Lurker

It doesn't really make a difference. I use the in-game PD setting.

Thanks for the reply. I'm on the fence with switching to the G2, I can't go back to 2d with DCS, but the resolution limitations of the Rift S with regards to detail are annoying me enough that I will probably take the plunge sooner rather than later. Spotting targets isn't really a huge problem once you know where they are, although the detail could be better, it's mostly not being able to read a lot of the cockpit gauges and screens without zooming in that's really getting to me. I do know that in the G2 the sweet spot is smaller than in the Rift S, but I can live with that as long as the sweet spot is clear enough to do that. P.S. Does the FSR mod really work with DCS? I heard it's kind of hit and miss at best.

Just a quick question. Is it possible to run the G2 with clouds set to Ultra, or at least High? Maybe by dropping some other settings? I've been running the Rift S with clouds on Ultra with almost no problems, but then again I do have an 3090RTX.

Seriously? It's a business. You know, the reason why we get all these nice things to play with is because, primarily Eagle Dynamics needs to at least break even. Or do you think it's better if they go out of business and we end up having no DCS World at all?

There is no good solution here that will make everyone happy. In fact, if the devs ever implement something along these lines it will probably cause an outcry among the most vocal fanbase and will probably alienate quite a bit of the silent majority. An unhappy player-base equals less income for Eagle Dynamics in the long run. I will ask this question though, have the devs implemented more G tolerance yet in the F16 compared to the other fighters due to the seat inclination?

I think that the Mig21 was phased out even before the collapse of the Soviet Union. the USSR was the premier buyer of it's own weapon systems after all, and the Mig23 as well as the later Mig29 were available long before that happened.

Actually none of the issues you've presented are really that complicated to solve within the DCS framework. The "modern" modules we have in DCS are an order of magnitude more complex than any WWII fighter or bomber. In fact the only thing that has been nominally put forward by Eagle Dynamics as a potential technical issue is that 4 engine aircraft (regardless of type) are a no go within DCS world. I would argue that if there were a very significant interest in a 4 engine module that this would be an obstacle that their FM programmers would be able to solve. With all of that said I think the real reasons why we won't see any "large" bombers (either WWII or more modern) in DCS are purely monetary.

Oh cool. I didn't know that. Thanks.

All this talk about CFTs and no mention of the WSO, his avionics suite and his ejection seat? I'm guessing here, but wouldn't that affect the center of gravity of the plane by quite a bit? (Not to mention complete mass of the plane) Back on topic, I'm one of the I guess few people who couldn't care less for the F15E. I don't find stand off mud-moving a lot of fun. Or rather, any fun, at all. I'm not going to be buying it. A full fidelity F15C on the other hand would be awesome, but I would really love to see them do something more unique.

I hate to bring this up, but there are a lot of people here who simply don't reason very well when they are faced with facts. Despite being in operation for over four decades and serving in the air forces of not just the United States, but also Japan, Israel, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Singapore and Qatar, no F-15 has ever been shot down by an opposing force. It has over 100 aerial victories. I bring this up in the Mig29A thread, because I hope that people will stop arguing over which aircraft is better, whether it's redfor or NATO, or whatever. It's not an argument. The facts speak for themselves. The Mig29A is a great plane, however it's mission, it's design and it's capabilities are completely different from the F15C or any other western or red-for air superiority fighter, this is not what it was designed to do. Even with the facts listed above, it doesn't mean that REDFOR planes are bad, or that the Mig29 is worthless or whatever. I'd love to see it in DCS. Just keep your expectations in check.

Apart from the extra challenge, why would you fly night missions in DCS World? This is a serious question. In RL scenarios, night missions make sense as you are automatically eliminating optical sensors (primarily the Mk1 eyeball) from the equation. I.E. your enemies can't see you. In DCS World, the AI can see in all weather, during the day and during the night. (Although they should not be able to see through clouds at some point, at least according to ED devs this is supposed to be coming in an incoming patch, let's hope that this is coming sooner rather than later)

So....with regards to it's great comm and target sharing capability, do you guys think that this will be limited only to other Apaches within DCS World (on the server\mission) or is it going to be more integrated somehow into DCS World itself. I think I read somewhere that the Apache we will be getting will only be able to share it's targets with other Apaches. So what happens when you are buddy lasing for fast movers. Do you guys think that this will be integrated and working correctly within DCS world?

I'd say it would be as easy or complicated as you want it to be. It all depends on your loadout, what type of sensors you want to use during your mission, whether the FCR is available and how you want to use it, etc. etc. And then you have to take into account that you can share the workload between two crewmembers. I'd say that flying and fighting in the Apache will be relatively simple, but very difficult to master. Now in the early days of the Mi24P the Petrovich AI is very bare bones, so I don't expect the Apache to be very easy to use in single player. However with an efficient and knowledgeable weapons officer in the front seat I'd say that it will be a joy to learn and use.

Oh okay, I see what you mean now. Thanks. But isn't that solved via Mast tilt?

Wait what? The net vector result of tailrotor thrust vs gyroscopic forces on the helicopter should be 0. There should be no inherent sideslip from tailrotor thrust.

Yes, that effect is called weather-waning. It's typical for helicopters.

What is the winglet effect and why would the AP YAW channel affect it? I fly with the channel always on, and I haven't noticed anything different?

Improvements to the interface of Petrovich, and audio cues that he has acknowledged commands would also go a long way toward making it more user friendly and more intuitive.

Like I said murky waters. If you somehow magically made the F14D in your backyard. I'm pretty sure that no one would bother you. If you then tried to sell that airplane to someone overseas, you would have a problem.

Why is this thread still going? As IronMike stated in the other thread, data can be unclassified but still not legally available. The way I interpreted that statement is that you can have legal access to declassified documents, but as soon as you use it in a commercial venture this is where you start getting into murky legal waters unless you have specific permissions to do so.

Two separate teams for the Hind and the Apache. Shouldn't be any (or much) overlap.

I completely disagree that we already don't have modules which could be used on the map. unless you really want to split hairs or suffer from OCD, the Mig21 BIS with weapon restrictions can fill in for earlier variants, and this goes for other modules both available and in development. I'd love to see it. Preferably with comprehensive unit AI assets, such as the upcoming Falklands map. I disagree that it can't be done, it just needs a dedicated map making Team, as Eagle Dynamics probably won't go there. However I do think that there need to be major changes to the underlying DCS World game logic, mostly with regards to AI, as a prerequisite for a Vietnam map to become anywhere close to functional in the proper sense of the Word. We would need destructible trees (napalm), Huge improvements to AI Infantry (jungle combat), functional AI GCI etc.

The sarcasm, probably

Yes that's for 1500 feet altitude right? Unless I'm completely misreading the chart, at 1000 feet, it should go up according to that "extrapolated" last line right? *edit* Nevemind, I failed to extrapolate for Max Lift *doh*

Yeah, 6.5 is the imposed so called "structural limit". In any case that 28 degrees\s at 1000ft, is just an extrapolation from the chart. It's nowhere near accurate, but it's probably in the ballpark. Remember this is an F14B with 4 Aim7s and 4 Aim9s, and I have no idea what the fuel grade would really mean with regards to thrust at max afterburners. It's all beside the point really. Any way you look at it the thing is a beast, and as long as Heatblur are happy, I'm happy.