Buzzles

Simple request stemming from occasionally seeing questions on here as to whether a module is still in a EA or not. Simple wish: Each module currently has its own loading screen, which is just a picture + loading bar. Put a big ol' "Early Access" on it until the point a module is deemed released. Pros & Cons: +More information presented to users and less confusion on module state. +Small expansion of existing functionality. -Someone has to remember to remove it at some point.

Tactics/employment wise, I expect mission designers will have us initially doing what the A-10C can't: SEAD. From then, I'd probably expect missions to have F/A-18 pilots jetting about the place, with refueling and rearming stops, doing small precise CAS covering a large area of land, rather than the A-10C missions, which tend to see them rolling in, lurking, then flattening the place in localised CAS or COIN. Alternatively, can use the more strike role of the aircraft instead, which is a nice change. Throw in a bit of light A2A for funsies and the F/A-18 should be good :)

Exactly what near_blind has said, it'll be a "standard" F-14B, although LN have said they might look into the LANTIRN post release. All the other new stuff you've listed would probably be part of a -D module if we ever got one.

They very much do belong there :) They're formation lights: (http://archive.defense.gov/dodcmsshare/newsphoto/1998-12/981217-N-0063C-001.jpg) That said, they probably shouldn't be showing in the day.

True, but the geographic bonus is also equally true for AVIO, Polychop and Miltech-5, the former based in Spain and latter two in Germany. It's still a very long shot though.

New Caucasus going onto the 2.0 branch (it's just another map module now btw*) will probably be the same as ED saying OA is at 2.5. "2.5" is just a name for a vague definition anyway. No-one knows exactly what's going to be in it apart from it being 2.0 + New Caucasus + some new bits. If ED have to drop some other planned new features to deliver a version of it in a timely manner, they will. They did that with 1.5 when they launched EDGE after all. I for one, cannot wait for the new Caucasus, it's looking rather lovely. *New folder structure in 1.5 has it living in mods/terrains under CaucasusBase, which follows the pattern of Normandy and Nevada in 2.0.

Either way, considering it's unlikely we'll have any other gen 4+ aircraft for a long time, it would still be out of place should it get made.

ED got the information for the A-10 from having a military contract though. The Eurofighter is classified, mostly because it is the top front line fighter in the airforces that have it. VEAO at least had a contract with the RAF and access to the aircraft+pilots. If you approximate too much as you don't have the info, at what point does it stop being at DCS standards for an PFM/ASM? Of course, doesn't mean it's insurmountable, as a third party might have better luck with another EU airforce rather than the RAF. My personal feeling is also that it wouldn't actually fit into DCS. We'll definitely not get a US equivalent (F-22/35), nor a Russian counterpart (Mig-35/Su-57). So it'd outclass every other airframe in DCS.

Don't forget, the first and apparently only copy of complete De Havilland Mosquito plans still around was only found a few months back when someone cleared out a building that was going to be demolished. Sure, that aircraft only had roughly half the production numbers (7.7k vs 15.6k), but was in production until 1950 and used by the RAF into the 60's! Can easily see how a lot of the P-47 data would be rare to find these days.

After doing testing for this thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=193534 Turns out side gunners in enemy AI controlled Huey's won't shoot at you if you're in the air. They'll shoot you if you've landed, but not flying. Your gunners however, will happy start firing if ROE is "free fire" as long as the enemy Huey is in range, flying or not. Surely their behaviour should be consistant?

Some switches move in the Su-25T too btw, and have done for a few years. As for the full fidelity, contrary to the poster above, the only thing known is that ED were asked not to a Su-27SM / when asking were denied. That's all. I suspect one day we'll definitely see full ASM Mig-29 and Su-27.

You can find plenty of info saying 7.33g was the specified limit originally, dropped to 6.5g for continued operational use. I've also seen it stated a few times that the F-14A was originally advertised as 9g max, although people may be mixing that up the -D. I've also seen the odd comments and such that the test pilots at Grumman were flying the -A at 10.5g without problems, which seems plausible if the standard 1.5x safety factor was used then 7.33g x 1.5 ~= 10.9g. Also correlates with a story about an Iranian pilot pulling 10g iirc. Either way, it's a pretty tough airframe which doesn't have an actual g-limiter, which is going to prove fun when people yank the stick back :)

It's definitely worth reading pages 31-38, which are the operational limits. Page 35 is the badger you're looking for regarding engine limits. It's very very easy to fall into the 0g engine cut off trap if you're not aware of the very harsh limit.

How do you know it's not costing 1C/777 money each time someone does it? Just because it appears free to the user, doesn't make it so. Maybe they've got some special deal with Valve because 1C are a much bigger company than ED+TFC? Either way, I'd rather stick with Standalone as you get patches and modules first :)

Do you have 2.0 installed as well? Or did have at the time of your 1.5 reinstall? If yes, it might be the updater grabbing files from a local install when it shouldn't.

Depends how the reg entries for the keys are stored. You can store them for the system (HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE) OR on a per user basis (HKEY_CURRENT_USER) under windows. Looking at my registry, ED and everyone else have all their stuff stored under HKEY_CURRENT_USER, so most of it should be all ok. There's one problem with LN's Mig 21 though, as that's stored under HEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, so you're bound to get conflicts on that mod.

How bizare. Did you completely delete the main DCS folder before you reinstalled?

If you're going to be that pedantic, I'll edit my post to say "currently or offically announced planned flyable F-16". Apart from that, glad you're on board with how pointless these "vs" threads are when comparing the paper stats of the RL airframes :)

This is nice and all, but this arguing over support and such doesn't really relate to the OP's post of which would win in a WVR encounter. Personally, I don't think it matters anyway, as we don't currently have a flyable F-16 in DCS. If we did, they my money would be on the person in the F-16A within DCS, as by all accounts so far the F-14A wasn't, and from the HB videos doesn't look, easy to fly.

You can't have 1.5.x installed then, as it's only 2.0 that requires the map. 1.5 always installs Cauc'. Definitely sure the version in the bottom corner says 1.5.xxxxx?

It's definitely a feature which would be quite handy. Even just the ability to use boxes as well as circles would be a nice step forward.

Had a good play, it's not possible. Sorry.

Clearly, that's not entirely true, as you stated he uninstalled 1.5, installed 2.0 and then realised he'd need a map. Either way, I don't actually disagree in the slightest, but 2.5 is on the way, which will resolve a lot of this.

The great merge should be soon, though we'll still be left with the Standalone/Steam issues. To be entirely honest though regarding the other complaints, I'd question if your friend actually read the download page at all. 2.0 is clearly stated to be early access, meaning it's for testing, and it specifically says you need at least one of the two DLC maps for it to function: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/downloads/world/ The fact you've decided to play mosty on an alpha branch (2.0), meaning your friend can't join you without buying a map, can't solely see the blame laid at ED's feet, as you could have installed 1.5 in order to play with your friend.