Nealius

I agree. What we do have in terms of air assets is extremely odd. We have 5 flyable Allied air assets with three more in development. We have 3 flyable Axis air assets with none in development. We have two Allied AI assets (B-26 and B-17) with only one Axis AI asset (Ju-88), plus one in development (A6M).

I've never quite understood the distinction between max conserve and max endurance, as endurance is a natural byproduct of conserving fuel, and conserving fuel is a natural byproduct of high endurance. What's the practical difference between the two?

This. Perfectionism is the enemy of progress.

AoA gauge has a marker for optimum climb AoA. It's shaped like a rectangle, and is somewhere around the 5 unit mark. There's also a triangle at around the 8 unit mark that's optimum AoA for either max conserve or max endurance, I don't recall which.

Sadly a theme across the entire DCS ecosystem. Once I discovered the functionality of that button I started doing it as part of my CASE I departure procedure. Once level parallel BRC at 500ft 300kts I turn on the autopilot and press that sucker. CASE III is trickier. I haven't found a good time to do it because it requires straight-and-level flight, which isn't achieved until hitting my departure radial. But even at 20 miles away from Mother, there's enough compass error that my actual position differs from the departure radial I should be on once I do level off and sync the compass. I remember someone in another thread claiming the TACAN CRS line is unaffected by the magnetic field, but this is false. The CRS deviation line references your compass, error/desync included.

I think he means in terms of historical accuracy. The Mosquito and Spit are the only bird that fits that timeframe of the conflict. The P-47s based out of there would have been earlier razorbacks, not the D model we have. P-51s would have been Bs and Cs. The K-4 and D-9 didn't exist yet, 190s would have primarily been A5s, I believe. The A-8 has some overlap with Normandy, but big-picture between Channel and Normandy maps, the only two historically accurate aircraft we have for those specific AOs are the Mosquito and Spitfire. All other US and German aircraft are late-war production models. This causes disparity in performance as certain aircraft are over- or under-performing relative to the counterparts they actually faced during the time period.

Update, "quit to desktop" method is not as foolproof as it once was. Multiplayer tracks never work. Singleplayer tracks with the F-15E also never work despite "quit to desktop." Logs are still claiming: Unexpected end of track fiber track/action. The "action" file in the .trk "track" folder is somehow corrupted. Another pattern with these corrupted tracks is that the "mission" file inside the .trk has an incorrect mission date format. Orignal .miz file format: ["Day"] = 26, ["Year"] = 2024, ["Month"] = 12, Corrupted .trk file format ["Year"] = 2024, ["Day"] = 26, ["Month"] = 12, Normal .trk files do not have an altered mission date format, only these corrupted .trk files do. Whatever mechanism is altering the date format in the mission file of the .trk is perhaps also repsonsible for corrupting the track file in the action folder.

Oddly the "quit to desktop" method doesn't work for the F-15E. Strange that all other modules tend to work with that workaround. The track data itself is somehow corrupted, as the log always points to: Unexpected end of track fiber track/action. "Track" being the folder inside the .trk file, and "action" being the file within that folder that has all the recorded (and encrypted) data.

Directions to turn left, not right? After trap the first director should tell you to turn right. I've had them stop me with my arse hanging out in the landing area, but they cleared me out once I folded my wings.

Hobson's choice and deflection to invalidate a reasonable grievance and slander the person instead of objectively addressing the issue is textbook internet goonery. I've tried skinning. Can't get it to work at all. Now, good day, sir, since you seem incapable of objective, critical thought.

And you totally missed my point. I know that. I also know that when they're deployed on the same carrier they all carry the same ship name. With these liveries we cannot build any coherent air wing with any carrier that we have in-game. E.g. CVW-3 should be VAQ-130, VFA-105, -131, and -32 but we can only have VAQ-130 on the Truman deck because all three VFAs are painted for Ike instead. We don't have Ike. And if we did, then CVW-3 would be missing VAQ-130 because it's painted for Truman. My point is that these should be a set for the same ship. If that can't be done then blank out the ship name on all the liveries. This has been discussed ad nauseam since the Tomcat and supercarrier modules came out 4+ years ago yet nothings's changed. CVW-1 we have a choice of VFA-136 and no one else on Truman, or VFA-11 and no one else on Roosevelt. A couple liveries have blanked ship names so they're more flexible, but it still doesn't solve the problem.

I checked today with a replay recorded yesterday and animations worked fine on my end.

Was this a recent change? Previously the kneeboard worked without needing this line.

If at night salute doesn't work in the Tomcat. External lights need to be turned on, as is real procedure. The Hornet's procedure is still unrealistic in that the launch crew doesn't respond to lights, and still requires salute at night.

Report has been out for a few years. Doesn't seem to be anywhere on their priority list.

I've noticed the taxi directors and cat shooters have a different logic while using the same signals, rather the signal instructions are in reference to different things between the two. Example: Taxi directors Move forward relative to current nose position Turn left/right relative to current nose position Cat shooters Move forward relative to shooter position Turn/move left/right relative to shooter position Is this inconsistency intended, or should they both be relative to nose position regardless of where the directing crew actually is?

I have MFD reflections set to none in special settings. Prior to the Christmas update my MFDs/DDIs had no reflections. Now they have reflections regardless of MFD reflection setting. Same image as another bug report but you can see reflections clearly in the left/right DDIs. AMPCD is unaffected.

+1. We have options for FMAV slew, so leaving some of the radar/FLIR slew controls impossible for standard market hardware like the TM Warthog makes no logical sense. The AG radar is almost useless due to the realistic TDC slew.

On my missions I often have them around 300-310KCAS and they always report 290 on the radio.

Quitting to desktop and using the "lastmission" track has worked well for me, however multiplayer client tracks fail to load 100% of the time.

Would be nice if the liveries had some consistency in deployments, or got rid of the ship names on the fuselage entirely. Impossible to make a coherent deck. CVW-3 has liveries scattered across Truman and Ike. CVW-1 liveries scattered across Truman, Roosevelt, and Enterprise. CVW-7 scattered across Truman and Lincoln. CVW-2 and-8 for carriers that don't exist in the game. CVW-9 is the only one we could do with the Stennis but Stennis no longer has supercarrier deck crew. Sixpac only spawns, apparently. Spawning on an elevator tips you over the side.

Better it's just lua editing and not completely new texture wrapping for the 3D models, I suppose.

Is something up with the downloader? Speed is capped at 11.5MB/s, 61750MB download comes out to be 90 minutes when doing rough math but the ETA is showing 4 hours.

Of course they would get screwed up again. Why can't we have nice things for more than a couple months at a time....