Nealius

Typical use is to roll in on dive angle with CCRP selected, visually acquire target in relation to TD box (it never seems to accurately be on the designated target), press NWS to switch CCIP for delivery. Press NWS twice to go back to CCRP if necessary, or flip the DGFT switch to sweep your egress.

In recent missions on the current DCS iteration the 9X seems stronger against flares, at least against Fishbeds.

Breaking force seems too low for me. I can't maintain a decent taxi speed while staying at sufficient RPM to not rattle the airframe to death.

They're not even in the right place. Those reflections should be showing the aft of the seat and whatever is in that compartment, not the front of the seat. The reflection as pictured would be physically impossible.

Reflections zero, visibility from 4 o'clock to 8 o'clock is trashed by these reflections

Okay, it seems to work, but is it normal to skip a lot of the liveries? For example on the Hornet it only adjusts and exports three liveries. Some F-14B liveries get skipped as well (VF-102, among others). The texture sizes are also still 4k when running the coremods files, but they're reduced to 2k when running my saved games liveries. Shouldn't the coremods liveries be reduced to 2k as well?

Can this be applied selectively, e.g. to certain modules only, by selecting specific folders in the popup, or can it only be run on the entire DCS root folder?

Replays using external scripts used to work fine up until the August update(s).

Still happening quite a lot with both SP and MP tracks. Others seem to be having the same issue. On occasion after a few days (PC reboots maybe?) they sometimes sort themselves out for others, but I haven't experienced that yet. Here's a whacky log from one today: That converts to 16,384 pebibytes. I didn't even know anything above a terabyte existed until today.

Hoping the Japanese liveries for the Hook are the correct color. The ones they made for the Apache are totally wrong.

CBU-99 (or -100?) was commonly seen on Tomcats during Southern Watch, the Hornet module has had them since day one, and a carrier-based aircraft missing the thermally protected Mk20 equivalent (while having access to the Mk20) seems a bit odd, but it appears we still don't have the CBU-99. Was it never planned for HB Tomcat? Double yellow stripes indicates thermal protection on the casing, therefore CBU-99 or -100. FMU-140 (perhaps?) also visible; which is not available on the Mk20 (at least in DCS).

Even with medium textures the Phantom makes online flying a pain when players aren't even flying the Phantom. With one F-4 holding short, the texture pop-in as I'm coming in for landing chokes my system so hard right where I need the most finesse for flaring, and I plow into the runway thanks to the Phantom-induced freezing. With textures medium. On a 4070Ti Super.

Bonus strafing episode:

"Without having to use" does not mean "will replace." This is basic English.

I don't think mine goes above 70, but next time I fly I plan on using MSI Afterburner to run my fans at 100% during the session to see if that makes a difference.

Definitive SUU-23/A pics I can find only show the right side for some reason. The one shot I found of the left side shows a link ejection port, but I can't find any pics of the bottom. Do closed systems typically eject links? I always thought they kept both the casings and links.

Rather famous footage of a SUU-23 affixed to a Phantom that's cut into nearly every aviation-related Vietnam documentary I've seen. Casings are clearly seen being expelled from slightly left of center.

With the lack of aileron trim in the Anton, you will always have some stick/rudder pressure to keep ball centered and wings level.

Bumping this, mainly for the SUU-25 pod. It appears to have been a standard load in Afghanistan, but the model and textures for ours is Windows 95 level of pixelation.

Would be nice to have these vital details in the manual. Or even a detailed guide pinned in the forums. There's zero documentation on MC-LOAD errors, the matching fuze requirement, or the JPF page. And yet the customer is somehow expected to understand all these changes.

Ah looks like I did have two different fuses. Is it not possible for the system to work with mixed fuzes for all bombs, or is this only a thing for the BLU-109? It would be useful to be able to carry mixed DSU-33 and plugged GBU-38s, for example. Manual does not mention MC-LOAD fault at all. Lost me here. When boxing the weapon the fuse settings normally appear on the left. With the BLU-109 weapons, is it moved to this JPF entry you're talking about? The manual makes no mention of JPF at all, and I've never needed to use the JDAM DSPLY page for TOO drops of BLU-109s in the past (box weapon, select TOO, set EFUZ, TDC depress on target, drop).

For the GBU-31(v)4B, how do you access the fuse settings in the Hornet's stores page? Yesterday I tried them in MP via the rearm window, set the FMU-152 to 60ms as per chart, but when I selected the weapon in the Hornet's stores page there was no MFUZ or EFUZ submenu at all. The bombs dropped, however they were X-ed out and were consequently duds.

This is where the Phantom is an outlier, and outliers make people question things. Having put significant hours on the F-5, F-86, F-14, A-10, AV-8B, F-15E, MiG-19, MiG-21, P-51, P-47, Mosquito (all analog modules that require constant trimming), the Phantom is the only one where you cannot trim to zero pressure for at least long enough to do admin work. Your statement is so far from the reality in DCS I question if you've actually flown all the other analog modules at all. Are you simply not being contrarian? Because you lack any supporting evidence at all. At least the devs are teaching us about the bellows and bobweights that make this such an unusual system. Taking the Tomcat for example, I can trim for hands-off CASE I marshal stack orbits. One click NU trim results in one click NU trim. One click ND trim results in one click ND trim. It's predictable and consistent because one click of trim = one click of trim. In the Phantom, one click NU trim does nothing. One click ND trim results in effectively 5 clicks ND trim. Then the next time I use trim, one click NU trim results in effectively 3 clicks NU trim, and one click ND trim results in effectively 2 clicks ND trim. This is what I mean by unpredictable and inconsistent. One click of trim could be anything from 0 to god-knows-what.

It would be. I have a hard time understanding how the Blue Angels ever flew this thing with any precision at all. I understand they have a history of making modifications, but with the description of how the trim/bellows/wizardry works, it sounds like any modifications would be rather limited.