its enough to fire at about 1.5nm. Against anything soft 2nm is plenty. Its actually very easy to snipe Shilkas and AAA without facing any meaningful threat. Dispersion of the GAU should be uniform despite dive angle. Steep dive angles just ensure the flashlight effect of the cone of fire impacts the target better. Dispersion of impacts increases or decreases on the target but the flashlight beam should always have the same shape, if I understand the geometry of how things work (sometimes I don't!). Effectiveness in all forms of attack is just about consistency and practice. You want to practice doing it properly the same way over and over, not just focusing on one thing but aiming to have the whole attack run from roll in to pull out being a well orchestrated string of precise actions. Avoiding over Ging the aircraft is again all about practice. You can practice the roll in and pull out by doing dry attack runs. This way you don't need to worry about hitting a target and instead focus on getting a feel for how to pull out without breaking wings off. Real life Safe Escape Maneuvers prescribe achieving 4 Gs of positive climb within 2 seconds of beginning the maneuver. This means you ease into the high G pull... quickly. No yanking. I do know for a fact though that much better pilots than I who I fly with regularly will come home with their Accelerometers reading 7Gs or more during the flight so... its hard to do, given our lack of 'gut' feeling. A professional clean attack would involve lots of little steps each involving a degree of precision and/or a mark you're trying to hit. Line up, roll, pull, level, track, pickle/fire, SEM. At every step you can critique yourself because at every step you should be looking to see something to know you're on track. When everything goes right it isn't even like you're making an effort. If its not effortless then you know you did something wrong. As for throttle management, if its 30' or below I just stand them up rather than go idle. Its important to keep as much speed as possible and its only high angle dives that require idle to avoid overspeeding. The A-10 is a slow pig, don't give it any encouragement. https://www.youtube.com/user/476vFG/videos Lots of goodies in there to show those very steps btw. There are demonstrations of the three main escape maneuvers, various types of dive attack. There are some threads that detail how to do proper CCIP bombing around here and if someone or I can find them for you they contain information relevant to gun as well since the roll in is basically identical. EDIT. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=117350&page=6 That whole thread is gold. I believe that particular aspect of LASTE was patched out a long time ago. References to that 8 second settling period come from outdated A model manuals.

If you use high HOF you either miss with the 97 owing to wind drift or the 87 bomblets disperse too much and don't kill anything because they don't do enough damage or something to that effect.

People use CCRP mostly because they're usually not very good at putting the pipper on the target by flying the aircraft, or because making a demo is hard work and it takes a lot of concentration to put the pipper on the target, which is what it takes to make CCIP mode work. After having played with CCIP consent mode a lot I've come to stop thinking of consent to release like its really separate from regular CCIP. When you use consent mode the dashed line exists so long as you are able to use it, however once you get past the point of being able to make that consent to release solution it defaults to standard CCIP. It means if you botched your CCIP CR attack run you still have the option to revert, and vice versa if you botch the roll in or general attrack approach on CCIP intending to just do a clean release you can change your approach on the fly and go for that CR release. CCIP is extremely flexible, particularly when dealing with a terminal attack phase that is full of variables you aren't quite certain of, such as exactly where the enemy is. CCRP however is pretty much a "I know where everything is ahead of time" tool, and if you only ever follow that methodology then you're probably going to spend at least twice as much time up there as you need to. PS. vis a vis HOF, owing to DCS' miserable simulation of high HOF settings on CBUs you're pretty much obliged to use low HOF, which coincidentally makes CCIP releases easier owing to the much lower hard deck limit to the fuzing.

The alternative is to create database waypoints which would allow a single point to service any number of people. The downside is that every player has to manually input it into their flight plans on mission start.

I've had that happen before. It seemed for me to be a total absence of certain warning sounds in general. The master caution for instance didn't make any noise when it fired off during my start up. Gear horn didn't make any noise on takeoff. I have noticed that it resolves itself during long missions and its only happened to me once or twice.

Sim pilots extraordinarily underestimate how important Angle of Attack is. http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/aoa.html http://kriegsimulation.blogspot.ca/2010/10/dcs-10c-warthog-angle-of-attack-watch_24.html Here's a secret. Its more important than any other variable. Humans might talk about stall speeds, and pitch angles and thrust to weight and so on, but computers that manage the flight envelope of modern fighters and autopilots that manage tubeliners all over the world can't do their job without knowing AOA. I know that some airforces actually teach their pilots to land by locking into a fixed Angle of Attack on approach rather than focusing on speed. This is because approach speeds are variable based on weight while correct approach angle of attack is constant. The Angle of Attack indexer is incapable of telling you to go too slow, provided its not broken (which I've never seen myself). The laws of physics and fluid dynamics say so. Intercept the glideslope from below. Drop gear and flaps and follow it down. Establish correct approach speed by getting the Donut to tell you you're at the right AOA (this is never wrong unless I think you're in a severe sideslip or something). Its now mantra time: Pitch for Speed, Power for Sink Rate. Pitch for speed means establishing and maintaining correct Angle of Attack. You can trim to this angle and it will not change, even if you release the stick. Aircraft are designed to want to remain at their pitched trim. Power for Sink rate means with your Angle of Attack locked in you will change your rate of descent by changing your thrust. You can watch this by seeing your TVV move up and down in the HUD while your speed will remain generally constant.* This is tried and true, and also counterintuitive. It takes practice but its part of learning the right way to fly. Its enormously beneficial to understand Angle of Attack and how it should be used in the approach. There's a reason the A-10 has 2 separate readable Angle of Attack instruments and a third that savages your ears with chop and steady tones. *In a stabilized approach your trimmed pitch angle will remain constant. When changing power it will move up or down, or both as the power state of the aircraft changes, however this fluctuation is temporary and eventually the aircraft will want to return to its trimmed pitch, meaning the same angle of attack which leads to the same speed, provided you don't alter the wing shape ie. by dropping or raising flaps. The fluctuation can be almost nonexistent if you make gentle power adjustments. At that point being and staying on the glideslope becomes a matter of gently adding or reducing power while your speed remains constant. Experience can allow you to also intervene during these fluctuations to basically dampen the natural pitch oscillations during more aggressive power adjustments until the aircraft is back at its natural trimmed equilibrium.