drPhibes

Have you heard of Syria? The ongoing civil war, and the different factions the US and Russia support, disprove your theory. Taiwan is out of the question for the same reason that the Taiwanese flag was removed from Maverick's jacket in the upcoming Top Gun sequal.

A word of advice: ignore Subritzkys delusional ramblings. He is uable to differentiate between fact and fiction. Case in point, his twitter: https://twitter.com/ArkangelDaniel1/

Since I also use my gaming headset for other things than gaming, I've been looking for a good quick detachable mount for my Delanclip headtracker. Welcro, which I used up until now, is too floppy (and every small tug of the cable results in annoying noise), so I had a look in my junk drawer, and found a Gopro mount that seemed suitable for modification. The upper part of this mount turned out to be detachable, and the hole pattern for two of the screws matched the holes in the Delanclip almost exactly: The curved top surface of the mount wasn't suitable for mounting the Delanclip directly, so I made an adapter: The finisted 3d printed adapter on the mount base: The first mock-up. Except for the screws being too short (I changed them later), everything fit perfectly. And the finished assembly. I used M3x20 DIN 963 countersunk screws. An equivalent 4-40 UNC screw/nut combo probably works just as well. If anyone else is interested in this type of mount, the CAD (in step and stl formats) can be downloaded here: https://github.com/adler357/cad

No. ICLS operates in the 15 GHz range. ILS = 108.1-111.95 MHz (LOC) / 329.15-335 MHz (GP). ICLS uses pulse-coded scanning beams (similar to MLS), while ILS uses space modulated AM. TL;DR: while they appear similar to the user, the systems have very little in common. That being said, deployable ICLS beacons do exist, and hopefully ED will include this in the sim at some pont in time, like they did with the portable TACAN.

Which nuclear reactor? The Al Kibar reactor didn't have cooling towers (river water was used for cooling), and IIRC that's the only reactor in the area covered by the map.

The 141 uses two lift engines in the front, not a fan.

AN/TPN-22 = deployable PAR with ACLS/ICLS.

Sorry to be the "ackchyually" guy, but you are wrong. You should read up on the USAF Deployable ILS system. Long story short: In 2011 Northrop Grumman was given a contract for the development of a deployable ILS system that could fit in a C-130, and be deployed within a few days. Then the project was cancelled due to budget cuts, and then given to Thales/Wilcox a few years later.

While this used to be the case some decades ago, back course approaches are rarely used these days (at least outside the US). Modern localizers use LPDA antennas with high front-to-back ratios ( > 20dB) which need modification in order to radiate a useful back course signal. Back course approaches are not approved for use in the EU (and Canada), and are extremely rare in the rest of the open ILS market (i.e. everywhere except the US and Russia, which have local monopolies).

How did you come up with that number? If the data on wikipedia is accurate (which it probably isn't, but let's just say it is for the sake of simplicity), the maximum range of the 114L is 8000m. Mach 1,3 = 450m/s. If the missile flew at a constant velocity (which it doesn't, but these are ballpark figures), the time of flight at max range would be around 18 seconds. Then add a few seconds for the acceleration phase, and you're looking at ~20 seconds.

One thing you could learn from this is that electronic components can (and do) sometimes fail, seemingly at random. The MTBF is not the same as the expected lifespan of a product.

I'll have to tread lightly here due to the "no politics" policy on the forums, but anything that could refer to Taiwan as an independent nation is a no-go if you want to sell your product in a certain Asian country. There is a 21.000 line long list of words and phrases that are censored (presumably from the MP chat) in \DCS World\Data\censor.lua, many of which are related to Taiwan. TL;DR: don't hold your breath.

Yep. The "chartOffsetX = xyz" parameter in beacons.lua simply moves the showm sector xyz meters along the axis of the radaited signal. The beacons are located in the correct location (and radiate in the correct direction).

The short answer is no. The longer answer: Many/most runways with ILS in both directions are equipped with an interlock that prevents both systems from radiating at the same time. This is a requirement for CAT III (specified in ICAO Annex 10), and it is recommended for CAT I/II systems. If the ILS for both directions use the same frequency, the opposing beacons will interfere with each other, and cannot operate at the same time. The way the coverage sector of the Localizers shown in DCS is a bit misleading, as it indicates that the beacons radiate away from the runway (and thus the opposing beacons), but this is not the case IRL (see the pic below for an illustration). Simultaneous operation on the same frequency will cause erronious monitor readings on the opposing beacon, and the actual signal in space will be corrupted by the interference. /drPhibes Hardware engineer in the R&D dept. of the largest ILS manufacturer on the international market.

Not really. TACAN is compatible with DME (TACAN is a DME system with the bearing waveform modulated onto the ranging pulses), but no part of a VOR is compatible with TACAN.

It's also what ghosts do to you if you open the ark of the covenant, at least according to Lucas/Spielberg.

This is incorrect.

95 worked quite well (especially after the OSR2 service pack), but the first release of 98 was more of the "if it compiles, ship it" variety.

A few of them: SU-22(or 17?): cancelled YF-23: cancelled Mitsubishi F-2: cancelled F-16: probably never really a project, just a few stolen renders with the author's signature/watermark removed F-84: cancelled KC-130T: cancelled TL;DR: don't get your hopes up.

Don't hold your breath. His track record is not particularly good (to put it mildly). He has announced, and then cancelled, too many projects to count.

I stand partially corrected. There seems to be intermittent coverage behind the localizer array at LCA. This shouldn't be the case. Back course approaches aren't a thing in this area of operations. The error reported by the OP is unrelated to this. The entry for the GP in the beacons.lua is rotated 88,955947° clockwise with regard to the LOC, and the 3d model of the M-array GP mast is also rotated approximately 90° CW: { display_name = _(''); beaconId = 'airfield47_0'; type = BEACON_TYPE_ILS_LOCALIZER; callsign = 'ILC'; frequency = 110300000.000000; position = { -8990.810547, 7.217739, -210314.343750 }; direction = 48.171958; positionGeo = { latitude = 34.860647, longitude = 33.608001 }; sceneObjects = {'t:336825842'}; chartOffsetX = 3620.000000; }; { display_name = _(''); beaconId = 'airfield47_2'; type = BEACON_TYPE_ILS_GLIDESLOPE; callsign = 'ILC'; frequency = 110300000.000000; position = { -6839.587402, 5.000005, -208096.250000 }; direction = 137.127905; positionGeo = { latitude = 34.881032, longitude = 33.630902 }; sceneObjects = {'t:750780863'}; };

Feel free to believe whatever you like, but in this case you're wrong.

Modern ILS systems do not have a usable back course signal, and back course approaches are not approved for operational use in many parts of the world, including the EU. The log-periodic antennas used by all major ILS manufacturers on the international market are highly directional, and have a front-to-back ratio of around 14dB. No usable signal radiates from the back of the antenna array.

There is a leaked development version circulating online, but this is probably not the place to be discussing such things, as per rule 1.8...

Exactly! Case in point: the northernmost part of mainland Norway is approximately as far from the geographic north pole as Houston TX is form the Canadian Border.