captain_dalan

Agreed, i'm all for chaff when pinged (if preemptive chaffing) or bug out.

No maneuvering involved here mate. After losing the lock, i point the nose to where the bandit is in the sky, 45-50 degrees high, i kick PAL, after 2 sweeps the PAL picks him up, and immediately loses the lock. With the nose in place i kick PAL a second time, PAL locks him on the first pass, the lock is immediately lost again. Something's fuzzy there. I'll try and save a track the next time i run DCS, but it's a very specific edge-case scenario and with none of my MP mates around, getting the AI to comply won't be easy.

At gamma setting of 2.1-2.2, VR is a bit dim and flat screen is a bit.....muddled? Hazy? I'm not sure i can find the exact words to describe it. It's not washed out like it used to be, but it's almost as if the atmospheric haze that should be there at say 10-15 nautical miles is completely uniform even at point blank range. Almost like you are flying through a very polluted air or water mixed with milk...

Thread lightly least thee invites the Delta fanatics as well!

NO plane should have its flight model developed based on OTHER plane's performance, don't let some of the overzealous and overcompetitive people tell you. Besides, the FM purists here (yours truly here included, guilty as charged) wouldn't shut up about it, so you will find out if it happens one way or the other

And that's how you make on camper happy but another one sad Just like the first major change, i actually prefer it when shaking is perceivable and has an actual mechanical benefit

Hey i'm 6' tall and can swim a mile in just about half an hour! But then again.......i do find pilot bodies in cockpits to be incredibly obscuring so, i don't really want one in DCS....

You know, these are some good points you raise there. Just last night, after the usual MP shenanigans, i went for some SP FOX-1 training, and on a couple occasions (literally 2), after losing the PD-STT lock inside 15 miles with the bandit high, i went PAL and nose up, because i had a general idea, where the bandit was supposed to be. I immediately locked him up, and then the lock was instantaneously dropped, like inside 1 second of it being established. This isn't the first time this happened, but it is an edge-case, as i usually am amble to perform anti-notching maneuvers, or lose the lock much closer do to large lateral displacement. Not in these two cases though. So, what gives? The bandit is high, inside 15 miles and PAL should be P-STT. So the lock should unbreakable, notching or not. But it does break and it breaks similarly to how it breaks when auto-switch to P-STT is on. So what if Jester is switching between P and PD despite PAL being on? Had i read this post i might have saved the tracks! Anyways, this may be worth investigating. @IronMike?

That's a neat idea!

Unfortunately there is no way of either confirming or denying that.

If the effect is as what @Swordsman422 describes, then i doubt it will be of any use, or at the very least it won't be different then dropping your gamma setting a few points, but it would be nice to have from a cosmetic point of view

Ah, i must have misinterpreted some of the generalizations made above.

I like the mindset behind these tests. If get enough spare time for testing, i'll try to replicate and see if i can find trends!

This!

Did you try a hammerhead in a fly-by-wire jet?

Difficulty rating should not affect plane performance, certainly not acceleration or climb rates. And MiG-21's (count the F-5's here) and especially MiG-15's always severely overperformed when controlled by the AI. This has largely to do with their flight models, that is the laws of physics they follow.

Sorry for bumping this, but it has been marked as missing tracks, though tracks have been provided on two occasions.

That shake is there to save your life, least you disregard it and depart the plane

This! I think many here would prefer the status quo (of absolutely borked missile guidance and dynamics) of the previous decade for the sake of perceived balance, fairness or what not. ED is working on it. It's working on it after endless years of passiveness. Give them time i say. We'll get there.

Thanks. I only ever evaluated the 4x4 configuration Ps wise, up to mach 0.8 at sea level and 5000ft and those match the published data down to the T

Wait, they aren't letting F-14's on MP servers at all these days? I thought this was specific to the e-sport jocks.

There is a contextual menu for Jester, that tells him to switch either from P-STT to PD-STT or vice versa. Maybe if you map that to a key binding, you can do quick popup checks? Just speculating here, i was never in your situation. My Jester auto switch to P-STT is disabled and i always start with a PD-STT, eventually switching to P-STT when very close and closer then that, i'm in PAL, PLM or VSL-High/Low and those are all pulse modes.

This is a topic that was on my mind for some time, not so much as a request, but more as a question for people that flew them. In the past i was never considering the impact of filters on visibility in general, as i could neither afford nor needed quality lenses for my sunglasses, and spending most of my outdoors in late afternoons or evenings, i never needed them either. But in the last few years that changed, and i did start paying attention. My first issue were a G15's and though i was highly skeptical at first, they do seem to effect contrast on bright sunny days. The last example was yesterday morning, as i was driving to work on a cloudy morning with a B15 filter. Again, significant improvement in contrast and thus spotting. Both example involve non-polarized lenses. But, as @Swordsman422 said, those aren't the topic of this thread anyways. So my first question is to any people around here that flew the F-14's (maybe @Victory205 can chime in), were the visors on the helmets used by the F-14's crews standard grey? Or were they tinted in any way? My second question is, does implementation of filters matter in DCS? When i was playing around with reshade i actually did adjust contrast, sharpness and hue in order to experiment with what made most sense to me, to emulate what i felt was closest to my own impressions. But then DCS changed the lighting model and the performance hit was significant for my machine, so i stopped. As i understand it now, the standard gamma of 2.2 should represent unmodified view through a clear and transparent canopy, so i try to adjust it accordingly within my screen's capabilities. Right now, i find the setting of 2.1 to most closely match most lighting conditions i can test on my latitudes and longitudes. But some kind of visor options would be cool, if for nothing else then for role-playing reasons. Heck, i might even program one for me in reshade, if i had any idea what the effects of having it should be.

Please don't misquote me. I never mentioned anything about acceleration, neither in the current version of the FM, nor the October-November patches. Especially not for a clean bird.

BIO is not the only one saddened by the start of this video, i almost shed a tear too....