randomTOTEN

I think also for the A-10C, the training missions and manual will need to be modified to account for the new mouse interaction.

Translation: Operationally Valid.

There is footage from last year showing *possibly* multiple C Hornets with this exact loadout. Where did you get the idea that 10xAIM120 is not used? Do people just declare loadouts they don't like as "fake" and loadouts they want as "real"? My position is that 1xAIM120 is an invalid pylon loadout for the F/A-18C, and needs to be removed from DCS.

Indeed, certainly not an operationally valid loadout. However, after talking with the team yesterday, we'll probably allow it for those that want to be so inaccurate. Thanks I'm just curious, to get the terminology right. Does ED/TFC consider 6x AGM-65 on an A-10C Suite 3 an "operationally valid" payload? Thank you.

I also don't think we have a warm up time in the Hornet? I think it's usable as soon as you select it. Does the seeker warm up automatically with no WOW?

I don't want a list of SAM codes clogging up my kneeboard. Kick it to the Flight Manual/ Early Access Guide.:mad: This is where that kind of information belongs. Not on some random page while I'm looking for airport charts. And of course the ability to *eventually* set these programs in the MP/ME.:thumbup:

Exactly why I made the OP. I think that's going to be the case.

What's an A-10C II? I think that's the first question I'm going to have when I look at the store page, the main menu, or the unit in the Mission Editor. It just doesn't feel right for the upgrade project, as this name sounds arbitrary. If this is real nomenclature, then obviously this topic is in error. I think there are perhaps better naming conventions than putting roman numerals after the module name. Examples: 1. Sub variants of the aircraft model (most closely matching): Examples include Block, Lot, and Mark numbers for the subject aircraft. These are already used on other projects like the Viper, Hornet, FW-190, Spitfire, Albatros, etc.. In the case of the Warthog, the obvious answer would be Suite number. 2. Project year: The Admiral Kuznetsov update can be see in the ME with the year in parenthesis behind the unit name. "CV 1143.5 Admiral Kuznetsov (2017)" 3. USAF Upgrade Program name, nickname: Examples include: Rewing, Hog-Up, Precision Engagement. I even like the fictitious "Tank Killer" title more than I like "II." 4. Usual software convention: Version 2, v2. "2.0" Just some thoughts to reduce a little confusion. I know it's already late in the development stage, as there's already been an announcement and we're near release.

The competitive multiplayer aspect of combat flight simulators is...in a way... the worse thing that ever happened to them. IMHO regarding autostart: Doesn't matter if I personally do them or not. I consider an autostart feature as a core component of any flight simulator. There must be a means for a completely new user to have a functioning aircraft with a running engine ready for immediate flight. Even if it's not otherwise configured correctly. DCS can accomplish this with the runway takeoff option, but the autostart script is identical, and similar in function to how other simulators operate. The AJS37 takes all of 5 steps to start, but for years lacked an autostart. I've never used, and will never use the autostart for that aircraft. But my opinion is that it must have one. Must.

You really have to custom build your profile. It's not good enough to use a default one, or one you download from somebody else. Building your own profile teaches you about how TrackIR works, it's features, and it's limitations. If you don't make use of it's features correctly, and you do not respect it's limitations, you will have an enormous amount of frustration. An example: TrackIR works by observing the 3 reflections of the hat clip, or 3 LED's from the Pro clip, and translates them into a head position. If TrackIR see's 4-5 reflections because of background noise, you will have problems. If it sees 2 because the camera is positioned incorrectly, or the random profile you use requires you to move one of the reflectors out of the camera's view... you will have problems. If your profile forces you to block one reflector with another, TrackIR will also see only 2 reflectors, and the view will break. You really need to create a custom profile and learn the system.

By default the eyeline is tilted downwards to place the DDI's within the boundaries of common computer monitors. What you're judging as "straight ahead" is actually pointed downwards be several degrees, the equivalent of looking slightly down instead of directly level (eyeline on the horizon). This is why the HMD cross is below the HUD. The solution is to tilt the eyeline upwards (pan upwards), but then you will probably loose visibility of the DDI's. But the HMD cross will be in the center of the HUD. I use TrackIR, and I physically tilt my head downwards to approximately match the default eyeline. I then set this position as zero, and when I raise my head to approximately level, the HMD cross position is correct. This can be adjusted for your user TrackIR curves.

And I disagree with you! Laughing with my Logitech Extreme 3D Pro. :joystick: The F-16 has FLCS, the autopilot is always on in that jet. How could it be any easier? Your hardware argument has no basis. All day. Every day. Twice on Sunday.

Yes, https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=283532 not like it's the 2nd sticky in this subforum or anything (not directed at you Juan).:music_whistling:

It keeps the mouse cursor visible while still allowing the mouse to control the view. Instead of moving the mouse around the cockpit to click switches, the mouse cursor remains in the center of your screen, and you adjust the view to place it over switches which you can click. It's not permanent, the same LALT+C will toggle mouse pan(view) -> mouse click -> click-and-pan -> repeat.

So you made the case that navigation should be learned before carrier landings:music_whistling:

Check this out: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1267371&postcount=7 It should still work. Might be a problem with MP servers though. Haven't used it since I got my TrackIR, but it used to work great.

Sure they will, if the wind isn't strong enough to justify turning the entire flight pattern around. They will never have 2 opposite direction ILS transmitting at the same time.

Which runway does ATC assign? That's the one they're using, and they've turned the ILS on for...

The A-10A exploded shorty after nose wheel touchdown both times I watched your track.

I think you computer is dumping all the data it had loaded into short term memory. Happens to me too, and to some extent with every large game/program.

Nice track! I was doing tests with the A-10C, but not the Su-25. Yes I do have one. How do I better explain the difference between a grass runway, and the grass next to a runway? It took me a couple tries with the landing, but I was successful in both takeoff and a landing from the grass at Gudauta in your track. Surprising, I really have never tried that much before. Lol, even using your own track I eventually got myself stuck in the dirt! 100% throttle, trying to rock the plane with gunning the engines, rocking the nosewheel, cycling the controls. Couldn't do it. Got myself good and stuck. Somebody call the airfield management.. get me a tractor or mower and a chain.:thumbup:

Yes, it certainly can. Especially since many of those other aircraft are still in active development. This isn't true either. Are there any grass airfields on any map in DCS? Can somebody try taking off and landing the Su-25 from it?

I guess that's true, and a good point. Just looked up some footage and took probably less than a second to fully inflate. I also have to consider that the drag from the chute has to be transferred to the aircraft through the chute lines. looking at a deployment, the drogue pulls the chute out (so it's not actually pulling against the aircraft yet), and the main chute lines probably come under tension as the chute is finishing inflating, so it probably is that sudden of an onset.

It seems to me the chutes don't "open," in that as soon as the chutes finishes their deployment animation the drag suddenly increases to that of the inflated chute. It's very jarring, and I would expect at least some sort of more gradual drag increase as the chute is inflating. Basically the drag should increase somewhat proportionally to the inflated chute area during the deployment process. Right now it feels very 0 then 1. It believe the brake system is similar to other Russian aircraft we have in DCS (and similar to the Spitfire system). A stick mounted single brake lever controls pressure to both main wheel brakes, with the rudder proportioning the force with pedal deflection. I think the brakes are fine.

stop trying to do visual approaches at night, the real US Navy prohibits it.