jasonbirder

Left hand rotary beneath the CDU switches between "Steerpoint" (you cycle through waypoints within your flightplan); "Mark" (You cycle between Markpoints - all of which you will have created yourself either by TMS RIGHT SHORT - creates a MARK at the point selected on the appropriate SOI - HUD/TAD/TGP, by pressing MARK on the UFC (Markpoint at the point your overflying) or Markpoint "Z" which is automatically created at the impact point of the last weapon you fired or "Mission" which cycles through all your mission points (both in and out of your flightplan) To make one of those Markpoints SPI simply select a Markpoint by turning the rotary to "Mark" then scrolling through your Markpoints (UFC Steerpoint rocker or DMS UP/DOWN with HUD as SOI) then TMS DOWN LONG to make that Steerpoint SPI

They're minor things (at least to many) but any work on the correct visual representation for Position Lights (Steady/Flashing) on the A10C and correct operation of the back-up ADI (A10C) ?

Thanks...I'll work it out and add it in...I guess other lines in my export lua (Viacom/DCS Bios) are messing with it! Cheers

Superb job...thanks very much!

I seem to have Tacview installed and working (its in DCS with the Tacview options page under special in settings and yes the "record flight data" box IS ticked) ) It seems to export some sort of data as each flight generates an appropriately named .zip.acmi file (though very very small...1kb) But when I go to play them in Tacview they don't really "exist" their duration is always 00:00:00 and consequently don't play Any ideas what i'm doing wrong?

Modern jets are specifically designed to be easy to fly...hard to fight Look at the difference in flying as you progress from say an F86 to an F5 to an F16 Modern FBW jets are specifically designed to "fly on rails" and give the pilot the easiest flying experience because so much concentration is needed to "fight" the aircraft...the pilot isn't thinking about flying - he's thinking about Comms, Situational awareness in a complex tactical environment, sensors, weapon systems, integration with other flights... Its not World War One and we're not having to "blip" the fuel valve to control our speed on our ratary engined bi-planes are we?

I suppose the question I posed earlier (and I am happy to hear a definitive answer) is that will a Radar akin to an APG 73 be able to distinguish between a "green blob" that may be a school or hospital or a radar return that identifies a bridge/motorway junction/railway marshalling yard/pier/Power Station/Runway etc...

I guess the question is...to what extent does the "can't ID what the Radar is looking at" apply... Does that apply to ALL targets? Point Targets? Vehicles? Individual buildings in urban areas? Recognisable substantial structures such as docks, railway/motorway junctions, substantial bridges, Power plants, Refineries, Runways etc? Distinctive elevation based landmarks that would enable an INS fix in the absence of GPS?

Alot of the anti-AG Radar "mafias" arguments focus heavily around the limited resolution and utility of older AG Radars which obviously limits their ability to identify and target individual vehicles/units etc... Whilst I know in a 21st Century sense its mere "theory crafting" to suggest anything other than individual unarmoured or lightly armoured vehicles scattered amongst non-combatants and thus needing positive ViD, might be targetted...is it not even slightly plausible to suggest scenarios where say, Runways, Power Stations, Water Purification Plants, Railway Marshalling Yards, Bridges, Tank Farms (POL not T72s!) might be considered targets? Also...if its absolutely impossible to use a radar akin to the APG-73 to perform Offset Aiming Point bombing...why do RCAF F/A18Cs routinely train for it?

Its not theory crafting to say that older generation all-weather attack Aircraft (such as Tornado's/Intruders etc) where able to do exactly that with Radar offsets though is it? Indeed - remember GPS has only been available post-1995

Is it really severely underpowered? Even those who are forensic about its flight model...suggest that its only slightly underperforming at the edges of its flight envelope... The point is the A10C in RL is underpowered... Which isn't really a massive problem given its usage doctrine except in high/hot environments

Obviously....no one disputes that given correct weather conditions/GPS availability/ISTAR assets etc etc the AG Radar is (by comparison) a sub-optimal sensor The question everyone has about the AG Radar is this...its quite easy to speculate about scenarios where NONE of the above are available - Wet Weather is common in North-Western Europe, Southern China etc, Russia and China have either significant ASAT and/or GPS disruption assets, Off platform assets may not be available in heavily contest Air Defence Environments against Peer level adversaries... Now yes, (in particular the Kosovo Air Campaign as an example) the SOP has been if those conditions exist...don't operate...leave it to say F15Es...BUT that's because 21st Century Air Campaigns have been relatively low intensity, low (or no) Troops on the ground, no existential threat to strategic allies, restrictive ROE's In a desperate Campaign against a peer level adversary - say, an Invasion of one of the Baltic States or Taiwan...what happens when unfortunate circumstance gives No TGP (weather) No GPS, No off-platform ISTAR assets? Do the F16s and F/A18s REALLY stay grounded...given that bad weather strike was a staple cold-war mission for Planes at least a generation more primitive (Tornados, Aardvarks, Intruders etc) and with no smart weapons in the 1980's?

Indeed - how could i have been so shockingly inaccurate! As you have correctly pointed out between my quoted figures and the "post half-life Alyx" figures you've shared the % of gamers with VR headsets did indeed skyrocket to 1.91% (from my quoted 1.29%) !!!! Why would you assume that Flight Sim players have VR headsets at a 10 times the rate of the average PC gamer? Or is it just confirmation bias...are we assuming that people like "us" active on the DCS forums ,rocking our home built gaming PCs...updated and overclocked...is in some way representative of a typical DCS purchaser

Do we have a citation (or even anecdotes) to support that?

How critical is VR support - when as of April 2020 - stats show only 1.29% of PC Gamers (not PC owners) have a VR headset?

As the anti A2G "mafia" have pointed out...in a hypothetical situation without off-platform assets, no GPS and in bad weather (for FLIR - heavy rain etc) current doctrine is exactly that...for F16s/F/A18s etc to NOT fly A2G missions...to leave that to F15Es As they no longer train for radar guided (principally radar offset) bombing... Now I can't be the only one that feels its because of current operations...IE: Low Intensity ops/low numbers of TIC, no "existential" type threat... Given that F111s, A6's, A7s, Tornado GR1s etc all were capable of Night/Adverse Weather bombing without GPS/off-platform assets in the 80's..would tha air force response to large numbers of lightly armed marines/Airborne troops being completely over-run in operations in quite typical North-West European/Chinese weather be to just say c'est la vie...if a peer level opponent deployed significant GPS disruption and the environment wasn't permissive enough for significant use of ISAR assets?

Thanks :) Hehehe I know i'm a grouch...but ED could solve an awful lot of their customer base complaints if they bore in mind the old adage "first do no harm..." with their updates!

Why? Was there mention of a time limit on their functionality on the ED purchase page? Would ED reccoment I DON'T purchase Baltic Dragon's Raven One campaign tomorrow...in case it is rendered non-functional by future base DCS updates? What other "serious" (not kiddie) games render purchased DLC obselete over time? (It certainly doesn't happen with my CK2 or CMNAO content)

No issues with the Syria map (already purchased) Will only be hung about A10C II if its release renders modules I have purchased historically, unplayable except by having a side by side install of an older version to play that content I have purchased (As has already happened with Operation Piercing Fury) The size of the SYria Map (and consequently the size of a typical DCS install) renders the reccomende d- have a 2.5.6 version alongside your release version a laughable solution!

Hehe and the stock answer to problems in the current release candidate is "have an older install to play module x/DLC Campaign y" when it was functional..." At c250GB for a "typical" DCS install...that's not a realistic solution for most people...

How does the number of MP servcers equate to interest in the map? When its well documented MP use is a small minority of overall use... Wouldn't a better metric be # of SP missions for WW2 planes on normandy map vs # of SP missions for WW2 planes on other maps? (In DCS User Files) to judge its popularity vis a vis other maps for the Warbirds?

I can't decide if the OP is gearing himself up in advance to be outraged at how "OP" the Eurofighter is...or disgusted that its been "nerfed" :) Given that a) nobody here really knows about the Eurofighters FM and b) the module is light years away...not much more than a skeleton and a few 3D models at the moment...

Whilst I wouldn't dream of arguing the specifics of different Radar blocks A2G capabilities...the question does remain... What's the plan for for Peer level conflicts (no/degraded GPS) in North-west European winter or Monsoon type weather conditions... I mean A7's/A6's/F111's/Tornado GR1's etc were available for those kind of missions in the 1980's (20+ years before our notional timeline) is todays answer really F15E's or nothing?

Whilst I understand current US doctrine is for either TGp based or co-ordinate based targetting...to the point AG radar isn't used operationally for bombing in "most" tactical planes such as the F/A18 & F16 SURELY that's a product of current operations though...IE: Generally unimportant targets, low strategic importance, small numbers of troops at risk etc in what are typically dry environments (middle-east/south-west asia) against opponents with limited capability... In a "peer-level" conflict with genuine consequences surely the "If I can't see it on the TGP and/or drop a JDAM on it from 15,000ft" doctrine would be revisited... China and/or Russia have significant GPS jamming/ASAT capability...making total reliance on GPS guided munitions problematic, North-West Europe, Southern China experience long periods of significant rainfall which renders TGP use (and particularly FLIR) difficult and/or impossible... In that environment with say, heavily outnumbered and lightly armed rapid deployment troops desperately defending a river crossing against a couple of Motor Rifle Divisions in Lithuania or with a big stack of PLA Ground Force infantry brigades bearing down on them in Fujian province...would the answer for support really be..."sorry you'll need to wait for the F15Es...we can't drop a dirty great stick of CBUs on a radar offset"

I don't want to fall foul of Forum rules (particularly as I never play General Aviation sims anyway) but surely there's a pseudo-competitor product coming soon where you'll be able to fly C130's with better weather and better ATC on bigger maps...that would be a far better/more enjoyable environment for C130 ops? WIth DCS a better environment for Combat aviation simulation... Why try and re-invent the wheel...