lmp

In the first case, if I understand correctly, you ended up with the aircraft being in one coalition and the airfield in the other coalition, right? If that's the case, I think the behavior is intentional. The ATC won't give an enemy aircraft permission to do anything (why would it?).

Thanks for understanding and sorry if I seem a little on edge. Tough week. Anyway, I'll try to do a test with your parameters once I have the time.

I had a total of 15 minutes of free time yesterday. I recalled you reported this problem - without the specifics - and I tried to quickly verify it (rather than spend my time on something actually fun) in order to help you and BST get to the bottom of. I didn't recreate the problem but I had an observation about the trim I decided to share. Even if it turned out irrelevant here... why the attitude? You want to fight this battle alone so badly, or do you want people to actually help you?

Zoom is exactly that - changing FOV.

I can trim it out to fly straightish and levelish enough for me to look down into the pit for a moment and not find myself spiraling into the ground once I look up. In a nimble fighter without FBW I don't expect to fly hands off for any extended period of time. One thing that helped me was to set a small deadzone on my stick - since it's old and somewhat wobbly in the center. See if you don't have that problem.

I did my tests and couldn't confirm a bug (90kts wind, flight at 10000ft, engine at 92% RPM, trim at 1, IAS stabilized at ~480kts). One thing I did notice however was that if you start in the air, the waypoint speed you set in the editor is ground speed - so the initial IAS will be different depending on the wind. And the aircraft will be trimmed for that initial IAS. That means, if you don't touch the trim throughout the test, you'll be putting a different amount of force on the stick to stay level and that might account for a few kts of IAS. Once I made sure my trim was the same in all the tests, I got the same performance out of the aircraft.

Thanks for the info, Matt. Any news about the promised fixes to older BST modules, primarily the F-5?

Well, you don't have to learn systems if you don't want to. Especially if you just want to blow stuff up. Take it all in at your own pace, learn what you want to learn. It's your game and your free time. It's a good thing you bought the aircraft you have a passion for (rather than the one that "makes sense" but you don't really care for). It'll make it less of a struggle. Also, what you learn in the A-10A won't go to waste when/if you decide to move up to the C. The two fly pretty much the same, a lot of the combat employment/tactics will be the same as well. You'll have to learn all the extra systems, particularly the nav and sensor stuff will be challenging, but once you do, you'll already have a good idea how to make use of it all. It's not a bad idea at all to start with the A and move to the C later.

I honestly don't think it's too much. The guns are right in front of your face, you're obviously going to get a lot of smoke. Here's a video of some Swiss F-5s doing strafing runs: It seems pretty close to what we have in DCS. I think you'll just have to live with it. Fire short, roughly 0.5 - 1s bursts and you'll be fine. You won't have time to lose track of your target. The F-5 isn't the Sabre, where you have to put 50 - 100 rounds on target to bring it down. A few good hits will do.

Shorter bursts?

I was intending to start a threat just like this one... Here are two T-55s pretty much "falling into" my Mk-82 craters. The game didn't even count that as a hit.

Confirming this still is a problem.

Yup, this bugs me as well. Not a big issue but I'd appreciate it if it were changed.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe activating any of the dogfight modes also disables bombs/rockets?

On Airquake servers or in their custom historical-accuracy-be-damned missions, sure. But why is it a problem? If you want to fly a "stock" MiG-23MLA you'll have the option to do so and how the vast majority of players play their game is really their business only.

IMHO the A-10C is a bad choice for a first full fidelity module. There's just sooo much to learn. Especially if you're the type who likes to have at least a general understanding of how everything works before you start doing "proper" scenarios, you'll be reading rather than flying for weeks. Both the F-5E and the Mirage are a better choice IMHO... That said, there's one thing I don't think anybody mentioned. Follow your gut. Which aircraft appeals to you more (aesthetically, personally, as a piece of history)? It'll take you some time before you'll be comfortable and feeling in control. Getting the "better" aircraft won't mean a thing if you get bored half way through the learning process and put it down because you don't really care for the thing.

1. F-5E. It has significantly simpler avionics, a better manual and the labels are all in English. The Mirage will be easier to learn to fight in once you wrap your head around the systems though. 2. Depends whether you like FBW and other complex avionics or prefer to keep it simple. 3. Mirage. It's more maneuverable, faster, more powerful and its avionics are a generation ahead at least. Are you going to pit them against the same enemies though? The F-5E against the MiG-21bis is about as capable as the Mirage against, say, a MiG-29.

Yeah, very quirky. Especially for a single engine plane :megalol:.

To be honest, there's not much you can leave out in a MiG-19 and still call it useful/fun. It pretty much has to be feature complete on release (or almost there).

So we're getting countermeasure dispensers? Nice. Hey Zeus, what sort of nav equipment does the MiG have? INS? RSBN?

BTW, how good is the nav suite of the MiG-23ML? Will we get an inertial or doppler navigation system or just RSBN and ADF?

The MLs, at least the Czech ones, to the best of my knowledge have the SPO-10 (like the MiG-21bis). The indicator is attached to the canopy frame on the left side. You can see it here: http://www.deton.lietadla.com/vyskov/vyber/ml/img_5834.jpg You can see it on the screenshots in the original post in the same location, it's just hard to tell it's a SPO-10 indicator. A fully modelled SPO-15 would be awesome but, oh well, we'll have to make do with the 10.

Great news, I can't wait! I also hope RAZBAM continues doing Red aircraft after the MiG-23 :).

You won't be spending time looking for targets. You dive at the waypoint and once you're in visual range, the targets may be a few meters off, but you'll get them in a single pass. And if you don't, you egress in a safe direction and do it all over again. No loitering over SAMs needed. See ED's latest video if you have doubts what I mean: Wags does exactly what I'm talking about. The only downside of this method is there needs to be a waypoint on the target. Either set in the ME or manually, but either way, you need to know where the enemy is in advance. OTOH if you want to aquire and engage targets from stand-offish ranges, you'll have to wait for the FLIR or A-G RADAR to get implemented. I don't see any other way around it.

True, but it's good enough to get you lined up for a CCIP attack. Set bombs to CCIP mode, target the waypoint, roll in, and once you see the vehicles undesignate to get out of AUTO mode. I find it the easiest and most effective way to engage ground targets at the moment.