JNelson

Can also confirm this is happening.

<3

Overall I'd say the flight model is great (not a CE2 pilot so I wouldn't know) but as far as an advanced aerobatic plane is concerned you can do all the things, lomcevak, stall turn and all the other fun ones. My issues are due to ground handling. If you taxi onto the grass and then touch the brakes at all it sticks you permanently. The other thing is that if you push the stick forward on takeoff its actually impossible to nose the prop in (will post a video) which goes against my knowledge of physics lol. I was going 150 mph on the ground with full forward stick and it didn't nose over. The landing gear too seems way to springy but that might be how it is so I can't really know. Edit just to add to the other commenters. It's an extremely forgiving taildragger due to the steerable tailwheel that breaks out when required.

There are definitely some quirks with the flight model, but overall I'd say it's good fun!

I also have this, I have a feeling ED forgot to turn off the console before releasing this build.

Tune to 127.5 then call ground crew using the appropriate radio.

This may or may not be a bug. It may be to do with how real altimeters guess altitude based on ISA. Whatever it is it has been in the game for a while on all modules.

Yea I known it's been around for a while but it is exacerbated by the increased performance of the AIM-7 and what with all the changes I thought best to bring it up.

Me and a buddy were testing and noticed that even when the F-18 was killed first it still guided the Aim-7 on to target. At Mission start + 24:36 there is one incident where the AIM-7 impacts my friend 4 seconds after my aircraft is destroyed and mission start + 28:59 where the missile impacted my friend 14 seconds after I am destroyed. We could not reproduce the same result with the matra 530 it seemed to loose lock after death. Both instances above resulted in a spin that should have easily taken the radar out of gimbal limits even if the radar wasn't destroyed. Thanks Track file: https://drive.google.com/open?id=19LnmmH2w1WZtd9JZCyLKKobVBSd4qlK4 Tacview: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qxJqZ9n6C5r9WCJbJAM83NPCe3pGV7SU

A preferential voting system would give a more accurate picture of the order in which people like stuff.

In the settings of aircraft the type of control priority can be changed. Try changing it to equally responsible then you can just transfer control with J.

Great except it would be more fun if we could just have IFF. We can't declare with AWACS atm either so unless you expect everyone on multiplayer to be on comms or you expect every server to not have aircraft available on each side. IFF is a must.

When I align my INS can I move off my parking spot first so that someone else can spawn and then start the carrier alignment, or do I need to stay in place and align first before moving.

I assumed it was the same as default. It happens for me with both manually and default.

Latest version.

Steps to reproduce: Have a double rack (either mk-83 or mk-82) Go into A-G Select either MK-83 or Mk-82 Set fuses to inst and nose Set QTY and MULT 1 and 1 Press pickle button, both bombs fall off rack when only 1 should drop.

What about this https://youtu.be/VX_122MmdsI, one touches down normally and the other quite clearly aerobrakes.

doesnt appear to be one

This is taking it to the extreme. People are only asking for appropriate scale with resolution of monitor, such that spotting is fair across monitor size. Just because you might not get 100% equality with this method doesn't mean it's not better than what we currently have.

Most people aren't freaking out over that but rather the other things said in the post.

Most of the time you don't look at the pilot body, anyways someone posted a female and male pilot in a flight suit and there was basically no difference. There are female ATC voices in BMS plenty of people play that. We have plenty of women playing DCS so obviously it is a non-issue as far as people are mostly concerned. That's why it is so low priority for ED. Diversity is great, but there are more important things to fix than the ATC voices right now. This is a silly argument as long as there are planes, bombs and missiles people will play it. I think it should be assholes will be assholes and called out as such.

The guy you replied to is a bit of a sausage, but anyone can download and play DCS without having to interact with a single person. He is hardly a barrier to most people.

Proof? If you are not talking about the topic and instead are talking about your gender it is off topic, the same way if someone started talking about anything else that isn't related. This is not a gender issue, it's the rules of this forum. This seems like a pretty asshole thing to say, but since we don't have the original context or post I can't pass judgement either way. As for under-representation that's probably because less women are interested in flying combat simulators. You can get DCS and play it without any contact with another human being so I don't see why this is an issue. It seems in this thread like 95% are supportive with a few assholes that aren't, but there are assholes on every type of topic whether it comes to how the gazelle flies or how many rivets a plane has. This is a joke in poor taste, but a joke non the less. The real reason is likely the extra effort it is to make an entire new player model and have ED implement the option to switch. They are irrelevant when they are not about the topic in the thread. The in-flight refueling one I saw. Some guy made a creepy comment about women and DCS then you spoke up saying women exist in DCS and then people were saying it was off topic, no surprise given the thread was about mid air refueling techniques in the F/A-18C. To preface this, I'd like all these things in DCS, controllers should be male and female and your pilot should be what you choose. However this is not the case likely due to prioritising resources. Since like 95% of the base is male it's not a wise business decision to hire voice actors and redo all the voices. Furthermore the voices are like 7 years old anyway so they could do with an update, this isn't intentional just prioritising. The pilot models obviously fall under something similar to the voice as a priorities dictate they finish more pressing issues like bugs and extra units that directly add to the combat. The SA2 for example is something that will add to gameplay, whereas a female pilot model is more akin to a skin for an aircraft and less relevent (although still required imo). This is just like any other feature request it will be put on the list and implemented when the devs get round to it. Patience is the key with this game. How are women treated any differently, ie tossed aside as irrelevant? The majority of the DCS community is male this is all this means. These aren't said to exclude you. I call unironically call my girl friends as boy and they don't care. It's just a word used to say hello. Don't look for exclusion where there isn't any. This is because no one cares what is between your legs. People have discussions based on what they say not what they look like what the colour of their skin or what genitals they have. By all means say you are a women but don't expect anything more than "so...?". This is hyperbolic at best. Diversity is great, I want as many people as possible playing DCS. However when it is a discussion about mid-air refuelling then it is entirely irrelevant, what someone's gender race or anything else is. Thanks for the post I think it has inspired an interesting discussion.

Are we getting some kind of IFF with the radar on early access?