Ramsay

The F-15E is discounted like any other DCS Early Access titles on Steam i.e. the AH-64D ($80 discounted -20% = $64) is 63.33€, for comparison the full price F-16C and F/A-18C ($80) are 73.99 € A price of 40€ would be a 50% discount (on it's $80 full price) - so is unlikely to be seen out side of a Steam sale and long after early access has ended. Waiting years to buy a better quality product at a lower price may seem odd but is the norm these days. The best way to let dev's know how you feel is to vote with your "wallet" and only buy when you are "happy" with the price and quality you've paid for. For example • I'm still waiting for the MB-339 to be discounted as I feel it's priced too high for the amount of use I'm likely to make of it. • I bought a single copy of the F-15E, as the EA discount isn't enough to justify a second copy for MC. These were simple enough choices as it's already hard to maintain competency across all the modules I own. Whether a purchase is good or bad depends on setting realistic expectations and how much use/enjoyment you get out of it. IMHO even if you paid a little more than wanted for the F-15E, if you are making use of it, you are getting your money's worth out of it. YMMV.

The post below suggests 15% deadzones with 20% y saturations, so perhaps try reducing y saturation with a curve tuned for your prefered max slew rate.

I haven't notice any difference in sensitivity between axis but you don't say which throttle grip you are using (I'm using the F-16 and it's Radar cursor). Same. This is my WIP/initial setting - the large deadzone is to help dexterity/axis control (rather than mask pot spikes/jitter) and like you I'm interested to see what curves other Winwing owners are using. Not sure what's going on with AV-8B TPOD ATM as the MFD was very dark and I needed to use the popout export to see anything DCS Open Beta Multi-thread 2.8.7.42718

The most often "quoted" Mirage 2000C EM diagram is from a Northrop document "Fighter Weapons Symposium for the Royal Malaysian Air Force" promoting their F-20. It is only an "estimation" and does not represent the performance of the "real" aircraft. Razbam have made use of it, as SME feedback and their own reasearch is that it is of the "right" shape ... Razbam have then adjusted the DCS flight model so that it matches some known SOP data points such as an engine 40NM glide from 30k ft and over head paterns/breaks with known turn radi, speeds, etc. There is more detail and DCS Mirage 2000C EM diagrams in this thread https://forum.dcs.world/topic/318436-care-to-share-your-resources-and-data-about-the-m2k-performance/?do=findComment&comment=5143613

Yes.

The French documentation for the SA342 starter switch says that - with the Fuel Flow Lever at Minimum, the ARRET (OFF) position cuts the (electric ?) supply to the fuel inlet servo and stops the engine. As far as I can tell from youtube videos of the SA342 in flight - • In flight it's normal for the Fuel Flow lever to be at Max and the "Starter" switch left "ON" . • The procedure to stop the engine after landing is :- 1. Move the Fuel Flow Lever slowly to minimum 2. Switch the "Starter" switch to Arret (OFF) to stop the engine. * As the documentation specifies the Fuel Flow Lever needs to be at Minimum, Polychop interpret this to mean the engine won't stop when the Fuel Flow Lever is at Max Position - this may be correct as the SA-341 's "ON/RUN" position has oil/fuel pressure sensors that perform a similar function (if my interpretation of it's flight manual is correct). Video of a SA-342 Engine shut down @15:20 AFAIK - it does not, in fact a hot started RUNNING SA-342L spawns in with the Fuel Flow lever at MAX and it's starter switch set to ARRET (OFF) - which seems like a bug - as I have yet to see a video of a SA-342 in flight with it's "Starter" switch set to ARRET. Tested with a SA-342L in Open Beta Multi-thread 2.8.7.42583 For Info: From the Open Beta 2.8.7.42583 change log https://forum.dcs.world/topic/170893-dcs-world-changelog-and-updates-of-open-beta/?do=findComment&comment=5264276

Here's a quick video demonstrating how to set the burst height afresh

Higher Burst Altitude = greater dispertion at the expense of greater wind drift. In DCS with high altitude drops, the main bomb casing picks up more speed and a higher burst altitude is required to allow the BLU-108 parachute to slow it's speed sufficiently for the rocket motor to fire at 100 ft. IRL the fuse height is set on the ground and the PACS is set to match, AFAIK changing the burst height in flight is a DCS'ism. AFAIK the F-15E's spin setting isn't "hooked up" yet.

TL;DR: The default F-15E burst height at 700 ft AGL is to low for DCS, so the canister/munitions hit the ground before the BLU-108 is able to trigger. Adjusting the Fuse height to 1200 ft (IIRC DCS default for FC3) allowed the submitions to trigger and destroy the target vehicles. Detail:

No, Razbam modelled AWLS as being the "same" as ILS. You should use TACAN instead, if you want to land in semi-realistic CAT-3 IMC (it was also more common IRL than AWLS).

Yes, the EFM calculates the gross weight, however ATM it's bugged and I "guess" isn't hooked up to DCS's rigid body physics correctly so we get DCS calculating the fuel weight twice when the helicopter spawns in, not reducing weight in flight despite the calculation being done internally, etc. I really haven't tested the detail of what's going on as the problem has been identified and fixed, we are just waiting for the next OB update. https://discord.com/channels/303482672834019330/1129129150079324221/1129129910724739184

A number of fixes have been submitted to ED for the next OB update (date TBC, subject to change) inc. a crash due to the RWR. A work around "might" be to turn off the RWR before destroying the enemy radar/emitter but I haven't tested this. https://discord.com/channels/303482672834019330/1129129150079324221/1129129910724739184

I wouldn't say I regret my purchase as 1. I did due diligence before my purchase (checked reviews, read the DCS and RL manuals, etc.) 2. have a good idea about my own preferences and how much time I would spend flying her 3. made sure to buy in a sale 4. there was nothing else DCS related that I wanted on sale I didn't understand some of the positive reviews as, other than pretty liveries and a nice 3D model, it seemed lacking in many flight model, audio and system aspects - however, as I'd bought cheaply - it is very "back to basics" and a change from the complex aircraft I usually study and fly. I was surprised by the aerobatic chapter in the manual, so spent perhaps 2-4 hours reading up on aerobatic notation and practicing some RL basic routines in DCS. It was a pleasant enough way to spend an afternoon and I learned something new. However, as I have little interest in the current CE2, it'd take • a module "refresh" like the Mirage 2000C or Gazelle 342 have received • or a community "event" ... before I'll want fly her again.

Here is a picture of the SIT page as shown in a 2012 AIB report

I'm not sure it's a bug and it's something to check with your SME's and/or SA-342 documentation. I suspect the SA-341 and SA-342 avionics/FADEC differ as I can't find any SA-342 videos where the "starter switch" is moved to it's center "ARRET" position while in flight or before shut down. However there are plenty of SA-341 startup and flight videos* where starter switch up (lift and pull) is ignition and it's then moved to a middle "run" position. * This included a civilian French cockpit with a similar instrument and warning panel layout to our L - but checking it's registration using google revealed it to be a SA-341F. Here at 5:33 a SA342M engine test is shut down by moving the Starter (FADEC ?) switch to the ARRET middle position. ... which is exactly what we see in DCS.

A bug which is already fixed and submitted to ED for the next Open Beta patch (date unknown and details subject to change). https://discord.com/channels/303482672834019330/671347367030685697/1128695695780630561

I found Auto-Acq DEPRESS worked (rather than aft) With the HUD "IN CMD", Auto-Acq AFT toggles between AUTO and CDIP modes. In AUTO the TPOD tracks the Flight Path Marker (which creates the designation) In CDIP the TPOD tracks the CDIP Pipper (which creates the designation)

TL;DR: You need to undesignate first - usually boat switch Aft (will remove the HUD azimuth steering line and target diamond) Like you, I had difficulty getting the TPOD to move to the Flight Path Vector the first time I tried but it seemed to "fix" it's self after I went Boat Switch forward first. Not sure if it was a switchology error on my part (I had designated with NAV, RADAR and TPOD prior to trying to use the HUD/FPM) or a bug. However, after I'd got it to work first time, other HUD "IN CMD" resets were trouble free. Detail So in summary 1. A/G Master Mode 2. Undesigate any existing designations (Boat Switch Aft) 3. TPOD SOI, Auto-Acq DEPRESS (track/untrack) returns the TGP to slave mode. (If you don't TGP continues to track whatever it is looking at, even without a designated target) 4. Depress Castle Switch, then quickly SHORT Castle Forward (HUD Reads IN CMD) 5. Depress Castle Switch, then quickly SHORT Castle Forward (HUD TPOD box centers on Flight Path Marker, TPOD PB17 SP RET) 6. Fly to place Flight Path Marker on desired Target 7. TDC Depress to Designate (HUD target diamond, azimuth steering line, etc. - depending on weapon/selected mode) Tested using GBU-12's in AUTO STEP N/T with a CLTD JTAC marking targets with smoke and buddy lasing.

The pod is for the TV guided AGM-130 which can be guided and/or locked onto a target after launch. https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104579/agm-130-missile/ AFAIK JTIDS / Link-16 is an avionics upgrade, not a pod fitted to the aircraft https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/138458/fighters-benefit-from-link-16/

476 vFG - TACAN Yardstick Guide https://www.476vfightergroup.com/downloads.php?do=download&downloadid=509

Lots of changes and fixes are incoming, including improvements to the sound (volume ?) of the ECS. From Razbam's July OB Patch changelog (subject to change) • Improved: Adjusted ECS airflow sound gains https://forum.dcs.world/topic/330163-july-ob-patch-notes-from-razbam-discord/

Yes, the JTAC will need to mark the target with smoke or an IR pointer. Once identified, you can drop a LGB on the target, while the JTAC guides it with his laser. The LANTIRN FLIR Targeting Pod doesn't have a spot tracker. I don't know if UTM data entry is on Razbam's "roadmap" but the LST capable Litening II Targeting Pod is scheduled as part of the first CTU (2010) update.

Likely nothing, AFAIK using the "bomb in zone" trigger is problematic as the "bomb object" is only briefly in the detection zone before being destroyed. You can improve the chance of "good" bomb in zone detections by dropping the bombs so they fall lengthwise along the bridges (the trigger zones are rectangular and match the bridge decking) However, there's no guarantee as there's still a bit of luck involved as to whether the game detects the bomb in each zone before it explodes. As a workaround mission makers typically use scripting or setup infantry/vehicles on bridges to test for their destruction.

GBU-10 "in zone" i.e. for bridge 1, 2 and 3 should set flag 1, 2 and 3. There's a 4th Flag set for taking off (overfly/enter trigger zone near the inner marker at the far end of RWY 25). Each awards 25 points, equalling a max total of 100. However like you, I don't see a "win" only a draw as my score is only 50 despite dropping all three bridges and landing safely. F-15E Operation Roadblock, 2023-07-07, debrief.log Tacview-20230707-145608-DCS-1 Operation Roadblock.zip.acmi

AFAIK the GBU-28 should not be available - it's a mission bug. https://forum.dcs.world/topic/328735-gbu-28-malfunctions-in-mission-bombing-range-demo/?do=findComment&comment=5245103