drPhibes

https://publicintelligence.net/u-s-navy-f-18-natops-flight-manuals/ US Navy F-18s use the AN/ARA-63 ICLS receiver, which isn't compatible with "proper" ILS. While the ICLS, technically speaking, is an instrument landing system (and is referred to as such in the natops flight manual), it has nothing in common with standard ILS. It has more in common with the TILS system used in the Viggen (pulse coded sweeping azimuth/elevation beams). Land-based export models of the F-18 may be equipped with different avionics for use with civilian navaids.

Sorry for playing forum police (or grumpy old bastard), but why are people spamming this thread with requests for changes to core functionality that isn't linked to the Caucasus terrain update? There is no point in filling this thread with "please improve X, Y or Z"-posts that aren't related to the terrain itself.

Yup.

According to Squadron Signal In Action #138, the all-weather avionics were removed, but the KA-6D retained the capability to be used for daylight bombing. It doesn't say anything about whether or not this feature was ever used.

Posting "bug" reports based on youtube videos where you know nothing about the settings used by the player is completely pointless...

That all depends on whether or not the MOD wil allow the release of the relevant systems information, and BAe granting a license for the use of their trademarks and design. Both could happen, but don't hold your breath...

Shhh! I'm pretty sure you'll give a rivet counter a minor stroke with a claim like that :P But it is basically true. To all normal people the differences are pretty minor.

I think I'll have a go at the winter camo they used for arctic training at BDU: (if we get some nice templates to play with, that is...)

TM Warthog: It's hard to give a good answer without having flown the plane yet, but to begin with, I'll use the left throttle axis for the nozzles and possibly the slider axis for the short takeoff stop. My reasoning behind going for the left throttle (instead of the slider) is that it is easily accessible while using the throttle. Using the right throttle axis for the actual throttle makes sense due to all the various HOTAS functions mapped to the buttons on the right throttle lever.

No. The latest two updates have been launched on fridays (1.5 yesterday and 2.1 on nov. 3rd.). Some times it's a wednesday and some times it's a friday. It all depends on how ready for release the next build is.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3289055&postcount=199

No

There are approximately 73000 posts about this already, and the answer is, as always, no date has been published yet. "Late November" is the closest we have to a date.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

What about the unlimited number of fatal crashes you can have and still keep playing the game?

he said, starting another wishlist thread....

There is nothing unrealistic about that. Whatever happens to the ILS on a reciprocal runway when the active runway direction changes is up to the procedures decided by the local ANSP and/or airport. The norm is to have an interlock switch in the TWR that disables the ILS on the non-active RWY direction when you switch between them.

How high? With a 3° GP angle your height above the ground when crossing the threshold should be around 15-20m (45-60-ish feet). The GP aiming point is usually 3-400m from the threshold, depending on the RWY length.

Using a FLIR image isn't really that accurate as far as missile seekers go. FLIR systems typically operate in the far infrared region (8-12µm wavelength), while the seeker on an AIM-9 is sensitive to mid-infrared (2-6µm). Or TL;DR: FLIRs can detect lower temperatures than the missile seekers. If the missile seeker was able to display an image like that (which most of them aren't; focal plane array seekers in missiles are still quite rare, IRIS-T and AIM-9X being some of the exceptions), you would basically just see parts of the jet efflux and the puffer jets.

Outside the major cities, the sand and sea looks no different today than it did hundreds of years ago. It's all up to the creativity of the mission designers.

Yup. GBU-38.

Except that the adapter can't be mounted or dismounted in flight, making the tanker unusable for any F15s/A10s that also need a drop or two of extra fuel. Mk.32B wing pods is the only practical solution.

Is there any specific reason why you can't check it yourself?

But any potential acquisition of BL755s by the DDR would have been blocked faster than you can say "COCOM violation", so the only German air force to have both 755s and MIG-21s at the same time would be the post-reunification Luftwaffe. But this is highly OT as far as the AV-8B goes. Technically speaking, the AV-8B can probably carry and drop 755s (I assume the suspension lugs are pretty standardized for NATO dumb bombs), but any ballistic calculations in CCRP/CCIP modes would be way off.

Through the magical medium of electromagnetic waves, i.e. television.