JNelson
-
Posts
433 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by JNelson
-
-
Can also confirm this is happening.
-
Thank you guys.
She got out a week earlier so few things slipped out before we uploaded last-minute fixes.
We're working to patch her for next week update.
Cheers.
<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.
-
What sort of quirks? I'm at work and have not been able to fly it out. Looks like a lot of ground looping has been taking place judging from the photos of a # of them lying on their tops :lol:
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.
-
Very happy too, it feels weird to fly it in DCS but I mean weird in a good way, a refreshing way :)
My first landing was a great success too :D
There are definitely some quirks with the flight model, but overall I'd say it's good fun!
-
I bought the new Christian Eagle. i updated the todays update version no mods.
I fire up and i come in a debug screen next to my playscreen.
Never seen this before...
:helpsmilie:
- cleanup and repair didn't solve the problem
I play in VR
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.
-
Same thing in FC3. An old issue. Probably something to do with the radar memory timer.
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.
-
IFF?
in DCS: F/A-18C
this is a sort of attitude that really irks me.better tools are better, but success starts with an attitude of being able to make the best out of anything you have. there are a lot of tools already at our disposal to deal with a lack of iff.
if you choose not to take advantage of them the problem is yours and yours alone.
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.
-
Don't set a value for mult. What that does is compute "x" number of times you want weapon program to repeat itself on each pylon upon single press of pickle. Qty1 mult 1 will release total of 2 bombs if you have two pylons with bombs
I assumed it was the same as default. It happens for me with both manually and default.
-
Can you confirm this happened after updating from version 2.5.2.17978.385 to version 2.5.2.18144.387?
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.
-
Anyone found the TDC Slew controls axis that is not mouse?
Trying to map it to the joystick on my throttle.
doesnt appear to be one
-
To truly make the spotting points equal in size for all users, we would need to account for screen size and seating distance from the screen besides only resolution. The true measure to equal that out would be how many angular minutes/seconds from the user POV a spot point fills and these are the values you'd need to calculate for that.
Probably a lot of coding that would not yield that different results from the status quo. Doesn't feel that far off from RL to be honest.
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.
-
Probably the same way that people thought that a female and black main character in Star Wars was "PC culture run amok" and "feminist propaganda."
Asking for female voices and stuff does seem like a weird thing to freak out over.
Most people aren't freaking out over that but rather the other things said in the post.
-
For those who say it’s “genderizing” to ask for female voice(s), female pilot bodies, etc...
Imagine if a company made an incredibly realistic and entertaining flight sim, but all voices and models were female. Would you buy it? Would you go online and fly with others? There’d be no nudity nor unprotective clothing/armor, just female characters.
I could see most* men playing it once or twice, but being forced to use female characters would irk your butts, and there’d be a constant call for male bodies and voices.
That’s how we feel.
And for the “Immaturity? Well, boys will be boys...” Rude and uncivil behaviors should never be excused, except IRL in the trenches while a bayonet attack is going on.
*There will always be exceptions.
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.
-
Here:
-> Once again, some woman who felt offended...
-> I am all for gender equality but ...
-> Oh no, the SJW's have found us, there goes the neighborhood.
-> If you're looking for a game that prioritizes your identity politics over everything else then go play something else.
->
You sir, are the reason.
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.
-
Hello everyone,
This is a topic that is generally avoided it seems, and if brought up, rediculed or even deleted by moderators.
Proof?
Woman are indeed a minority in military aviation, virtual or otherwise, but that doesn't mean when someone feels the need to point out a particular situation where our presence is underexposed, it should be branded "off-topic", moved to a distant dark corner of the forum or even deleted altogether because "some do not handle these kinds off (sic) discussions well".
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.
Sadly, a quote from forum user and part of the ED Tester Team, @Weta43, can't be repeated here since the original post has been deleted, but it comes down to this:
"You mean to say all this annoying woman talk should be moved to a different part of the forum in order not to disrupt men having a serious conversation? Seriously?"
This sums it up nicely.
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.
Back to DCS then. This particular topic seems to have gained wide-ranged support from the community, but when specific points are brought up in existing threads, the responses are less kind.
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.
to simply being tossed aside as "irrelevant" and deleted as "off-topic". Men openly ask "what does gender have to do with DCS", "what does gender have to do with in-flight refuelling" in order to deligitimise questions being raised about under-representation
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.
- There is no option to have a female voice for basic in-game communications such as asking for ground power, requesting ATC for taxi clearance, ... (as opposed to male English, male Russian and recently even male Chinese/Mandarin);
- There are no female pilot models to use in cockpits;
- There is a lack of female ATC responders when using English as communication language (the Russian ATC does have more women);
- ...
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.
What I am asking for is not to be tossed aside as irrelevant.
How are women treated any differently, ie tossed aside as irrelevant?
To people starting posts (both regular forum users such as myself, and developers) and youtube-videos, please don't start of exlusively with "Hi gentlemen", "hello gents", or "Welcome to the Hornet, gentlemen". There are alternatives such as "ladies and gents" or simply "Hello people" or "Hey everyone".
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.
There are multiple women on this forum aside from myself, who don't speak up and stay "in the closet". I wonder why...
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.
and frankly that should change: the diversity of society is something to be recognised and even cherished: it improves everyone's lives. Ad-hominem attacks don't help anyone, quite the opposite.
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.
I speak up here with the best possible intentions, in order to improve DCS as a product, and society in general. :thumbup:
Thanks for the post I think it has inspired an interesting discussion.
Hornet Mission of the Week and D/L
in Missions and Campaigns
Posted
Don't fight the mig with guns unless you are basically clean. With the loadout you start with it's completely pointless to guns fight the mig. Your most precious resource is fuel. I finished the mission with like 3000 lbs of fuel flying very conservatively. So you should hit the mig15 with an aim9x.
The tactic for this mission I found best. Was to use aim-9x on the mig-15, 19, 21 since these guys will waste your fuel (for various reasons) trying to gun them, then guns the guys poor in a dogfight and that should save you enough long range sticks for the big bois. Attached is a tacview of my attempt at the mission.
Also don't fire Aim-120's outside of ten miles.
DACT.zip