Jump to content

JupiterJoe

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    729

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by JupiterJoe

  1. JupiterJoe
    Nothing from Heatblur, or did they fail to give you their patch notes in time?
  2. JupiterJoe
    I had my exclusion set to an old drive (D:), forgetting that I'd since transferred DCS onto a new SSD drive (H:). Please make sure your exclusion has the right drive designation.
  3. JupiterJoe
    I concur. @scommander2 Please remove my suggestion from the list. @draconus is right, it was a stupid idea. I'd be happy if we get even half the stuff on the current list. I won't add any more. I apologise for wasting people's time and generally acting a fool on this thread.
  4. JupiterJoe
    I don't understand the question. When you damage the plane it has to be repaired, no? I think badly over-stressing the airframe and/or landing overweight should be included in that. It's a simple way of adding a time-penalty (currently 170secs) to the player. Obviously you could just respawn, but that's cheating It's this or no consequence at all. Which would you prefer? There is a Logbook, with a rudimentary points system. I'd like to see points deducted, or perhaps even a demotion for sending your aircraft to the scrapyard early, but it's clear I'd be asking too much.
  5. JupiterJoe
    'Over-stressing the airframe and/or landing overweight may require a repair period.', is all we're looking for. Just read through the list again. It's a fantastic snagging list and I think a very reasonable request to get our beloved F-14 closer to a finished state. Great work compiling it @scommander2
  6. JupiterJoe
    @Zabuzard Anybody? So, we're saying the actual weight of the F-14A at this point is roughly 39086? That's the 42086 shown below, minus the weight of the weapon rails and fuel pylons (which is what roughly, 3000 lbs)? Just trying to find a semi-accurate baseline. It's necessary in order to stand any chance of calculating a fuel ladder for example.
  7. JupiterJoe
    Item two I give up on. According to my detractors the penalty received in the Speed & Angels for over-stressing the air-frame is meaningless, even though that campaign was created with the assistance of an actual F-14 pilot trainer. Item three is a no-go because apparently the F-14 isn't worth that level of fidelity and who cares about trap weights anyway? Furthermore I should be happy with what we've got because the F-4 is far more popular dontchaknow, even though it lacks the versatility to do both carrier ops and shore based duty.
  8. JupiterJoe
    One out of three ain't bad. I'm on a roll
  9. JupiterJoe
    Deep breath. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8...9......10.
  10. JupiterJoe
    I apologise to everyone for letting my frustrations get the better of me last night. Perhaps what triggered me was once again catching a glimpse of the F-14's beautifully modelled crew ladder, nestled in its housing for all these years, never to see the light of day: Meanwhile the Phantom has this on the day of launch: Can this thing even perform Carrier Ops?
  11. JupiterJoe
    Thanks for being so positive and helpful. Poor guy's just trying to do us all a favour and compile of list of stuff that needs fixing on our beloved module.
  12. JupiterJoe
    Bug reports for the F-14 get little to no response from Devs on here, or Discord these days. Whilst we're on the subject, having bug reports in two different locations is a stupid idea. This forum is a mess and a completely inefficient way of tracking anything. This Wish List/To Do List/Fix List is long and getting longer. Sure sounds like it's going to stay that way.
  13. JupiterJoe
    That says it all. What a load of rubbish.
  14. JupiterJoe
    What are you still not convinced about? Point 1: is a real life procedure. Just as you cannot currently repair the aircraft in-game with the engines running, I want it so you cannot refuel the F-14 with the starboard engine running. Point 2: Overweight landings and over-stressing the airframe both have consequences IRL. I guess that's why Reflected included them in his campaign. I am simply asking for a repair period as a consequence for doing either/or. Getting a demotion/points deducted for repeat offending is just a bit of added gameplay fun. Point 3: The weapon rail weights are not in the loadout menu.
  15. JupiterJoe
    1) During AAR you switch to left-engine air source, to avoid ingestion of fuel/fumes into the cockpit. When refuelling on the ground I believe it is procedure to have the right engine shut down to avoid similar, plus the danger of the refuelling crew standing immediately in front of a running engine intake. 2) During Reflected Simulations Speed & Angels Campaign you fail the task if you overstress the jet. I would like some penalty in general. Perhaps you have to do a repair if you overstress the airframe and/or land overweight - in effect a time penalty. I want some sort of inconvenience if you screw up. Perhaps a demotion if you do it twice/thrice in a row. Currently the hook breaks if you land too fast, but it doesn't matter if you're well overweight, as long as you land 'on-speed' it won't break. Yes it's possible to collapse the gear, but that's if you land way too hard, again not because you're over 54,000 lbs. 3) No, it isn't already modelled. The weapons rails have no weight. You're wrong three times in row there @draconus, I think you're losing your edge
  16. JupiterJoe
    [Wish List] I would like it so you cannot refuel the aircraft with the right engine running. Weight added for weapons rails. Thank you.
  17. JupiterJoe
    Probe still not contacting drogue properly. There is mention of something being fixed in the last Patch, but it wasn't this: This image shows my AI wingman attempting to refuel from an S-3B.
  18. JupiterJoe
    Still broken: I have made mention of this here:
  19. JupiterJoe
    Was the fuel probe located in the drogue properly? The bug I'm talking about had the probe hovering outside the drogue at the two o'clock position. That aspect seems to have been fixed with the last patch. (EDIT: Not fixed. See below.) 15 mins seems a very long time. Are you sure that's accurate? Did you ask him to rejoin/RTB? The AI usually launch with empty external tanks, so can take longer to re-fuel than you do.
  20. JupiterJoe
    I hope when they fix this it doesn't ruin the awesome induction noise you hear when you increase throttle whilst sitting in the cockpit with the canopy open.
  21. JupiterJoe
    Could you give me an example to jog my memory? I wasn't aware of any current issues.
  22. JupiterJoe
    Hi Reflected. Hope all is well. Thanks.
  23. JupiterJoe
    Surely the U-2 is even easier to shoot down than it was in the early 60's? I guess they can still use it to fly over countries other than Russia. Even the mighty SR-71 would be under threat from SAM's today. Hence the need to go even higher and a great deal faster, in orbit. Not as sexy though, is it?
  24. JupiterJoe
    [To Fix] At dawn/dusk it's possible to have the red HUD filter in place when spawning into a mission, even though the lever isn't pulled.
  25. JupiterJoe
    Ah, that explains a lot. Thanks @draconus.
×
×
  • Create New...