randomTOTEN

Do you own the Supercarrier module? Is it installed?

Are the engines running in your F/A-18C?

Looks like this image comes from the F-16.net forums. For DCS you generally want to fly the 11° approach to flare to 13° for touchdown. This is also explained in the early access guide that came with your DCS F-16C blk 50.

I just ran it. I was listening to some music in the background so from my perspective it was a nice relaxing flight out and back. I fired the gun pods for entertainment (mostly to see if I could remember to do it), and I think I heard the door gunners fire a couple times. Other than that, a pretty uneventful mission as Wizz alluded. Yeah I say give it a try if you haven't yet. It's quite fun. :thumbup:

Great info. That needs to be reported.

Why not just then make it a mod that all your coop players should install? Or have the admin turn off the IC so you can run modded?

Page 173 gives a table of economical airspeeds. The one I remember is M0.55 (Sea Level). I think the rest of your questions come down to pilot decision and mission specific needs/threats. I wouldn't think of the attack as "I must go into X zone burner at Y distance/TTG" but more as a tool available to achieve the mission goal. Somebody else probably has more detailed info. Interesting, I didn't realize the MiG-21 is faster in MIL at S.L. but just ran a test and yes it is.

you can just modify the .lua files to make this happen... I don't understand why every fantasy loadout needs to be supported nowdays

"F/A-18C Game" is only used if you've enabled "Game Avionics Mode" which is a simplified experience with less depth = less controls that need to be bound. If you don't use this "Gameplay" option, or the mission you're using does not allow it, your controls will not work. To get full bindings, and full systems depth, your controls must be bound using the category "F/A-18C Sim," and the setting "Game Avionics Mode" must be off. They are linked together.

May I request this decision be reflected in the manual? Perhaps a description of each map mode, followed by "Not simulated." as in other DCS products. It will hopefully (I doubt it) cut down on bug reports in the future after the full release. Also it would add to the completeness to know that the lack of these map options is intentional, but they exist in the real aircraft.

https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/news/o...715#post288715 Also, seeing this is your first post, WELCOME TO THE FORUM!! :thumbup:

Link to the thread where it's marked [REPORTED]?

That sounds normal to me. The version of a module in DCS may not be the same as the one in Beta, so it could require you to have two versions of the same aircraft installed. EDIT: It should first look on the computer to see what modules are already present, and copy them to the new installation. It won't be a complete copy as mentioned, but it should still search. Does it not do that for you?

I think that might actually be correct. Hornet is receiving the current TACAN radial, and presenting it on HSI. The TACAN's transmissions are oriented (assume) to local Magnetic North (Station Declination). The fundamental enhancement of the VOR/TACAN signal vs the standard radio beacon signal is that they are directional (contains direction information). Hence why classical radio beacons are called NDB's (Non-Directional Beacon). This signal itself does not contain direction information. The receiver must Direction Find to determine it. If the process is Automatic Direction Finding, then the equipment is called ADF. A lot of my assumptions are based off civilian VOR's and RMI indications, but they should be nearly identical to TACAN, as the pilot indications are identical (only the methods of transmission and interpretation, and security are different). When you are South of the TACAN, and see it's bearing as 000°M, you are on the 180° Radial from the TACAN. The TACAN is transmitting this information to the Hornet, which is calculating via the signal pattern alone that it is on the 180° Radial from the TACAN. The signal is directional. The Hornet's radio doesn't care the direction from which it's received (this is why it's more accurate). So, since the Hornet knows the Radial is 180, it knows the bearing is 000, and drives the pointer to 000. No matter if the current north reference chosen by the Hornet pilot. The magnetic variation is applied at the transmitter, not at the receiver. When you are on the 180 Radial facing 000M, you see the bearing pointer for TACAN straight ahead. When you change to True heading, your heading is now 006T. But your equipment still receives the 180 signal from TACAN, so the bearing pointer shifts left of your nose by 6 degrees, to still show 000.

I disagree with this statement. Longitudinal eyepoint position is only one of the variables which can cause this effect. In your description (for this aircraft), it is the wrong one. In that screenshot it is absolutely the problem.

Eldur, I interpreted that as an AoA below -7 degrees. I think the new M61 sound is in the Hornet too..honestly I didn't know the Vulcan was getting new sounds, only the Avenger....

Have you set any snapviews? I adjusted my default position a while ago and it appears to overwrite the ED setting.

Perhaps he's asking if there's a way to display MGRS/UTM coordinates on the TGP display?

Round up to the nearest 1,000lbs is how I would read that (pilots like to keep it simple... assuming heavier weight is more safe than assuming lighter weight than actual). So I round up 44,500 to 45,000 and set 17 ANU.

Yeah calling the ship and asking for a bearing is probably the best way to go. I have the same problem finding the Kuznetsov in the Mi-8 after an off shore SAR.

You crashed last night, didn't you.....:music_whistling:

They still "somewhat work." You have to place them in the Saved Games/DCS folder, and they will break the multiplayer integrity check. Also I can't get any of the light posts to appear, but the ramp equipment and buildings are OK.

I'm pretty certain that before the new flight models were released for Flaming Cliffs 3, AAR was performed by AI taking over the aircraft from the player... You couldn't even fly the procedure yourself if you wanted to.

There is, I just looked it up. It's called a "gate" and the only way to set the power levers below flight idle is to pull triggers on the base of the throttles. So you have a physical stop for throttle travel in the Q400, just like in the Hornet. Interesting, it is the lifting of the virtual triggers while in flight which causes the alarm. I have no flight idle gate, and no triggers on my hardware.. and it works fine for years. Same for the Q400. It is Physical block+alarm. For the majority of the flight, a large portion of my physical hardware is unusable. On the ground I engage a control lock, the opposite end of the same hardware throttle becomes unusable there too. In that case it is literally all deadzone. Many, many, many, many simulated aircraft have nearly identical systems to that. Yes they do. The Hornet idle stop does not physically move the throttles during it's function. Their position remains unchanged. The pilot moves the throttles. Not the limiter. When you land in any condition other than a flight Idle flare the transition is also seamless. When you hit the carrier deck your next throttle position is MIL or MAX. When you perform the same no-flare landing the throttles are above flight idle on WoW, the next thrust setting is ground idle. The transition is seamless just like any takeoff. I believe the TDC option was implemented before WINWING even shipped. Well WINWING doesn't have a retracting flight idle stop (or retracting afterburner stop with force override?) so even that's insufficient for the task. It would be nice to have a actual antennae tilt scroll though... How about a short sound that plays when the throttle angle=flight idle? You might like it better.

And I disagree with you, too. No, that's your hardware's fault. This isn't the only virtual airplane I fly that does this. The Majestic Q400 has an identical system. In the Bombardier Q400 if you go below the flight idle stop in flight (try to put your hardware at idle) an alarm wails continuously to warn you of a danger condition. That's all replicated in the Majestic version, with the addition of an audible "click" detent for flight idle. An audible detent would be vastly superior to your supposed solution, as it also does not change the calibration of the throttles. You merely replace a touch sensation (physical block of throttle movement) with a sound sensation (click informs you that flight idle is reached). Obviously there's no alarm for the invalid position (in the deadzone). This is exactly the identical behavior if you repeat the test with your hardware in the flight idle position. Below flight idle your hardware is in an invalid position. You will if your throttle was not previously in an invalid position. It is realistic. That's what real Hornet pilots have to deal with.. their throttles are equally limited in flight. I notice it with the rotary throttle at the base of my Logitech Extreme 3D Pro. And my Warthog throttle. So what? I know in the Hornet there's no need to put it all the way down in flight. You can also give yourself an accurate estimation of flight idle if you practice with the control indicator visible.. with some practice. It's excessive. The current implementation is accurate, takes minor adjustment in technique, and therefore IMO superior to your solution. Your solution is worse. It suddenly allows an invalid position to be valid without input. It moves the virtual throttles even though you made no action to move them. It allows you to eliminate a task that a real Hornet pilot must perform. No, I disagree completely. Which is accurate, and a feature of this aircraft (this isn't the only aircraft I simulate that does this BTW). I disagree, stop trying to put your hardware in the ground idle position while in flight. Easy.