HILOK

@Jak525 thanks, i really hope this and the cursor only being visible on the format currently being SOI will make it into our DCS hornet eventually

+1

in my experience, when looked at from above, water can take on almost every color and texture depending on weather, time of day, its base coloration, reflected surroundings and the angle it is looked at. that being said, every color scene could be realistic, as long as it fits to the overall conditions, i.e. changes as function of the variables above. so, i wouldn't say the new water is wrong, but to me it doesn't seem convincing in some scenarios, which was also true for the old water. and yes, reflections are way too sharp most of the time.

thanks man! this thing truly is a piece of art

personally, i dont mind waiting for the clouds until they're ready and bug-free. but couldn't the hornet be updated in the meantime?there are a couple of game braking bugs right now, that many of us would enjoy seeing fixed. also the new hornet features look exciting and would sweeten the wait for those breathtaking clouds

thanks! that's what i was referring to. i think some missions edit stock .lua files, hence my question.

i dont see a problem in having a checkbox in the options or mission editor for "easy AAR". let everyone have their way of doing things. personally, i would prefer auto-pilot refueling or "auto-stay-connected" (after hitting the probe/boom manually) over a magical "in-zone fill-up", because this way everyone in the flight still gets to apply the procedures. also, one of the most important keys in successfully AAR is to know the picture you are looking for, when getting in position. so watching the AP refuel a couple of times will definitely help people on their way learning to do it by themselves.

unfortunately i wasn't able to make it work either

didn't use it yet, but did you take a look here already: https://github.com/rkusa/DATIS it's all described there.

i think it's actually the same without VR. you fly through pitch dark space until all of a sudden big bright tanker lights pop up. i hope this will be improved in the future.

+1 very good idea! all of it

so in a nutshell, although AUTO does correct for crosswinds, its mechanisation is somehow wrong (?) thanks.

of course, thanks. i am pretty sure though other auto flight systems exhibit this kind of behavior

just one more thing. actually the ASL does correct for wind. it directs for a WCA into the right direction, and when you manage to release the bombs with VV on ASL, they are spot on. it seems only the ASL has a weird way of doing things, at the moment...

thanks. i saw your thread, but i am not convinced the issues are related. the fall line is not that far off in my case... have you checked the target waypoint altitude? good to know, thanks

thanks. it's an air start, so i would not expect the INS mode to be the issue here. but i will check that.

when in BALT, shouldn't the autopilot correct the aircraft's vertical path to maintain barometric altitude, in case the altimeter barometric setting is changed? at least below transition level? because it doesn't. e.g. if you fly at 1000ftMSL, engage AP-BALT and then increase your baro setting, the altitude indication will rise. my understanding is that the autopilot should start descending to catch the 1000ftMSL. but it seems the hornet's AP is currently set to a fixed reference qnh. is this correct?

hi everyone, i could need a good advice what i am doing wrong. the plan: low level runway bombing with snakeeyes in crosswind conditions. the problem: the closer i get to release the more the CCRP fall line starts moving left to right towards the target, making it basically impossible to follow it and end up wings level for release. i managed to make it work by slightly banking towards the fall line from the right (target side) and trying to meet it at impact point. see track. but i suppose that's not the right way to do it... conditions below, runway magnetic track 064. (i saw the other threads about CCRP bombing, but didnt find them to be related to this specific issue) thanks HORNET CROSSWIND BOMBING.miz f18-crosswind-bombing-AUTO-HIT.trk

very nice! thank you saw it a couple of days ago in user files already, but haven't had the opportunity to test it.

oh i like that idea! and i think it only makes sense once a module is (completely) out of early access

a former hornet pilot told me that the bow wave would push the basket away, so that sometimes he had to approach it slightly offset and kick in rudder and thrust shortly before connecting, iirc... apart from that, once you are connected you basically fly in formation with the tanker. dunno what you guys do, but personally i dont use rudder in close formation.

i very much agree with the 2 statements above

+1 been wishing to have this for a long time about the telemetry data issue that you mention. maybe it could be solved in 2 ways: A) effects that rely on telemetry data, but typically occur in a narrow range of data ingame. e.g. gear extension is a function of speed, but will typically occur below a certain speed (depending on a/c): have the effect play at constant intensity (typical extension speed), as this is what the player needs to tune the effect for B) effects that rely on telemetry data in a broader range. e.g. g-feeling: have the effect play through the whole range, as the player needs to know the extreme values in order to tune the effect right also, just as an idea: start/stop functionality (rather than play once button) allowing to play effects simultaneously would make tweaking easier, when trying to weigh each effect's intensity in relation the other effects.

well, technically you have control over more Gs when pulling than when pushing to the limit. so it could just be that the stick range reflects that.