Eagle7907

Bingo. Thanks. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I think it would be okay to make it an OPTION. But I do like the antiquity of the current HUD. It makes dogfighting more interesting. Now, if I can just get my RIO to maintain lock then my heart will probably belong to this airframe for a long time. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

You read my mind. I remember IronMike saying the next patch would include the Cat. I’m confused now. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

It does matter. Problem is there isn't any simulation of any damage if overweight. Example, cable snapping, strut collapse/damage, etc. Otherwise, there currently is no penalty for landing overweight, unfortunately....which I think there should.

That’s right. It knows it’s basic operating weight which includes the airframe, oil, pilot (probably a standard weight of 180lbs); ordinances, and fuel quantity. All this calculates into gross weight. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

No apologies needed. I just appreciate the open communication you and Cobra have with us. That’s what is really important. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I thought you guys normally do one update a month. So is that the case? Or did I assume incorrectly? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I know there’s lots of frustration brewing, and I think I can understand why. It relates to my question, and hopefully it could calm some nerves. I’m a bit confused as to why it has taken this long to develop the TGP for the Hornet, which is exactly the same as what’s on the warthog. Yes, I know, you can’t just copy and paste. I get it. But hear me out. The pod on the Harrier was developed rather quickly if I recall. They had it functional within a year of release. So my question is why? Granted priority’s don’t match, but still raises suspicion. I’m not a hardcore demanding person on here. It’s a game. Things take time, but confusion does seem to be a common thing in this forum. (To be honest, there are other developers for other types of games way worse) I think the statement of the June release was a mistake, also the confidence of an engineer was even a bigger setback as well. I think ED is doing good and is working hard. They are not just taking our money and running off to Las Vegas. But saying one thing then being “covertly” about it next really doesn’t help with the open communication. Granted, I’m sure I’ll get flamed and ridiculed. I really don’t care. I’m doing this for the benefit of everyone and to help calm the tempers. You only live once. Enjoy what you have. If you can’t, then move on to something else. There are lots of great, enthusiastic, strong-hearted people that love this product. That’s clear. It doesn’t mean we hate ED. It just means they are concerned. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Look again, all the way at bottom, make sure you view last page too. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Updates Again, nice update guys! Keep up the excellent work. Making great strides! DCS World 2.5 Changelog and Updates of Open Beta https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?share_fid=74365&share_tid=200724&url=https%3A%2F%2Fforums%2Eeagle%2Eru%2Fshowthread%2Ephp%3Ft%3D200724&share_type=t Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

3-wire landing “Oh man was the Admiral watching!? That was a 3-wire!” Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

You guys are late to the party. I reported about this when 2.5.5 came out. The logic changed again. No need for EFUZ to Inst Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Agreed. Pilot is too busy keeping blue side up, looking out for surprises, navigating waypoints, managing fuel, orbiting target area, etc, etc Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Exactly. If realism is such a major requirement then might as well stop players from moving between RIO and Pilot. This is no different. A mod does not infringe on any other player nor stop them from flying either position. Calm down. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Haha, okay. I don’t see anywhere where he corrected your statement I quoted. You said it sounds like a civilian jet. He said, yeah the externals are a bit off but internals are good and recorded from an A-10. I said, actually it is a common engine on business and regional jets. No need to get angry. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Oh okay. Is there a source you can point me to? Not saying I don't believe you. Would like to read more. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Hate to break it to ya. Those engines are the same ones from your neighborhood CRJ regional jet. Only difference is the rating. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Ever since update 2.5.5, I’m having an issue with Track IR disconnecting while either loading into ME or loading into a mission on the first time. After it disconnects, I exit the sim then restart DCS. After that it operates as advertised. Anyone else having this problem? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Ah okay. I wasn’t aware there was a difference. That makes sense now and opens another can of worms regarding other things I’ve cited. What exactly does HB model so I can get the correct information? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

IFF, what's crypto, mode 4, master I believe the master switch is to switch between the UFC controlling IFF or that panel. Emer position is for controlling IFF on the panel. The other switches do the same thing the UFC does when the master is in Norm. Most likely used in situations of battle damage or failure of the UFC. I don’t have the tactical manual for this one so I can’t positively say that’s what they do. This is a hypothetical answer. Most of those switches on the back left are for emergency back up functions. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

SAS engage on/off Hmmm... that seems backwards to me. Even NATOPS says “all SAS switches should remain on in flight”. Even under Flight Characteristics chapter for Roll SAS says.... “High AOA handling qualities are significantly improved by keeping ROLL SAS ON.” Interestingly enough.... “Pitch SAS increases damping of the longitudinal, short- period dynamic response, but the aircraft can be operated safely throughout the flight envelope without it.” Makes me wonder if turning the pitch SAS off is what was really intended and not roll SAS? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The most useful function of this mode is when datalink is being used. It allows you to see any contacts behind you or outside your radar scan area. Also if you’re trying to find a target waypoint that the INS can’t point you towards. Like a defend point or hostile area. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I discovered this as well from NATOPS. Just using engage switch puts the autopilot in an attitude hold state. Puzzling is it functions still after pilot stick input in contrary when a HDG or ALT mode is selected, the AP will disengage those modes and a pinky switch press is needed to reengage. As far as the SAS goes, I’ve noticed there is a difference when I fly it. The controls are super sensitive almost where I find it difficult to control, especially the roll SAS. Also, if that’s the case then why would you disengage it for the fence-in? I can understand more control authority, but if you can’t control it very well then what’s the point? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Method for drafting F-14B compatible free-flight missions? This tutorial is a good start. Placing units is what you want to learn. After that, you can learn changing weather etc. That’s probably what you’ll want to just fly for now. No combat. No carriers. I’m not sure if Spud covers it, but when creating a new mission, you get the screen about your Friends/Foes/Neutral. That stuff is not important and just accepting as is will be fine. After that gets you to the map where you can place units, etc. Also, remember to set the airfields you want to operate in as the same side as your side. Otherwise, you can’t refuel there and Ground Crew will not respond for chocks, air, power, etc. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro