Xavven

Full brakes is currently causing lockup and the viper steers right. If you're using pedals, try around 80% braking force. If you are using keyboard, try holding much less than 2 seconds. Another thread on this forum suggested anti-skid isn't implemented right now and possibly could be fixed later, helping us with maintaining control on rollout.

IRL an SA-10 site will have multiple launchers that are spread out and away from the tracking radars. If the mission designer follows this philosophy, then taking out the launchers is hard because they aren't emitters, so your HARM won't home in on them, and they can be hidden. And the whole site would have way more than 6 shots

Yeah it's a bear right now to attack targets of opportunity. I've been trying to get better at BORE mode, but really even the original A-10C is much better with getting the TGP on a pop up target. And with the A-10C II it is almost instantaneous.

Yes, this happens to me. I have to switch to the SMS, change weapons, then I can go back to WPN and switch to PRE/VIS/BORE.

Monitor quality makes a big difference in being able to see the lights. I noticed a huge improvement when I upgraded earlier this year to a monitor with a brightness rating of 350 cd/m2. That and zooming in helps too.

The brakes seem to cause me to swerve off course more than usual in this version, yes.

There's a standing joke that DCS stands for "Digital Cockpit Simulator" for this reason. I have hopes that the dynamic campaign the devs are working on resolves this problem. Recon and fog of war would be a welcome addition. As it is, you look at the mission planner and see exactly where enemy units are unless the mission designer had the foresight to use the hide function.

Keep in mind that an aircraft can self-designate an APKWS rocket without a JTAC, if said aircraft has a targeting pod with a laser.

You need Combined Arms in order to control ground units to become a JTAC. I made a map where a human JTAC coordinating with 1 or 2 Warthogs was the principle point of the mission. I played as the JTAC and it was quite thrilling, actually!

I think it's mainly because IRL, if the Air Force needs more ordinance to ensure the objectives are met, they might bring more aircraft and keep each aircraft's loadout light. In DCS, you might not have that many players on that night, or the server has its limits without lag becoming a major problem. So for the sake of the sim not becoming overly tedious, players would prefer to add more JDAMs to their loadout than make extra trips.

I really feel the same way. To add to your list, DCS lets you spawn F-15s in the air and use the F-10 map to navigate around. You can launch 6 AIM-120s at a group of unknown radar contacts without verifying if they're hostile and fly home without answering to anyone. I don't want Ace Combat either but I realize there's a point at which we can take the realism argument too seriously. You can already have 70 missiles if you enable unlimited ammo in the settings menu. There's also an entire "game mode" in DCS -- in other words, we already have the ability to turn DCS into an arcade game. It's just that most players opt not to. But have you seen how much ED got blasted for allowing the F-16 to carry SIX mavericks? "It's not an operational loadout!" Guess DCS is unpure and we have to burn it to the ground now.

5 demerits for silverdevil! Bad! Anyway, it's obvious neither side is going to convince the other at this point. I think it's clear there are two camps: one that wants a 2007 Viper locked to that time and one that wants more flexibility to put that Viper in the year 2020. IMHO the A-10C II is the best thing that's happened to DCS this year mainly because of the APKWS (HMCS is awesome too though). Maybe ED could be on notice that there is a desire to add a 2016 Viper as well and add it to the aircraft dropdown. It could still be a Blk 50 but just be one from 2016. Hell, charge $5 for it for all I care. I'd pay it.

Yes, which is why I would support having GPS in the Bf-109 if DCS were a civil aviation sim. While people do perform airshows in DCS, it's really a military sim. There is no military scenario where the Bf-109 would be employed and have GPS.

I think GPS on a Bf-109 is anachronistic. It's technically possible but no nation flew the Bf-109 after GPS was invented. I can't put myself in the shoes of a Bf-109 pilot using GPS in a "what if?" war scenario, because either it would have to be in 1940 where there was no GPS or in 1999+ when no nation was using the Bf-109 for combat sorties. Likewise, the P-47 was not a nuclear capable aircraft if I'm not mistaken. However, there are F-16C Blk 50's in the USAF inventory today that use the APKWS, and it doesn't require an update to the aircraft to use it. This in my mind is why I would support having the APKWS on the F-16 in DCS -- it doesn't actually break from reality provided your mission is after the year 2016. I'm surprised at how heated this thread got. Adding APKWS to the F-16C will most certainly not ruin DCS, and neither will its exclusion. I think we can all relax :)

Here's a track against the MiG-16P at Ace AI level starting from 10,000 ft neutral and maneuvering to the control zone. By no means a great run, with glaring mistakes resulting in two scissors, but hey it shows what to do in a scissor! I uh, meant to do that, for uh educational purposes :D Pay attention to airspeed and G. When in the vertical, I'm pulling enough G to avoid going too much over 450 knots, and relaxing G to avoid going below 250 knots. General rules of thumb: At the early, neutral stage of the fight: Try to climb into the vertical with 400 knots or more airspeed Avoid going below 250 knots over the top of the circle. Relax G as necessary to maintain speed. Pick up speed on the descent side of the circle such that you are around 300-350 knots towards the bottom of the circle. If you do this, you'll have 400+ knots by the time you climb vertical again. Repeat, and you gain angles on the MiG If you find yourself going over 450 knots, pull more G! It's like getting a bonus check in the mail. Spend it! As the fight switches from neutral passes to you gaining an offensive position: Tighten your turn circle by going more vertical out of plane of the hostile. Only do this if you have enough airspeed. If don't have enough airspeed then favor lower nose positions. Losing altitude faster = more airspeed. Not going as high in your circle on the vertical ascent side = less airspeed lost. You'll see that I fail to recognize I'm going too fast and have energy to spend, and miss a shot opportunity by failing to just pull the stick more. The hostile reverses on me and a scissor ensues. The game changes at this point: Stay in afterburner. Spend all your energy! Pull G and go nose high as necessary so you don't fly out in front of the bandit. Maneuvers should be between 160 knots on the low side and 250 knots on the high side. If in an offensive position, reverse slightly before you cross the hostile's 6 o'clock line. This will get your turns in sync so you get to the control zone. If defensive (not shown in track), reverse at the time the hostile crosses your 6 o'clock line. This keeps your turns out of sync so shots are harder for them to take. I end the fight with a sloppy snap shot, but hey, my landing will be on wheels and his, not so much. F-16 vs MiG-16P Ace AI guns only.trk

I had always thought it was weird that you could change your bomb's laser codes in the air in the A-10C using the DSMS. Aren't the laser codes set by the ground crews? Anyway, glad they went this route for the F-16.

This is my personal preference as well. If you're already in close, the dogfight radar modes are excellent, and you get your gun sight too. Normally I'd be using sidewinders, but if the hostile is in a climb into the sun, it could get blinded, so I prefer a radar guided missile.

What I'm doing is this: Enter A-G mode Select waypoint near the target area with DED increment switch Open SMS page and enter CCRP mode Open TGP page DMS down to make TGP SOI TMS down slaves the TGP to the steerpoint. This is different than the behavior before patch 2.5.6.53756, which if I'm not mistaken made the TGP slave to the HUD TDC. TMS right changes the mode in some way that allows you to slew. My slew controls do nothing if I press TMS down and it stays stuck to the steerpoint. Complete your weapon delivery as normal. Make sure your laser is armed if using GBU-12 and use trigger stage 1 to fire the laser. We now have a TTI in the lower right -- hurray!

LOL gotta love that immediate thread hijack. Hey, I can't answer either of your questions, but should I have pizza or pasta for dinner tonight?

I'm inclined to agree. We make plenty of concessions in the realism department. We can start a mission in mid air and end it without landing. AFAIK this has never happened IRL. :D Our sim jets always spawn in perfect maintenance condition and you don't get yelled at by your supervisor and suspended if you don't go through the full entire startup checklist including tests, or fail to follow the traffic pattern. We have an F10 map that shows you exactly where you, friendlies, and hostiles are (depending on settings). We have an entire settings page that lets you turn on labels, and turn off GLOC, wake turbulence, bird strikes, and random system failures. We can pull max G on the airframe and stay in afterburner as much as we want, and generally treat our planes like they're disposable and don't cost money to maintain. We can take off with more ordnance and fuel than is technically allowed, and land overweight too, or dump fuel at low altitude over a city without consequences. We can assign any country to red force or blue force, even countries who have not historically been allies or enemies, and have dogfights between a WWII plane and an F/A-18C I have no problem with the LAU-88 if the F-16 was designed to use it, even if it wasn't used in practice. I want a high degree of realism in DCS too but I don't draw the line too strictly.

I agree. I started playing DCS on the Su-25T, and when I finally decided to buy the A-10C, the first thing I missed was the beam-riding Vikhrs. I mean, the Mavericks are awesome too, but you can't carry as many.

Agreed. Every IRL military pilot seems to comment on how poorly the DCS pilot handles G. CW Lemoine comes to mind.

It's early access, so what we have is an incorrect implementation but gives us just enough that we can drop some LGBs for fun while they work on programming it properly. From what I've heard from other forum members, in the real F-16 the TGP uses an offset from your waypoint but doesn't move the waypoint itself.

That worked! Thanks. Everything is quiet now.