Capn kamikaze

Over mach 1 is better than under, preferably above mach 1.2 so you can be sure the flow around the missile is definitely supersonic rather than transonic, then launching in this condition means the rocket motor isn't having to fight through the high drag transonic region during any of its burn time.

If you want accuracy use tacview.

Could we have the ability to create helicopter flights with troops already onboard in the air without having to land and embark them.

This is specifically related to the F/A-18 wingman AI, so should be in the F/A-18 bugs list, other AI such as the Harrier don't do it, reworked the mission to use the Harrier, and using the same wingman commands it attacked the tanks and ignored the downed pilots.

Specifically targeting armour isn't an option at the moment.

This is NOT a mission editor issue, it is an AI bug with the Hornet wingmen, moving the thread makes it seem like ED are trying to downplay the bugs related to the Hornet.

I built a CAS mission, and having defended the combat zone from an enemy CAS flight and its escorts (Su-24's and MiG-29's) I told my wingman to engage ground targets, which comprised T-72's,T-55's and some APCs and IFV's, instead he decided to bomb the enemy pilots that had ejected, totally ignoring the Armour that was about a mile from them.

NO.

Needs implementing in DCS, people have been asking for this for a long time.

Kind of this, I read it to mean pushing the nozzles fully forward while flying forward to use the thrust to break, anything other than very slow speed in this regime will not cause the hot exhaust to re-enter the inlet.

Wind your neck in!

Seems senseless for two reasons, firstly if it's in the public domain it's hardly secret, and why the arbitrary 1980 date?

This ^

There is no way you'd get exhaust gasses into the inlets by VIFFing, your forward speed and the associated airflow will stop that, it's only an issue in the hover, even a few knots of forward speed will cause the hot exhaust to tend to be near the tail not the nose, not to mention you have the cold exhausts between the hot and the intake.

???? Players can join via IP though.

I have to have people join by IP number, why is this, I have port forwarding set up on my router, and my "DMZ" is set correctly, no issue with people once in.

It SEAMS (geddit?) that development on the Harrier has slowed right down, it's been quite a few updates since the last time we saw one that included any listing of additions or fixes for the Harrier.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=221117

Posted a similar wish. It should have different colours for each weapon type on the platform, since ships tend to have the most, they can have anti-ship missiles, cruise missiles, SAMs and guns, each type should have its own colour in the ME, and the sensor ranges should be colour coded too, one for radar, another for EO.

Looks like the update has well been updated.

That's a scary thought.

Feeling the same way about it, gone back to the Harrier recently, the Hornet is more like TEA rather than EA.

Whisper it does compute, you just don't want to "compute" it.

awjudge, we are not idiots, and we know what EA means, the point is that progress seems incredibly slow right now, just look at the latest update list for the Hornet, and what we do see seems more like very very minor tweaks, more like bug fixes than added features. To be quite honest I'd rather see features added and then later on do the bug fixing because at least at that point you have two things going for you both from our perspective and from ED's, you have the features out there, and you have thousands of people beta testing them as soon as possible and for a longer time, which is going to help with any bugs that are caused by features interacting with each other in unexpected ways, if you're chasing a bug and fix it and then introduce a new feature that breaks something again, then you have to do a second fix, it's got to be more logical to get the features in place, then bug fix. Lastly theOden is right, there is a bit too much sucking up like behaviour in the community, as if you think that's going to achieve something, no need to be "teachers pets", it won't gain you anything. Bottom line is we are customers, and if I feel, and I do, that there is something wrong in the approach to it when you have a list of like a dozen fixes/features in an update for a module that is firstly not made by ED but by a 3rd party, for example the Viggen, and only 2-3 for ED's current flagship model, well sorry, that's my opinion and I have every right to voice it without being called an idiot or part of a group of "idiots" for doing so, in other words awjudge, jog on!

When is that happening?