Hummingbird

Also to be clear, are you allowed to mention a specific manual now? That is without linking to or providing any content of it here. Most (if any) of the manuals I have don't have any of that, but I'm damn confident they're declassified :P

Yeah, being able to walk around and inspect your aircraft before jumping into it would be quite cool. Would definitely increase the immersion factor by a noticable amount. But tbh this probably belongs in the DCS 2.5 wishlist thread, and not the Super Carrier one, as it's more of a general request.

Considering they said it will represent a milestone for ED, my best bet is the AH-64 Apache. A very complex twin seat military helicopter that would offer an exceptional coop experience. That would indeed be a milestone for ED in my book.

Is it possible you could post an example to follow? i.e. a manual with all the required sources & clearances etc.

F-4, EF2000, EE Lightning or AH64 and I'd be pretty happy.

Going to venture a guess and say that's because you're flying a civilian aircraft at relatively low airspeeds and don't have a need to have precise measurements of peak maneuvering performance. All teen series jet fighter EM performance tables are in TAS.

Pretty sure we are talking about aircraft energy here (i.e. in its bubble of air), and not bullet impact energy ;)

To calculate energy you always use TAS.

Assuming a normal jet engine climb rate usually descreases with altitude as lift decreases. The exception being a steep zoom climb which obviously maxes out at the altitude of highest top speed.

TAS is also airspeed = True Air Speed.

Hoping for this: But not expecting it. Mostly wanting this: But sadly know it isn't it.

Yup, accurate calculation of G forces & rate is only possible via TAS. Hence why performance manuals come with speed conversion charts to convert IAS and/or CAS into TAS, these are different for every aircraft. F-14, F-15, F-16 etc. EM charts are all in TAS, mostly True Mach Number.

Onboard accelerometer measures it, ground crew member can then have a look after the flight.

This is still a problem after all this time, really hoping for a fix soon cause it's frankly infuriating to operate.

Finally

If you're talking to me, no. For a realistic F-16 load out I am talking e.g. 4x AAMs & 50% internal fuel or more. No external fuel tanks as these would normally be punched away if the situation is a high stakes WVR dogfight. So CAT I and the full 9.3 G's that the DFLCS allows for. In such configuration the F-16 & F-15 both have a higher sustained rate (and thus G) than the F-14 above mach 0.74, and the reverse below that. Max sustained rate however is very similar, the F-14 just achieves it at a noticably lower speed and thus G & radius, meaning it can sustain a tighter turn than the other two, which gives the F-14 a noticable advantage in an angles fight that is kept strictly horizontal.

I claim it is giving a very false picture, as in reality (& DCS) the F-15 & F-16 will both be able to sustain a higher rate/G at speeds above mach 0.74 & 0.70 respectively than the F-14 in any realistic load out configuration. Completely clean at 25% fuel and @ SL is just not ever going to happen in anything but a guns only airquake server.

@BIGNEWY Do you know wether there will be any update to FLCS laws/control surface speeds etc with the next big update?

No, it influences the landing as the aircraft will have to correct it's direction in relation with the ground in order to avoid veering off track ones the tires hit the ground. The flight of the aircraft won't be affected at all, i.e. aircraft performance stays unchanged. Only gusts of wind & turbulence will impact and be felt by an aircraft in flight. In short steady state winds only impacts an aircraft in 3 ways: Ground track Ground speed Range (over ground, obviously) Flight characteristics & performance stays unchanged

I know it's false because I rigorously tested it myself, and above 0.74 mach the F-14 does not beat the F-15, F-16 or F/A-18 in STR in DCS. It only beats them below this speed, just as it should as pr. the real life performance charts. Also the F-14 doesn't have a G limiter, so testing it to 9 G's isn't showcasing a flaw (the real airplane was stress tested to 13.3 G and had the same ultimate load factor as the F-15). That said a combat loaded F-14 will not sustain 9 G in DCS or RL, an F-16 or F-15 will. A clean F-14 at 25% fuel, maybe, but in real life you were not ever going to see an F-14 in that configuration in combat anyway.

Guys, steady state winds only affect ground tracking (movement of plane in relation to ground), hence why it's important for landings, but it's not going to effect how the aircraft performs in the air.

Guys, Deano & bkthunder are talking about steady state winds, which should not affect the aircraft once airborne. Only gusts of wind (like waves on an ocean) should affect an aircraft in flight.

If you don't understand why the F-14 does so well in the sim, then simply look up the real life performance graphs and compare. You'll soon realize that HB's simulation of the F-14 is one of, if not the most accurate FM ingame atm. Amongst the teen series the F-14 quite simply was/is the king of the pure horizontal turn fight, hence simply don't go there if you're fighting one. If fighting an F-14 in an F-16 or F-15, use the vertical, here the Cat will struggle against you. PS: the chart posted by that "other" user is completely false, the F-14's STR drops off above 0.74 mach, where the F-15, F-16 and even the F/A-18 are all better in the sim (the F/A-18 is suspiciously good at these speeds).

Lot's of people wanting the A-6, but I'm just wondering what its role would be ingame and why one would ever choose it over the A-10?

EE Lightning for me. I really would love to see more 60-70's fighters in DCS.