WHOGX5

If I hover my cursor over a target on the FCR and press the pinky switch for FOV EXP, my cursor will be way off the target. When I press it again to zoom out my cursor will be over the target again.

I've tried to find a single condemning sentence in all my handbooks but there is nothing that explains it beyond the shadow of a doubt. Everything seems to point towards it, but I don't have definite proof. The closest sentence I found was the exact same that you quoted NineLine. One interesting thing though is that in my handbooks I can't find a single picture of the DED in COM Override Mode that has an empty scratchpad, and there is not a single illustration where the scratchpad frequency is the same as the selected frequency. I also found this illustration through google images but I can't for the life of me find it's source, and therefore I can't claim it as definite truth. The illustration does however show the exact behaviour that I tried to explain, which Frederf explained more eloquently than I ever could.

Where my J-35 Draken boys at? We need the AJS-37's brother in arms! Imagine having either the J-35F2 from '67 or the later J-35J from '87. Either of these two options would make me a very happy man! :D

I understand what you mean, but I think you misunderstood what I meant in relation to the quote you posted. In it's current implementation it doesn't select your previous freq/channel you had in the scratchpad. Instead it displays the current freq/channel which makes no sense. Why would I press ENTER to see the freq I'm already on? I have no IRL F-16 experience, but the way it works in other sims I've played this feature allows me to quickly return to my previous channel without having to input anything; just press COM1/COM2 followed by ENTER and you'll be back on your previous frequency. Do the same thing again and it will return to the freq/channel you were originally on. In its current implementation in DCS this isn't possible, as it instead tries to enter my current freq/channel and I just stay on the same freq/channel as before. EDIT: ̶T̶o̶ ̶c̶l̶a̶r̶i̶f̶y̶,̶ ̶w̶h̶e̶n̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶p̶r̶e̶s̶s̶ ̶C̶O̶M̶1̶/̶C̶O̶M̶2̶ ̶i̶t̶ ̶w̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶a̶l̶r̶e̶a̶d̶y̶ ̶d̶i̶s̶p̶l̶a̶y̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶r̶ ̶c̶u̶r̶r̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶f̶r̶e̶q̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶s̶c̶r̶a̶t̶c̶h̶p̶a̶d̶.̶ ̶P̶r̶e̶s̶s̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶E̶N̶T̶E̶R̶ ̶w̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶r̶e̶p̶l̶a̶c̶e̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶r̶ ̶c̶u̶r̶r̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶f̶r̶e̶q̶ ̶w̶i̶t̶h̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶p̶r̶e̶v̶i̶o̶u̶s̶ ̶f̶r̶e̶q̶.̶ EDIT 2: I checked again just to be sure I wasn't talking out of my ass, and there was an slight inaccuracy on my part. Actually, when you press COM1/COM2 your scratchpad will show your previous freq by default, not the one you're currently on. So if I switch from 251.0 to 255.0, then the next time I press COM1 my scratchpad will display 251.0 even though I'm on 255.0. If I then press ENTER, the next time I press COM1 I will be on 251.0 and the scratchpad will display 255.0. I'm tired and possibly retarded. I'll be back tomorrow to triple check my claims lol. :music_whistling:

Here's the track. radio.trk

The newly created tutorial section of this forum is a great initiative by ED, but it needs to be moderated to be useful. As most of you have noticed, a certain DCS community has already spammed all their tutorials for pretty much every module there is. The issue with this is that most of these tutorials are wildly inaccurate, unstructured and unnecessarily convoluted which will only lead to new players to learn things incorrectly and inefficiently. There are plenty of content creators that make tutorials of incredible quality that explain things accurately and in an organized manner. Please make sure these kind of tutorials are what our new players find instead of what we see at the moment.

As far as I know, if you press COM1 or COM2 on the ICP followed by ENTER without inputting any numbers, the selected radio should switch back to the previously selected frequency or preset. This is currently not working.

EDIT: RECRUITMENT IS CURRENTLY CLOSED! Hi Everybody! The Wildcats Community is now recruiting and we're looking for virtual fighter pilots and RIOs with some experience under their belt to fill the ranks of our F-14, F-16 and F-18 squadrons! We operate in Central European Time and strive to fly with the use of realistic procedures and tactics. If this sounds interesting, join our community discord, say hello and we'll take it from there! Discord: https://discord.gg/8C6yw3M // Prophet, CO for 23d Fighter Squadron

I'm no expert or anything, but I've never seen a clock dialed to Zulu reach 26:43:41.

When holding TMS Left to use LOS mode for the IFF it doesn't trigger when you've depressed it for the required amount of time. Instead you have to depress it for the required amount of time, then it triggers when you release the button. As far as I know this is incorrect behaviour.

Admittedly I have a 21:9 monitor but I always check my gauges out the sides of the NVG's. Since the vertical FOV is so limited even on a 16:9 monitor it's easier to look out the sides, especially the bottom corners. In the F-14 for example, I can still look at the speed gauge and vertical speed indicator without moving my head at all when using NVG's.

Having all of this and a properly modelled TCTS pod would be amazing. It'd be really nice if we could practice A-G and A-A completely without live weapons. I'm gonna have to say the "I" word. I M M E R S I O N

+1 Trim is ridiculously hard to do fine adjustments with in the DCS F-16. I don't know which is more realistic but I really like the F-18's trim because you can do such incredibly minuscule adjustments with ease. Also, don't only fix the roll trim, fix pitch as well.

Can confirm that this still is an issue and when I brought this up previously it got marked as 'already reported'.

This has been an issue for a very long time and applies to all aircraft AFAIK. You simply can't refuel your external tanks. Only solution, like you said, is to remove them and then attach a new one.

It does indeed look slightly horizontally stretched in the real life video, you can see a slight oval effect on the circles that are displayed. I only want to bring light to this inaccuracy, and I assume that ED has access to real life photos or documentation that will allow them to accurately correct this without needing to reference some shoddy ol' YouTube video like I have to do. :D

I completely understand that Hornet pilots feel a bit sour about getting TWS after the Viper drivers, for all the obvious reasons, and those feelings are justified. What boggles my mind though is people who want the feature to be delayed, rather than release it to the Viper first. I just can't understand this "if I can't have it, he shouldn't either" mentality. Life isn't always 100% fair, that's no reason to make it suck just as much for everyone else.

I want to preface this by saying I know this might not seem like a priority or a big deal at all, but this is really hampering the overall experience for me. The fonts are incorrect which make numbers very hard to distinguish and read from a distance; much harder than in the real F-16. I have therefore made some comparisons between the fonts in the DCS F-16 and from recordings from real life F-16 MFD's. Here's the world's first AIM-120 kill by 90-0778 which is an F-16D Block 42, and therefore it would be reasonable to assume that it has the same fonts for it's MFD's as the F-16C Block 50, though I can't confirm this as I don't have access to any documentation or have any contact with SME's. In the top right you can see 480 in big letters, and also on the right in the middle horizontally you can see 1180 in small letters. Compare that to this photo from Wags latest mini-update: Here's a side-by-side comparison of the bigger font. On the left is from real life, on the right is from Wags latest mini-update: As you can see, in real life the eight is a lot flatter along it's top and bottom, with almost an hour glass shape to it. The real life zero has a much rounder shape and the diagonal line is, well... A lot more diagonal. The lack of these details in DCS makes these two numbers almost impossible to distinguish unless you're completely zoomed in. In DCS the silhouette of these two numbers is almost identical and the much flatter diagonal line makes it even harder to distinguish the two. A correction would be much appreciated.

When the velocity vector is outside the HUD due to drift, it starts displaying incorrect directional information. In it's current implementation, for example when doing a crosswind landing with the velocity vector drifted sideways outside of the HUD, the velocity vector can be several degrees above the horizon line on the HUD even though the aircraft is still rapidly descending. It will display the same incorrect pitch information in both Norm and Drift C/O mode. This makes the velocity vector completely unreliable during situations when velocity vector drift is encountered. Normally when the velocity vector drifts sideways it should still be accurate in terms of pitch. Discovered in DCS World Open Beta 2.5.5.37626

I've done some tests in different weather and different altitudes. My suspicion is that the FLCS is overcorrecting it's yaw inputs when there are external forces acting on the aircraft. So when you're (too) fast at sea level and the aircraft starts buffeting the rudder starts freaking out. Same thing if you're flying below 400 knots at low level with turbulence and wind. The FLCS seems to be seems to be constantly overcorrecting with it's yaw inputs. However, in bad weather as soon as I climb above roughly 3000 ft ASL it seems to just fade away. Then if I start descending below 3000 ft again it starts jerking around again. I know how turbulence is portrayed in DCS and it's definitely not caused simply by turbulence. If anyone else can confirm that this is infact the case and not just the ramblings of a mad man, that'd be much appreciated.

Next aircraft from ED are pretty much confirmed to be the P-47, Mi-24 and F-4. After that we've got the Me-262 too. That's pretty much the next three to four years all booked up. As much as I'd like a Tornado I wouldn't hold my breath. If it's coming at all, it probably won't be from ED. And Pharoah, I completely agree with your wish for an UH-60. I'd even go a step further and wish for an HH-60G. Got plenty of cool stuff, but not so cool that it'd be too classified to make it's way into DCS. FLIR, TFR, Aerial Refueling, Hoist; what's not to like?:D

Multiple coalitions with relations that can be changed during the course a mission. This would allow for having, in addition to friendly and hostile forces, civilians and multiple neutral nations. If relations between factions could be changed during a mission, you could have scenarios where entering a neutral nations airspace will make them hostile to you and engage you. You could also have situations where two factions are hostile to each other, but both are friendly with a third faction. Have client aircraft spawn as uncontrolled before being entered by a real player and act as a regular static object until then. If an uncontrolled aircraft gets destroyed a client can't spawn in it. A task option called something like "suppressive fire" where ground units will engage a specific enemy but does no damage to them. This would allow for prolonged firefights where players would have to intervene and eliminate the enemy ground forces for the firefight to be won. AAA firing at random a la Baghdad. Polygonal trigger zones that can be shaped in any way. Ability to control carrier lights through advanced options or scripts. Ability to add radio beacons to naval ships. Add flashing IR strobe as static object with the ability to attach to a unit.

An early MC-130 would be the perfect tactical aircraft to model for DCS. In addition to what the C-130 can do, the MC-130 can both give and receive fuel via aerial refueling, drop 15,000 lbs BLU-82 daisy cutters, extract ground personnel using the fulton recovery system, use FLIR and terrain following radar to perform low altitude penetration of enemy airspace in lo-vis and night time conditions, etc. The possibilities would be endless and it would be able to perform superbly even in combat roles. Also, for the record, I would happily buy an E-2/C-2 if it was ever released. :D

What we're in dire need of is eastern air superiority platforms, something that can match the F-14/15/16/18 of the west. I don't think something like a Q-5 would be a very wise choice, but rather something that can combat western fighter aircraft with even odds. The most obvious choices would be something like the JH-7, J-10 or J-11. Outside China there is of course the Su-27 and MiG-29. Considering that we'll be getting a new Kuznetsov carrier in due time a J-15, Su-33 or MiG-29K would be a very welcome addition.

I mean, the F-16 doesn't have any mirrors... Couldn't we use that computing power for actual rendered reflections for our MFD's instead? At least as an option? I really don't like those static reflections. In the F-18 they work great, but in the F-16 the reflections are so crystal clear that it breaks your immersion right away. So yeah, MFD mirrors, please ED!