Winston60

That would be great.

If you change to metric in <options> <gameplay> you'll get kilometers in the mission editor ruler. :thumbup:

You may also want to have a handy button for "change weapon" as you may need to quickly change from the AIM-120's to AIM-7's to AIM-9's and vice-versa. Happy hunting!

+1 Yes, IC to kill the MP cheats. Single player cheats.... well go ahead.... continue to play with yourselves! :megalol:

Yes. Use IC to squash these "cheat" mods and figure a way to allow useful mods like added objects and terrains. .... and get this working in Ver 1.5 too! :thumbup:

Yeah, I see they haven't animated that switch yet. The EAC switch is not animated either so I just test that it's engaged by a quick turning on of one of the autopilot modes. If the autopilot will come on.... the PAC will work. In the release version of 1.5 I'm satisfied now with the current operation of the PAC in the A-10A. Don't forget to switch on the EAC first or the nose will still rise when firing in A/G mode. ...plus the G-force breathing is fixed now, so I'm a happy camper!

I'd buy that!

Thanks Grimes. Well explained! :thumbup:

So how do you turn on/off this new IC on a server? I can't seem to find any info or instructions on how to incorporate and manage this new IC method. Is it just a matter of switching it on or off or is there more to using IC? :dunno:

^ +1

Good point Azrayen. So perhaps ED could do like they did in the Su-25T when they couldn't put in a light for that plane.......add some HUD symbology to show that it's on? Not realistic, but hey.... also not realistic to not be able to tell if it's on or off.

How about showing a little love for the MiG-29S and add the ECM indicator light? :yes:

No it doesn't. The H2 Hummer's were a far cry from the military versions although still awkward, heavy, uneconomical and not really that robust. They had pickup truck frames and suspension instead of the independent suspensions of the military Vee's. The H3's were smaller, similarly made and equally hampered. The target consumers were the military wanna-be types and Rock Stars/Movie Stars. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger had one during his time in office. Such are the USA crash requirements. The "crumple zone" must dissipate the headon collision forces plus try to keep intrusion into the passenger compartment to a minimum. Also notice the left front door is open so evidently the driver exited. A car is completely totaled but the occupants probably survived. :doh:

Funny alert! Ahh... careful what you say about a Hummer crumpling..... :megalol:

So it is possible to bend/break things instead of a catastrophic "off with the wings" event? Perhaps the Su-27 damage model programming could be tweaked for more instances like this as an alternative to the "instant disintegration"? :dunno:

:thumbup: How did you incur that damage? Was it stress or combat damage? I'm surprised the tires didn't blow. I can blow tires on the taxi way now just by being heavily overloaded and hitting the brakes for too long.

Perhaps an improved hydraulics system damage model will make it's way into the F-15C as it's flight model is gradually improved?

I don't think ED will add the "instant disintegration" feature to the F-15C unless they completely ignore real world stuff like this: http://www.businessinsider.com/israeli-air-force-pilot-land-an-f-15-with-only-one-wing-2016-4

Now the tires will often blow when landing heavy unless you PERFECTLY grease it. The tires also blow when just taxiing to runway too fast at gross overweight and hitting the brakes too long, usually the right main tire comes apart. Not sure of any other ground damage as of this new feature as I mostly come home winchester and dump fuel to less than 1000lbs. I'm tired of testing this. I'll let my issues and suggestions stand as previously reported here and I'm now going to spend some time flying and mission building. .... one final thing.... I see so many people here with the impression that most of us do not like the new feature at all. That's not necessarily true. I think most Su-27 pilots that have weighed in here don't want the 20G capability returned, they just want it reviewed and tweaked by ED, perhaps with some new warnings and alternatives to the only result of over stress... explosion. Ed could just as easily damage the plane so RTB would be the only alternative, albeit it maybe a challenge just to do that! Or provide some documentation that Su-27's fly perfectly, with no adverse handling problems, right up until the wings come off. Cheers all, and for now..... all you Hot Shots, please keep the total weight down, OK?

+1 All good and valid points. If ED used your post only to investigate the proper implementation of this new feature, I'm sure they would tweak what we have now and make it right. :smilewink:

Very good video. A fascinating watch. I suggest ED interview some real life fighter pilots, current or retired, as to what feedback they encountered when stressing aircraft. My few queries to a few US pilots found that they did hear or perhaps felt airframe stress. By the looks of that static stress test, in a simulator environment how could you miss seeing the wing deform that much?

I believe Betty announces her warning at a set G and AoA? It does not take into consideration a/c weight or loadout and Betty's call is very, very conservative. If you stopped/relaxed your maneuver when Betty suggests, you might be in danger of being shotdown by a Cessna with a shotgun. You can also blow a tire when taxiing a heavy aircraft just by braking a bit too hard or too long. At least there's feedback though when you hear the tire blow. I'm not against exploding the aircraft if you want to get silly. Just program in some feedback and some alternative damage to an overstress that's not always instant destruction.

It's unrealistic because there's no feedback or damage indications before the aircraft just explodes. Why wouldn't you expect to hear some creaking and groaning of the airframe or see the wings bend or the damage model to simulate being bent/damaged? Not every Su-27 would explode at precisely the same instant of exceeding a limit.

I sure hope they don't mess up your beloved F-15C by implementing the new "instant disintegration" feature of the Su-27 as it is now. It's a nice idea to have something like this but totally unrealistic in the way ED has incorporated it into the Su-27. There's no warning, airframe sounds, shaking or any feedback whatsoever before the aircraft just explodes. I've spoken to a few US pilots and they all confirm that modern combat jets will let you know when you have or are exceeding the limits, by the sounds they hear and the way the aircraft acts. In ED's implementation, everything goes well right up to the "BOOM - WINGS OFF!" No noises/sounds, vibration/feedback of any kind and the failure always happens at the exact G vs weight instance. You'd think not all aircraft would explode at the same instant of exceeding a limit. Some would bend or break something but continue to fly in a bent/damaged state, flyable enough to make it home. Overall a nice idea for realism sake, but oh so poorly done here. This new feature needs a lot of rethinking and tweaking.

My point exactly! Then why this sudden "Wings-Off" nonsense? :dunno: I imagine there's only a few handfulls of real pilots in the world that can fly this plane effectively in a real world combat environment, and they have real tactile feedback and human g-force limitations and warnings from the airframe. Now ED is adding their version of quick and hasty "realism" in this case and expecting all of us virtual and recreational pilots to be included in those few handfulls of real world pilots, not to mention we don't have the real world feedback/forces/warnings when we are sitting in front of our simulators and they have not provided any feedback at all in the way of sounds, vibrations or graphics before BOOM - WINGS OFF! This is certainly not why I bought the FC3 pack of planes. Would I buy FC3 now, knowing this new "feature" is so poorly implemented? Certainly not. Will this fiasco affect my purchase of future aircraft modules? Absolutely. ED, please fix your implementation of this new feature, make it more real, add some warning sounds, vibrations, shakes, rattles, bent wings and unruly handling before you explode my plane. Equip the FC3 Su-27 with a more sensible overstress damage model and make it conform more to what people expect in a FC3 aircraft. Leave the super hardcore disintegrations to the new releases and fully articulated models. (but please add some sound and visual feedback before you suddenly explode any airplane!) Just because you exceed the specs of an airplane as written in a manual somewhere doesn't mean it will instantly explode every time a parameters is exceeded. This is just a case of a hasty and poor implementation of a new feature using exact theoretical data with no allowance whatsoever for variables.