randomTOTEN

Not really. What they do is change where the vortex is located in relation to the wing. The change in location provides an aerodynamic benefit for the generating aircraft, equivalent to an extension in wingspan. I don't think the effects in DCS are overdone.

I've noticed that the aircraft's waypoints automatically create kneeboard pages which cover most of the route of flight. Exactly in the same way I could see the map display being used. I wonder if they're going to transfer that technology from the kneeboard to the cockpit.

I have a button below my mouse wheel. The point is it's a very very very small amount of movement.

that's a lot in my opinion (assuming the aircraft is otherwise symmetrical) I have my mouse wheel set to "clicks" instead of continuous rotation, and it's two clicks of the wheel for me... nowhere near 1/8th deflection. It's an incredibly tiny amount. If you were sitting in the aircraft with your hand on the knob you would probably apply enough pressure just to barely feel it moving under your finger tips. As soon as you felt it move you would probably release pressure, then check the change. 1/8th sounds like way too much.

It isn't in my experience. When I start my trimming demonstrations with the TGP mounted, the ball is deflected to the side. The first step I perform is yaw trim to center the ball, then roll. This is to avoid trying to correct a yaw mistrim with adverse yaw from ailerons/stabs. You probably need to zoom in some to see the deflection of the inclinometer in finer detail. In the previous discussion, a user pointed out that this will actually result in a small amount of sideslip due to combined aerodynamic effects of the asymmetrical drag and trimming force. Uncorrected it's skidding turn. The ideal would probably be about half the correction, known as a "zero sideslip" condition. But really, it's such a small amount of slipping or skidding to really care about such minute details. You can just adjust the controls until you're satisfied despite being less than aerodynamically perfect.

Not when the projection display remains fixed. If you change FoV but do not change your physical display a change in Focal Length is mandatory.

Yeah, you got it correct. Basically every unit, AI, airfield, ATC, and anything else that might need to know.. will always know what "coalition" you are on. Always. Even if the jet is parked and the battery is off. Clients in fighter aircraft might not be able to see it, but that's an issue specific to them, and not the rest of the simulation.

post a short track I've seen this happen before to another user.. I think a DCS repair helped him but I can't remember

Yes it's all simulated. do this using the HOTAS Trim control and looking at either the CHKLST page or FCS page.

Your first image has an amber FLAPS indication. Your Standby ASI shows about 280 so looks like FCS retracted flaps to protect the aircraft. Your second image shows FLAPS FULL. Your third image shows externally FLAPS FULL. The times for all 3 shots show these are minutes apart, and you mentioned the problem just after a cat shot. I think you catapulted with full flaps sir.

Not quite, they do use deception to spoof range calculations. That's where the false contacts come from. It seems from test reports here that might be the case. Otherwise, I suspect the FCR is being disabled for electrical demands to the ASPJ transmission.. I.E. perhaps there is not enough electrical supply for both at the same time. The radar is one (if not the single) largest demand on the electrical system for these aircraft.

No. You may adjust the controls on the panel, but they do not change the IFF function for the A-10C 2 or any other aircraft or system which targets the A-10C 2.

I wouldn't think a change in seat height is required, just tilt the view up more. You loose view of the instruments but they're really not important at this point. You want a good look at the tanker. The real pilot would probably either be shifting his eyes up, or tilting his head up to see it better. Yes the canopy bow is a restriction but that's part of the aircraft design. I don't think it would be useful to slouch in the seat to see it.

I think I would shift my view up so that the tanker occupies more screen space.

I use 2d, I would very much like to have "baked" reflections. I've enjoyed them in all the sims i've flown over the years. There is a group of us that do like them.

lemme check the date on this post, ...it's not from 1993? strange... it looks like it is

Thanks QuiGon, this really is a great mission.

LYSBOMB also doesn't deploy according to manual images, they stack vertically which reduces the ground area illuminated. It makes subsequent attackers less capable.

yeah I'm kinda genuinely impressed and confused how you made this gigantic long post about having your hand held learning to AAR, you actually take the time to learn to do it, remark, and make zero mention of the lights... while repeatedly remarking the lack of visual references. so...what... you just winged your way through this? You didn't watch any tutorial vids for this (there are hundreds of them online)? You didn't read the manual, in which a picture of the perspective of the tanker in the pre-contact position is given, and a depiction and explanation of the lighting system was given... what just happened here?

Logitech Extreme 3D Pro I use the RPM lever on my Saitek Throttle Quadrant for throttle twist control (left at 100% during all flight). no mods. no pedals. "rudder trimmer" option basically mandatory with the spring twist working great for years

At the end of the mission you will see a debriefing screen with several options on the bottom. One of them is called "save track" or something like it. It will create a file which is a replay of your flight. The smaller the mission (fewer units, fewer scripts) and the shorter the replay, the smaller the file is. If you can create a small "track (.trk)" of the problem and upload it to the forum, it would greatly help users to try diagnosing what your problem is. I would also suggest viewing the track with the "replay" feature on the home screen just to make sure it's working correctly, and showing what you would like us to see.

and yet hundreds, or thousands, can perform this task, even with the game in it's current state. Even with no AAR training mission still for the A-10C. After all those years. This is a large portion of the current user base right now, "the game should try harder" and you are not alone. It appears the community does a fantastic job of rising to the challenge of filling the gaps in learning. This thread isn't about learning. This thread is about people that (for the most part) don't want to learn. That think this learning is "boring," "not worth their time." But they still want the satisfaction of success. Now I'm speaking specifically to the problem of AAR here: I think this is incorrect. The opposite problem is the case. Too many people are staying and buying modules. Back when your options were either a slow and ugly subsonic Hog or a Russian helicopter the type of people that want Auto-AAR for the most part said "eww," and moved on. If you stuck it out you are probably also the type of person to put in your months (or years) cracking at AAR. Yes, we should acknowledge the extremely minor group that want's to do it and just, for whatever reason, seriously can't. That's not 99% of this thread. Now we have fast multirole jets. Those previously uninterested people are looking at DCS and buying them. Now they get behind a tanker and realize that this stuff can be hhhhhaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrdddddddd. Funny enough FC3 had completely automated AAR, but it was deleted when the flight models were updated to the DCS standard. Most were very happy about this. huh, practice? Not really. You only started with it because a campaign asked you to do it (2 of them). And you experimented with it some in between. You didn't look at it as a "thing to do" with the Mirage. You still can't do it in the Mirage... that's not what I consider "motivation." Compare to how many of us come to AAR. We see the controls in the cockpit. We see the receptacle on the external model. We see the chapter in the manual. We see perhaps videos or other players in a server doing it. We see the tankers flying around. "Hey, I want to try doing that!" I've never touched a campaign for the Mirage and I can AAR in it.... and I was doing it even before the first M-2000C campaign was even released. Because it was something to do in that jet, and I wanted to do it. So I did it. The game absolutely presents a path to learning AAR. But now, people look at that path, see others go down it, and say "no thanks, gib autopilot." "Just turn on unlimited fuel or don't do it," "no, I want to pretend I'm doing it." This is a terrible example, and your suggestion of it probably underscores your problems with AAR. The act of learning AAR presents certain milestones that happen in a defined sequence... naturally. And it's basically identical for everybody. This is not the first one, but you thought it was a good idea to throw at somebody first. This shows your hand. this also violates the building blocks of AAR. And is mostly useless. You don't need some magic "box." You have eyes, you can see how close you need to get. There are already an enormous number of resources (official and community) which will teach you the procedures and references. Once one skill is obtained, it sets the foundation for the next. But you have to want to do it, and you have to find the challenge enjoyable. lets go back to the A-10C days. You put two airplanes in the mission editor and off you went. Now you guys have instant action missions ready to go, but that can't solve motivation problems. What AAR really needs is time, and that's the thing you guys don't want to give it. It's about building the motor skills. The hand eye-coordination. The Spacial Awareness. You guys don't want to build them. There is no "hard way." There's "the way," and to be short-sighted is to give you a completely redundant (unlimited fuel) tool because you were offered a little bit of a challenge that didn't involve something exploding.

You got time to run 3 hour sorties with mandatory AAR, but you can't find any time in your busy lives to run a session with air starts in trail of the tanker? ...funny how that works...

So why aren't you guys running AAR training sessions together?

if that's true, that just about completely invalidates any criticism for unlimited fuel. I never use it so I don't know... but now I'm going to test it.