Czar

Approach the boom at the same height of your pilot POV after 'clear pre contact' message received from the tanker. Once the boom moves to point at the refueling door, change reference to the reference lights/deviation lights. Align first the up/down deviation lights to its middle/neutral. Approach slowly until the longitudinal lights gets into the middle/neutral position. Stick to both lights at neutral for a bit and the boom will automatically connect. Always reference the yellow painted line bellow the tanker to center the aircraft. Tiny inputs on throttle at a time while giving time for the consequences of each input to take place. You have a bit of play after each lights maximum deviation but take small actions to keep on middle. From what I can tell from memory. AAR is fun. Pleasurable. Enriching... and still is over simplified at the current state. Once you 'get it' it becomes second nature. A little zoom command can help, even though the lights are overly dim. Sadly. Put it is possible.

I view this differently also, not saying you're wrong. About the later part: I think PvE environments, at least the ones I'm attracted to (dynamic campaigns, mission generators etc), are not target rich that badly. Taking down as many aircraft you can instead of working with micro and macro strategies are much less rewarding for me personally. When I mentioned PvE-Co-op, it was more about strategy and tactics instead of killing spree against AI. My bad, bud. I remember early MiG-21 days. Hoping into that thing against F-15Cs and other fast movers was a thrill I think extinct. It was quite an event. I'm personally glad I got to experience Flaming Cliffs 3 golden era where you had Eagles vs Fulcrums and Flankers on 104th servers, after that, everything became weird with Hornets vs Vipers all the time. Don't we all? I believe that mission designers should commit to their 'artwork' and not external pressure as the later is the definition of 'artwork' death. The best type of missions and PvP environments came alive from the few to the many, not the inverse, imo. Is down to the mission designer. If they put the 35 in, their loss on the mission breaking and being unpopular. ED has already stated more red stuff coming after the 29A if that's a success in sales as that team needs to make revenue by itself. There are also external factors that we don't know all about. So I'd rather not worry about PvP balance as hoping for anything remotely close outside Flaming Cliffs is in vain. I'll stick to PvE and enjoying the sights that made me stick to DCS in a constant basis for 3 years straight now. Sorry to derail into a large post and the thread is not about this. All of you have a nice/blessed/delightful week and enjoy what you like the most.

That's the bottom line. A few people forget there is a lot of players that don't touch on PvP where crafted missions, dynamic campaigns, mission generators and co-op vs AI far exceeds enjoyment on hoping onto a server that once again is at noon, few clouds and is constantly unbalanced by player numbers let alone machinery specs. Kudos to ED to make an F-35 if it is their wish to do so. Many will flock towards it in many scenarios solo and with their friends in co-op.

The blame on this lies on the server/mission creator, not ED.

huh.......good catch! I recall it happening.

: ( yeah... The Harrier was the next in line for me, just before this stuff started. I'd guess there would be a hit on trust once again if older modules started being sunset instead of leaving anything towards the 'replacement' purchase. I'm not too pessimistic about this possibility... but again, "anything is subject to change".

I meant it more about the Mirage, Harrier and MiG-19 than the F-15E. Yeah, I'm still able to refund the 15E at any time but the Mirage 2000 is something I've always wanted in a sim. Specifically this very variant and it bothers me that I'll have to purchase it again at some time. It bothers me as well that I made a friend get the 15E and he got it from Steam and there is currently zero chance he can get a refund. Not that he's asking one or bothered, but personally I feel gutted.

This thread shouldn't degrade itself towards being a CFT thread... I agree with any path forward out of the current 'stalemate' of the 'RB/ED situation'...but the paying full price twice thing. Customers that already had the modules of the same variant supposedly being replaced should be recompensated by a discount of a decent margin.

This is my impression as well. Having flown the Tomcat from Heatblur for many hours, I don't think the jester menu is superior to the George's interface in the Apache module, for the Apache module. The button presses short and long are sometimes superior to head tracking on that Jester menu where you'd want to use it the least as possible binding Jester's actions on the keyboard or Hotas. Here on the Apache is a quicker interface for quick action with button presses and less room for mistakes. Coming from a virtual Tomcat driver, I like it.

BIG thanks! I just got the module and this update landed before my second ever flight.

In a beefy sim like this, there should be a option to allow this. I agree.

I did purchase the A-10C in early access and have Nevada that came for free with it. I don't have this campaign either. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Black Shark 3 is almost just as recent as the Apache and the devs should of had updated the logic on par with other modules. I get the point of the original module age, but I don't think it is a valid argument as they released paid upgrades and the Shkval is a major core component.

Saw these at the "In Developement" section in the DCS website. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/downloads/screenshots/572/ So I'll post here in order to not get lost in that list as that portion of the website is poorly maintained. Sinai section still have outdated screenshots at Downloads/Screenshots from the website. Of course, these are not user made and are cherry picked by the devs/marketing team. Missed 1 or 2 because they were not that interesting, but it is on the link above.

Well...you put F-4E on the list you get me weak. No way I'm voting for anything else. (unless if it were some CAS stuff with the A-10C or Apache, maybe.)

I didn't meant to be mean if it is about my post, bub. I was stating a discrepancy with my own experience in another sim and in DCS itself. I'm glad we have you here on the forums. Fair skies!

So, devs should only make modules that can do well in PvP on paper? whaaat??!! Please bring Zeros! Yes! I flew them more than Hellcats in that good ole WWII flight sim from the 2000s. Mitsubishi's Zeros and Nakajima's Kis overall on that sim.

The software only writes in the mouse memory the new parameters. It can be closed and never accessed again as well as unistalled. Welp, found similar results. So nothing can be done, I guess. Just save the info about the Logitech software if you ever need it. No background processes needed.

See the old Logitech Gaming Software if it works. I use it for my G600 because I dislike a lot the new G-Hub. https://support.logi.com/hc/en-gb/articles/360025298053-Logitech-Gaming-Software

I agree with this too. A checkbox to 'tie' the sea state to the wind exactly as we have it now in the sim. With the box not checked, the mission creator would be able to adjust sea state values and direction as someone posted a mockup here in the thread. I'd just add the checkbox and with it being defaulted to ON/Checked to not break any mission or campaign somewhere. (if that's how it works, I have no idea) The weather system in DCS is not realistic at the current moment, so it wouldn't hurt to implement these if it is simple enough to add flavor and most importantly to avoid glassy sea on low wind speeds on servers if the server intent were to avoid high wind but still have something for pilots to see the water surface.

The missions sudden ends in the air?! This seems a huge no go... The player should have the controls on that aspect, not enforced...

Just tested on "Driver Default" after posting the text above. Yep, mission loads in 50 seconds as well.

I just found that disabling "Shader Cache Size" on nVidia control panel (maybe there is something similar on AMD cards too) triples or even quadruples loading times in DCS. Consider enabling that function if your disabled it or keep at 'driver default'. I did disabled it for testing purposes and found out long loading times in DCS. Enabling at 5gb made DCS go from 3 minutes 50 seconds + at loading a mission to only 50 seconds. Probably same applies to leaving at 'Driver Default'.