Buzzles

Yeah, this thread: There really just needs to be a pinned thread for the most common ones atm, to cut down all the extra threads.

Definitely correct on that part as it carries two (2) bombs only.

How would that work for curves/deadzones etc? I have different ones depending on the module. The current way supports that pretty painlessly.

What you're describing is my experiences when still trying to take off at 1.2ata. Honestly, just shove that throttle forward. At 1.4ata the Anton tracks pretty much straight down the runway with only a few dabs of small rudder corrections needed early on. At 1.4, I also have no problem getting the tail up, tracking straight and doing a 2-point take off. I assume it's to do with propwash or airflow interaction with the airframe/rudder (or lack of) but 1.2 was hard, more throttle makes it easy.

Not much work at all, you know, barring completely re-doing the cockpit, re-doing the flight model (the aircraft is different), wiring up the new cockpit and underlying systems for multicrew etc... only those small things. Sure, it'd be cool and all, but just pointing out it's actually a fair bit of effort, and not really worth it over other planes currently when we already have some 2 person trainers.

You do get that info on the debrief, but yes, it would be nice to be able to turn on the debug feed (ED have shown this during the WIP screenshots) inside the mission editor for a specific mission. Best of both worlds then, can turn it on when needed for training missions, but it can be forced off for proper missions/campaigns/mp etc... as you'd not actually get that detailed information when flying (outside of visual fx)

Hallo, meine Deutsch ist sehr schlecht, aber auf Englisch: Right click on the middle box on the "Mission Payload" section, you'll get the pop up to add bombs. oder In the bottom left, click 'new' and make a new payload, you can then right click and configure how you need

Is your issue with ED doing a civvy aircraft? I agree that ED should focus on the sim and military craft, but if a third party wants to bring a civvy aircraft to DCS, are you saying they should be stopped?

Going back to OP, would I buy multiple variant modules of any plane? No, definitely not as full price modules, even with discounts if you own one already. Would I be maybe pay for a full module once, and then a much smaller fee for an 'upgrade/downgrade' to add different versions? Maybe. If the differences are substantial in cockpit and systems, eg F-14A/B -> F14-D, F-16A -> F-16C etc... and even then, I'd have to really want that sub version. I'd likely just stick with the main version I'd bought.

Dunno if a dynamic solution might be better for the clustering issue? Under 5km away, full label becomes a dot?

Consider turning vsync off. People tend to not understand what it actually does, and it's harmful for performance unless your minimum fps is always over 60fps. If you do get screen tearing, turn on freesync/gsync in your gfx card settings, not in game.

Okay, I see where you're coming from and get why because I like doing start up too, but isn't that going to result in an illogical scenario? The other aircraft in your examples don't require an engine start for their instruments to be warmed up. Ground crew do it and leave the aircraft plugged into the mains until the pilot is ready for a flight, at which point the engine is started. It's representing rapid alert aircraft rather than cold and dark. For the Anton, you're asking for the ground crew to start and run up the engine to temperature, keep it running so it stays at proper temp, then to shut it off when the pilot appears so the pilot (you) can restart it immediately. Even ignoring any fuel burn, that's a kinda odd scenario, right? Why wouldn't the crew just leave it running so the pilot gets into a warm and already running plane?

Considering warming up the engine is done after starting it, isn't the 'Take off from ramp hot' option that's already there exactly what you want?

From the wiki page there's more: thinner wings, extra wing fences, removal of the automatic >m0.92 speed brake, and importantly: a radar gunsight. I'd be more than happy to see the -17 in DCS, be nice to almost have the whole suite then, as we've got -15, -19, -21 and soon the -23 and -29 as full modules.

I remember the discussions about this back in the day, so went digging for thr threads: It's a design decision, and it was much, much more pronounced at launch: It was changed shortly after to what it is now (see the follow on replies): Honestly, I'm not bothered if it stays or goes, literally just use it for tiny corrections at low taxi speed, and it's not like you don't have to use the proper brake steering for actually turning on the ground because of it.

For MP, better solution than just turning it off would be an ATC slot for each airfield. Player occupies it and AI shuts off for that field. No player? Get AI ATC.

Yeah, you'd hope they'd have gotten around to it by now, considering it's a couple of minutes of work to make the change and check it in to source control, easy bug to knock off the list and helpful one too.

Sure, you can save the position, but I concur with the OP, either the sight's a bit off with regards to the default head position, or the default head position is wrong. Be nice to have it fixed either way.

If you already use the standalone (not Steam), then just buy it on ED's store and it'll all be good.

Look at it this way, HB have announced the A-6 module properly, so even if you really, really, really want an F-111 from them, there's zero chance of it happening in the next 2-ish years while they're working on the A-6. Might as well let this thread (and the Tornado + F4 threads) sleep for a while.

Technically no, iirc the radar set in the bis (the -22) doesn't generate the right type of beam for the Grom. Edit: more info

Excellent news on potentially removing 'game' mode and avionics, if only for reducing the list in the input menu Can you ask if the 'take off assist' option can be removed too? It's pretty telling when all of Chuck's guides and the common view on the forums is to turn it off as it's a hiderance not a helper.

As above, the two free standard ones are TF-51 and Su-25A. However, as we're currently in a free period, go to the module manager in the main menu (top, it's the 9 box icon) and you'll be able to install everything that's currently available during the free trial.

You misunderstand my post regarding "new vendor technology", of course the 3 big players aren't new. Doesn't change the fact SAM is an AMD specific technology, and Nvidia have a comparable technology. Yes, it's all built around the newer PCIe spec, but currently it's not implemented in an software agnostic way as far as I'm aware. All I'm pointing out is focusing on that sort of thing _right now_ isn't the optimal thing to do for DCS, as other aspects of the sim engine need more work first.

Bumping this as it's frustrating as a feature, due to it being inconsistant over different modules. A8, P47 etc require the new LShift+F1 to get into transpose mode, but other aircraft like the F14, Mig-19 and I suspect others still work the 'old' (and frankly better) way of being able to middle mouse button your way between modes, no new binding required.