Hummingbird

No, I didn't know that the track replays worked at all. Otherwise I would've naturally provided it, it's the easiest thing in the world.

Ok, how come? I thought the track replays didn't work and the aircraft were bouncing all over the place.. But I'll provide a track replay once I get back home later today then.

Just realized my recording wasn't in the best image quality (although you can still make out the numbers in the infobar), hence I just re-did the test in 1080p to make sure the numbers are clear for everyone to see. The results were obviously the same, now it's just easier to see the infobar numbers:

Regarding the maneuverability of the 'copter, other than the P/W ratio, doesn't the disc loading also play an important role much the same as wing loading does for fixed wing aircraft?

Well so will the DCS F-16. Thing is you need to be at a certain speed depending on altitude, weight & configuration for this to be the case. For example at sea level and 22,000 lbs clean, the F-16C will accelerate whilst pulling 9 G at speeds of over M 0.7.

@ED Are there any plans to address this, or is this considered an area where realism must take a backseat to "balance"? (Honest question btw, not attempting to be passive aggressive) Just wondering, as currently our pilots (esp. the F-16 one), seem to fall way short of documented average pilot capability in this regard: https://www.sto.nato.int/publication...ARD-AG-322.pdf Excerpt: "The maximum G level obtainable using the anti-G suit and AGSM has never been systematically measured in the laboratry.: The maximum G level duration attempted in an upright seat using only an anti-G suit and AGSM was 9G for 45 seconds which was attained by 9 of 14 subjects in a study conducted at USAFSAM in 1972 " This coupled with the earlier excerpts in the OP rather strongly indicates that we should be able to sustain 9 G's for longer in DCS, esp. in the F-16 which is documented as having at least 0.8 G advantage in max sustainable G tolerance due to seat angle alone. It would IMHO only be fitting if this were simulated in DCS as well, for a more realistic experience, just as has previously been done in relation to other modules (F-86 vs MiG-15 for example).

ITR is still a bit too low however. 22,000 lbs, clean, 25% fuel (unlimited), ICAO std. day 15 C, sea level no wind: 9.0 @ 432 KTAS / 0.653 M 8.9 @ 416 KTAS / 0.628 M 8.8 @ 409 KTAS / 0.618 M 8.7 @ 404 KTAS / 0.610 M 8.6 @ 399 KTAS / 0.603 M 8.5 @ 394 KTAS / 0.595 M 8.4 @ 388 KTAS / 0.586 M 8.3 @ 383 KTAS / 0.579 M 8.2 @ 378 KTAS / 0.571 M 8.1 @ 373 KTAS / 0.563 M 8.0 @ 368 KTAS / 0.556 M -------------- 7.9 @ 363 KTAS / 0.548 M 7.8 @ 359 KTAS / 0.542 M 7.7 @ 354 KTAS / 0.535 M 7.6 @ 350 KTAS / 0.529 M 7.5 @ 345 KTAS / 0.521 M 7.4 @ 341 KTAS / 0.515 M 7.3 @ 338 KTAS / 0.511 M 7.2 @ 332 KTAS / 0.501 M 7.1 @ 327 KTAS / 0.494 M 7.0 @ 323 KTAS / 0.488 M The above figures overlayed on the real life chart: Now this could ofcourse be down to FLCS logic, which also affects G-onset. We'll see once the next FM update hits.

That's very interesting, should help make me feel a bit more safe when overflying urban areas with manpads, currently Im a nervous wreck when doing so in the Hind

So it can detect manpad launches?

Will the AH64D come with any automatic IR countermeasure system?

Copy that, not expecting things to be perfect in EA, just good to know what to look forward to further up the line

Ok, because in Wags video there appears to be lag even when he's moving the head at way less than 120 deg/sec, even when he's moving his head up and down slowly like at 10:46 min: Anyway thanks for the answers Remco & kgillers

So IRL there is this slight delay between moving your head and the PNVS image moving? Makes sense if so, just wondering.

Yeah that one gets a lot of people

Would be a nice thing to have vs older insurgent manpads

Exactly, the problem lies with the missiles. I haven't been shot down once by AMRAAMS since the update whilst flying a jet, which is telling.

Wondering wether this will be added at some point?

Noticed AIM-9's also go almost 90 deg off the rails in MP, losing a lot of energy. It feels like it's only the Russian missiles that are properly functioning atm. Scoring kills with them is easy peasy. Btw, the 120's issues have nothing to do with the F14, the 120's are equally bad against all the other jets, it's just awful. Still haven't shot any jet down with it yet, only a couple of helis. And haven't been shot down by it yet either when flying the F16 or Su27

You litterally reposted the link I provided in the very post just above yours

I think anyone who downright wouldn't like a full fidelity F-15 is abit crae crae... imho

I'm not so sure. Some good informative posts to read: https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=53852

^Truth

Because it is data deduced by the people best educated & experienced in the field relating to the subject, pure and simple. Hence that is the target you have to go for, not something you calculated yourself. Thankfully this also appears to be HB's stance as well, because most of the time that's also the case with their F14, e.g. it's very accurate at 5 kft for all I can tell, and at sea level it's bang on the 6.5 G at M 0.62 @ SL as pr. the HM chart. It's just in a few places where it's possibly not matching atm, but seeing as Fat Creason himself said "it's not quite there yet", he's obviously very aware of this. I only have praise for the man regarding the FM. Finally don't worry, I am very patient, and I have been calling for patience amongst people here too, as I am aware things like this take time - esp. when you got other stuff in your life to take care of. Hence you won't be seeing me criticising HB for the time taken to fix something, esp. when they're letting us know they're working on it, which is all I need to "stay calm" so to speak.

No more earth shattering than the fact that such data is very valid in the absence of actual flight test data at SL.

I think the reason some people (incl. myself) are so passionate about subjects such as these, are that in our minds there are few worse feelings than lacking/having a performance advantage you know should've/shouldn't have. Which is why getting all the modules matching the charts as close as possible is one of our greatest desires. For example right now it pains me that the F15 FM is suddenly broken, and it will kick the butt of the F16 in many cases where it shouldn't. Or the AV8B basically lacking lift induced drag and being able to outturn every single jet figher in the game atm...