=Mac=

Aerobatics server, tacan was 12x, ICLS was 12, tower was 127.5 DME was reporting correctly but the Tacan location was miles off and ICLS didn't show up at all. No needles. Everything else was fine.

Not sure what happened but it's fine now.

Serious question: I put in ABE in the Caucasus at Sochi heading Northwest. I wanted to make ship's speed at 25 kts but it only had 11 kts. Is this a bug or just birthing pains?

Some kind of weird bug. I got on this carrier, see. And there were a bunch of people all around telling me what to do. They were so obnoxious. Maybe this all will be fixed in the next update?

I have the TMWH and an absolute straight curve. I have the idle/off detent but no AB detent so I keep an eye on the EFEI to know when I light a burner. I have no problem matching speed of a buddy or a tanker. Carrier approaches (on speed), I don't even think about it. I adjust the throttles without thinking about them. The trick with AAR is getting on altitude first, getting left/right lined up on the sweet spot for the drogue (keeping out of the jetwash if it's turned on), and then slowly driving in to the basket. Don't chase it. You should come in about 1 to 2 knots closure on it. Yes, it will drift but keep your position as you drive in. If you miss, back off a tiny bit and then try again (power up will drive your nose up so keep your throttles smooth and walk one or the other just a bit back or forth as needed.) Never fight for the basket. Drive in slowly, drop back slowly. ("Wipe on, wipe off"!) Edit: Yeah, I just read Greyman's post. Never use the autothrottle nor your autopilot. Trim only. Then slow, steady move in.

If you want realism, fly against seasoned human pilots. You won't be bored, that's for sure. You might get frustrated, though. Most experienced DCS pilots are very, very good.

You are 100% correct. However, how would you fly with an AI in close formation, even straight and level, when the AI gets to a slow turn? I don't think an AI can do a slow, precision entry into a loop, even if timing was right; I think it's difficult for a human to do it. Humans DO do it, but it takes hours and hours of practice plus extremely good comms to get it right on a consistent (safe) basis. ("Do do" it? God, I hope my English Comp proff doesn't read this...)

You mispelled June. Hey! I'm tryin' to be funny here! Gimme a break!:)

If you set them up right, AI can look quite realistic. Sometimes not. But the link I have here is me flying with two AI aircraft.

My only worry is that ED does not fall by the wayside because so many customers are demanding ice cream and cake. I don't care if the SC is a month late or even if it comes in next year. Well, actually, I do care, but that's not my point. I have many aircraft from ED that I have never used (can't because I'm not skilled enough) BECAUSE Eagle Dynamics is such a great gift to us flight simulator enthusiasts. True, the programming staff are having problems. Sh.. happens. I just don't want to lose ED. Thank you Big Newy, thank you 9 line, thank you Kate, Wags, and all those of you plugging away at DCS World for us. Okay.... green deck.

First and foremost, I wish to thank Matt and the entire ED team(s) for the unique (niche) product that tens of thousands of us have come to enjoy. Because I have adopted the FA-18 as my primary focus, I am very, very appreciative to know that the intensity of development on the F16 is slowing down a bit and more focus is being placed on my favorite aircraft. I’ll trust the ED team(s) to figure out how best to proceed with it all. Second, I am retired, in “Late Afternoon” in my lifetime and, thus have limited funds to contribute to DCS. But, so too, DCS is important to me BECAUSE I want to put quality stuff in my sunset years. I know this will generate much laughter, but I don’t care how much a module costs so long as it’s (1) realistic and (2) finished. I used to say that, “if it flies, I have it.” But I have not gotten the I-16 nor the second FW-190 because I wanted to focus on the F-18/Super Carrier (I do have the SC pre-purchased.) As you can see, that is the direction of MY wishes. Well over 40 years ago before MS-DOS was on an ALTAIR 8800, Zylog’s Z-80 was a 10 MHz 8 bit chip and the IBM 360 was king, I was writing with compiled code software (COBOL, RPG, FORTRAN, LISP, various Assemblers, and eventually BASIC). I worked with several different companies in the business environment as well as the budding AI research and development environment. There was one rule above all others: The customer NEVER would see a bug. Ever. In fact, most of our documentation was made after a good study by the legal departments to make sure what we said we’d do, we did. Our company’s existence depended on it. As for the complexity of things compared to today’s flight simulators, I’d say what we were creating (with what we had) was just about as complex, especially in the convoluted custom inventory management or corporation payroll schemes often demanded of us. We delivered our software bug free and feature rich. We had to. There were no such things as Alpha or Beta releases (yet). It was, “I want this; I will pay for this; call me when you want to deliver it.” We never had the option to tell an end user, “That’s something we’ll have to fix.” If a delivered computer system had a glitch, a less-than-careful company soon disappeared. To be able, on a regular basis, to deliver an end product (even complex ones), we would spend sometimes years getting it right. But, in the end, I can say that there probably are still some IBM 360’s out there running my flawless code. Even Bell Labs has some of my coding floating around out there, probably. Today, the IT world doesn’t work that way. I acknowledge the limitations and shortcomings. It is what it is. My point, though, is to point out that we, as an advanced computer using society, have allowed this to be. I suggest to ED that they look back at the obsessive focus to flawless coding we had back then and strive to closely approximate it. And finish the FA-18.

Yeah, my human wingman does the same thing. When I yell at him, he just goes nose hot and rings my RWR. I think he does it on purpose.:music_whistling:

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dotrugirl/?originalSubdomain=ru http://dotrusite.ru/

F9 gives you the view of the carrier (and other boats if pressed again). Mouse around until you get to the Crotch and adjust your view until your nose touches the edge of the boat at the angle's centerline. Don't touch the mouse again (or the view will move) and pause your TrackIr. I don't know if you can pause your VR view.

For Case II and Case III, will there be a heavy rolling of the SC deck? The IFLOLS has two modes of stabilization: line and inertial. The most precise is inertial stabilization. In line, the glide path is stabilized to infinity. As the deck pitches and rolls, the source lights are rolled to maintain a steady glideslope fixed in space. Inertial stabilization functions like line, but also compensates for the flight deck heave (the straight up and down component of deck motion). If the IFLOLS cannot keep up with the motion of the deck, the LSO can switch to the MOVLAS or simply perform "LSO talk downs." Only the most experienced LSOs will perform talk downs or control aircraft with MOVLAS during heavy sea states.

CNATRA P-816 (01-14) https://www.cnatra.navy.mil/local/docs/pat-pubs/P-816.pdf If the tail of the aircraft is over water, do not attempt to preflight that portion of the aircraft. Not sure I understand why not. :megalol:

Tor's only can track and attack two targets at a time. Send three harms or jsows together and one will get through. As for the Pyotr, I did a popup and sent four GBU 31's up and over the mountains at Novo and all four hit easy. I was launched on by many Tors, SA-8, and others but I was back down the side of the mountain and got away unscathed. However, four GBU 31's will not sink the Pyotr. You need one more hit. Of course, any strategist will have the East side of the mountains heavily guarded with anti air up the wazoo. So, too, an attacking strategist will have them hit before an anti-ship strike goes sliding up the valley. So goes war.

I've tried numerous ways from Harpoons (useless) to Jsows (can't get close enough anyway) and Jdams (there is a way.) If the Pyotr is in flat terrain (say, at sea or close to shore but nowhere near mountains) you can't attack it successfully. If the Pyotr is in port AND near a mountain (like Novorossiysk), I can successfully sink it no matter what surface to air defenses are launched. (Migs and Sukhoi's are a whole other kettle of fish!) Pyotr's radar is 166 feet above the surface of the water. That gives an aircraft flying no more than 100 feet above the water (or flat land) the way in to about 28 nautical miles. Anything except Jdams and iron bombs are taken out on their way in by the Pyotr. How to get a Jdam close enough? I don't think there is a way other than terrain masking.

Yes. According to the insider's web page, there is finally a release date.

Permanently

Doesn't Latch work? That leaves the laser on once you trigger it. (Or was that the Warthog?)

I need your discord id number. Your link wouldn't let me in. My discord is: Mac#1607

Man! I would love to fly the F-114! What is it? Seriously, I'll check your discord and see if we can hook up with you. I have all the aircraft, maps and (soon?) the new carrier. I'm in Toronto (likewise in GMT -5) I normally fly the Hornet when it's capable of flying... :)

My rig is quite fast so I don't notice an FPS drop. I could look but I'm sure it's there. However, I would call the black smoke an actual bug. Why? No airplane, in afterburner, generates smoke of any kind. Just intense heat. Afterburner is a complete fuel burn. Black smoke is the result of an incomplete burn of fuel. If you have ever seen a diesel truck or bus running along on a flat road, there usually is very little smoke because the engine is burning the fuel efficiently. However, lug the engine or when the vehicle climbs a steep hill, you see black smoke because a lot of fuel is being used which lots of it fails to completely finish oxydizing. Same with jet aircraft. In afterburner, fuel is simply being dumped into the tailpipe and ignited. It oxydizes rapidly generating a lot of heat (hence the red metal and gasses). All the fuel is burned efficiently. No smoke at all.

Consider this: What would it be like with NO early access? When did the EA FA-18 come out? 1 June 2018. It's almost two years ago. So, when do we get the FA-18? For it's release? We Haven't Yet. The Hornet is NOT available. But people are flying it now as if it was. That appears to be the whole problem. On both sides: Eagle Dynamics and customers. There is no such thing as DCS Hornet yet. The same goes for Open Beta. ED needs to test in the wild. (Just look at the recent update of the update of the update.) That's what OB is. A test. Yet people are flying it as if it's released and are getting their knickers in a twist because the new landing gear won't come down. With that said, what's taking ED so long to get a functional Hornet? Two years?