tom_19d

I've always seen the failsafe function of hydraulic speed brakes accomplished with a separate normally open valve that deenergizes open on electrical failure, bypassing the SB valve right to the return, but obviously none of those aircraft were of the F5/T38 family. If you recall the unpowered position being CLOSE, absent a maintenance manual I certainly have no room to disagree. Thanks for the input.

OK, now we are starting to get somewhere. In the case of an unpowered aircraft, I don't think the position of the SB switch is at all relevant. If this is any sort of typical setup, the spool of the 3 position hydraulic valve can only rest in one position (think of a normally closed or normally open solenoid). Electrical impulse is used to select the other two positions, but as soon as electrical power is lost the valve will move to its neutral position. So the question becomes, where does the SB valve "rest"? In the EXTEND / RETRACT / or OFF (centered) position? 1F-5E-1 doesn't speak to this at all, that was why I asked in Post 7 if anyone has a maintenance manual... On another note, welcome to the forum Statro, it is always nice to have someone here with actual F5 time. If I may ask, because the -1 isn't clear on this either, in a single seat F5 did the SB switch on the throttle spring to center or would it hold position in either EXTEND or RETRACT?

There is no significant pressure to bleed off. Hydraulic fluid is incompressible. You cannot "trap" hydraulic pressure in a closed system of lines attached to an actuator. Pressure doesn't hold the brakes up, the concept of trapping an incompressible fluid on two sides of an actuator does. I don't disagree that the brakes would droop over a long period of time due to mechanical imperfections of the valve but the argument from post #6 of this thread I was rebutting is that they would droop to full extension overnight.

As 2Alpha pointed out, 500 AGL level delivery, so geometry is no factor. Time of fall is a constant based on gravitational acceleration regardless of airspeed at delivery (0 knots or 500, it doesn't matter), the only question is how far downrange the bomb will be when it strikes the ground. Have you had a chance to try it again 2alpha? Hopefully adjusting your airspeed to a constant TAS will at least get you in the ballpark...

Release tables in TO 1F-5E-34 are all based on TAS as opposed to IAS. Your aircraft is moving almost 100 knots faster when you are 500 KIAS at 11,500 MSL than when you are indicating 500 knots at sea level.

What do Miles have to do with it? Your question (paraphrased) was "why aren't my bonus points available for this item that is on sale?" You haven't been able to use bonus points on already discounted items for years, and those rules have always been publicly available, easy to find, and they aren't even fine print. If you are trying to compare Miles and points that is a different issue, and a ship that has already sailed.

You were trying to use bonus points on December 7th. That was while the Thanksgiving sale was ongoing. You can't use bonus points on content that is already discounted. That is rule #3 on the link that BigNewy posted for you. The sale is now over. If you go to the E Store today, once you get to the checkout page, you can use your bonus points.

Well said. From 1F-5E-1 (Change 9) "TACAN - HSI steering and navigation indications provided by TACAN DF - bearing pointer points to UHF station selected on UHF radio"

This is normal behavior. DF equipment can only provide a bearing to (or from) a station. The signal DF equipment is homing on (a downed pilot’s beeper for example) is only transmitting audio, not navigation information like a TACAN.

I don’t see any reason to enable it until it as least close to as capable and realistic as the wonderful SRS. Per the briefing the AIM9M is restricted on that mission. Alpenwolf has stated he MiG21 / F5 are to be the primary air superiority aircraft on this server and having the best A2A missile hung from an attack aircraft would undermine that intent. If I recall correctly all the weapon restrictions came about earlier this year, if you go back in this thread you can see all the discussion .

Thank you Sir, that is all anyone can ask for. Another thing to be grateful for on Thanksgiving day.

Hi Alpen - Catch me if you can was running tonight. The two Reds (1x MiG15, 1x MiG21) said they couldn’t load any missiles. I don’t have any red fighters to verify and we ended up organizing a fun little impromptu 2v2 Guns only anyway but I told them I would pass it along...

No to subscriptions. As others have said, I paid for my modules already (and in the case of EA, I paid for the promise of a completed product down the road). Absolute hard no to any kind of cheesy loot model. I would be fine with paying for the engine every 2-3 years instead of the freeware model, but I would have to see some real progress there (ie dynamic campaign, weather, ATC, etc) to convince me that is the correct path. I want to compensate the folks at ED for improvements, but frankly 4th gen fighters don’t do it for me, just like I’m sure Vietnam, Korea, or WW2 ere aircraft don’t appeal to others. Everyone needs the engine though, so that is where I would prefer to spend my money. And as for the subscription v 1 time argument; I am more than willing to pay a premium for a complete product, just not promises. That is why I have moved away from EA. As for the actual question posed by the poll: I’m not sure a sudden infusion of cash is what ED needs to suddenly make everyone happy with progress, so I don’t really buy the premise of the question.

Hi Gents, Thanks for a good discussion and BigNewy thanks for some great feedback and moderating. I think I can shed a little more light on two of the later questions brought up and hopefully I won't muddy the waters too much doing so. Full disclosure, I am away from my rig on business so I can't watch the track to see how long you waited, but I will say this; You will need to be on 02 with a cabin alt of 21,000 feet, but it might take longer to become perilous than you expect. Time of Useful Consciousness (TUC) is defined by the FAA as the time between the interruption of oxygen OR exposure to an oxygen poor environment until the pilot is no longer capable of taking corrective or protective action. This doesn't necessarily means unconsciousness, but instead it generally manifests as a pilot who is still conscious and might even realize there is a problem, but mentally can't fully grasp the situation or physically can't take the actions needed to address the hypoxia. TUC obviously is highly dependant on physical condition, but the FAA shows general time ranges as a function of altitude and either a slow or rapid decompression. In the case you are discussing, that would be considered a slow decompression (just turning off 02 without dumping the cabin). In such a case, TUC at 18,000 feet is 20-30 minutes, TUC at 22,000 feet is 10 minutes. FAA AC covering this topic is here. Like I said, I wasn't able to watch your track, but if no symptoms of hypoxia are present after 10 minutes at a cabin alt of 22,000, that would indicate a problem. At that point, however, I don't know if that is a problem with the F5 or DCS in general; what I mean is that the systems of the F5 seem to be working correctly, but reactions to hypoxia could be coded into DCS itself, not the module. That is pure speculation on my part though. I mentioned this in passing in post #5 of this thread. There is indeed an interlock between the supply lever and the diluter lever on the oxygen regulator; if the supply lever is placed to OFF, the diluter lever trips to 100%. In practice, this means a pilot with his mask on can't forget to turn the supply lever on; he wouldn't pass out as with hypoxia, he would literally be physically prevented from inhaling at all (his mask is hooked only to a closed line). As Quadg noted, our pilot in DCS always has the mask on. For this reason, I believe BST (now ED) decided not to implement this particular feature, as it would really serve no purpose other than making the supply lever into a suicide switch (or just killing off players who spawn too slowly into a cold start multiplayer match). No conscious person would be calmly suffocated by a non-flowing mask. They would either immediatly rip the mask/helmet combination off their head by pure instinct (or perhaps perish in the attempt if they are inept) but in no case would they sit calmly during the affair. FOLLOW UP: Finally back home and able to do some testing. Took an F5 up to FL400. Cabin indicated ~FL180. Turned off the O2 at the mask regulator and kept the aircraft between FL400 and 430. Cabin altitude held between FL180 and 200. After 20 minutes, double vision of my gun pipper set in. Turning on the O2 regulator immediately restored pilot vision. At this point I have no doubt that both the F5's systems and pilot reaction to hypoxic hypoxia are modeled to a most reasonable standard.

Hi guys, someone needs to help me here because I am not seeing a bug... The F5 is a pressurized aircraft. If you carefully watch the OP’s track, when he levels at FL300 you can verify his cabin altitude is only 11,000 feet. This is well within normal parameters according to the pressurization schedule provided in 1F-5E-1. There is no physical need for a healthy, fit individual (ie most fighter pilots) to be on oxygen at 11,000 feet, and in fact depending on the type of operation the FAA might not even require a pilot to be using supplemental oxygen. To then verify the system is working as designed, take control of the OP’s track at FL300, verify the O2 supply is still off, and dump the cabin. The cabin altitude will rapidly rise to aircraft altitude and shortly thereafter symptoms of hypoxic hypoxia set in. Turn on the O2 and pilot function is immediately restored. Unless you are talking about the supply lever/diluter lever interlock which from what I can tell isn’t modeled (and I don’t think that is what the OP is getting at) I don’t see a bug here. There is no reason to need supplemental O2 at 11,000 feet.

Your pinky switch in cockpit is never going aft from what I can tell. I’m not sure how you are getting the anti collision switch to stick forward, but if I take control right after you turn on your position lights and anti collision lights and lean over in the cockpit to the left, your pinky switch is neutral. I cycle mine aft and I have full control of all the lights.

@rodborza, rromano already said he has the pinky switch aft right in his post...

@rromano, this might be a silly question but maybe I'm not following you -- you do have either an engine running, the APU running, or ground power connected, correct? It has been a long time for me in the A10 but I am pretty sure the buses the majority of the lights are on need a power source other than ship's battery to energize.

How so?

Long standing bug unfortunately, reported in this thread and tagged “reported.” https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=220031&highlight=Rwr

Had a teamkiller on blue team tonight, sadly, at about 22:00 CDT / 03:00 Zulu while Phone Booth was running. He took down a friendly F5 that had just departed, then turned around and strafed a Vig that had just landed. I had to leave but if he continued to be a problem I have TacView of the incident if that would help, hopefully the guy just left...

Right on, right on.:thumbup:

I could be a smart**s and say "manufacturer recommended speed increase for gusts" but you are of course correct, nothing atmospheric will change the required IAS, post above edited. In real life of course, but DCS doesn't model any damage to the AoA system that won't have an associated caution. That is why I specifically said "correctly functioning F5" in my post; I prefer to save my admittedly limited mental bandwidth to keep my head on a swivel and fly the donut. But, whatever floats your boat... Fair enough, I totally get what you are doing with the AoA and agree with your depiction, like I said something about it just tickles my brain wrong when I try to picture it from the perspective of someone just starting out with the concept -- maybe my thoughts are that someone could incorrectly association the red / green on the diagram with a red indexer. Obviously that would be incorrect, but just trying to see this from a different perspective. Regardless, like I said above, if I am the only moron with an issue, my apologies, so I will let it be. Thanks for the effort and the chord terminology change, cheers.

@Ramsay, with all respect for how spot on your analysis typically is, I don't know if I am a fan of that graphic as the coloration and some of the terminology seems misleading to me, but maybe I am missing the point... Angle of attack is the difference between the chord line of wing (not necessarily the "aircraft nose / datum line" as shown by the graphic, since the chord line changes with the configuration of the wing) and the relative wind (aka direction of travel). Now perhaps I am misinterpreting the diagram posted, but with the difference in red and green and their positions on the triangle shown, it seems to be implying that the angle of attack would be different for the two different weights. This is of course not the case; correct angle of attack, as indicated by the green donut of the indexer, is always the desired angle of attack -- in the diagram you show, that angular relationship (the triangle) would always be the same, regardless of speed. The required speed to meet that angle of attack in unaccelerated flight (aka a constant rate of descent) will change, but not the AoA. The diagram is correct in saying that a lighter weight will yield a slower approach and vice versa, but I think the colors might be misleading -- if I am the only one seeing it that way and everyone else just gets it, my apologies. Regardless of all that, the entire point of resurrecting this thread was to answer RodB in post #6 -- and the answer remains; if a correctly functioning and configured F5 is on final with the green donut AoA indicator illuminated, the speed is correct for approach. That speed necessarily will be different as the aircraft loading changes, but it will be correct regardless. Fly the green donut and don't sweat IAS...

AOA indication will be accurate regardless of the weight of the aircraft, the stores you might or might not have onboard, or their location. Just fly to the green indication and you are correct regardless of aircraft loading or fuel status.