Wizard_03

To be honest I get depressed reading these forums sometimes because it feels like there's nothing but problems but the reality is people don't post about the things that work and the vaaaaaast majority of things in DCS do work and they work really well. So when something doesn't it kinda sticks out like a sore thumb but I try not to let that bother me as much as I can.

Its not though, the new drivers borked a bunch of other games too.

That's why there is no competition and there probably won't be until that changes

And there's no competition because there's no money in Flight sims, at least compared to what someone could do instead with the same skill sets; for more money.

That can be construed as both an advantage and a disadvantage. On the one hand yes I think your absolutely correct, the person that spends X amount of time dedicated to a specific mission set is going to be better the person who spends >X amount of time on it. No question. However now your depending on having that specific person and that specific equipment in the right place at the right time. Its great when it works and everything goes exactly according to plan, and It doesn't when it doesn't. There's now an intelligence chain in your ability to execute missions effectively that can be exploited. I think the general strategy moving forward in the 21st century is getting away from specialized units and focusing more on general readiness, across the board. Something like an B-52H or F-22A is amazing and highly effective and the aircrews are naturally very skilled at what they do. But it does you zero good if they are 1 day away from deployment at any given time and place but you need a target hit in a half hour for it to matter. That's where rapid response organizations like the USN/USMC and platforms like the F/A-18E/F or F-35C come in handy. They are worth their weight in gold because that's all you have on day 1. The US strikes a balance by having both forces and options available to them but most countries do not, and when they can't or don't, multi-role and flexibility is typically preferred in both equipment and crews.

Your right about the usage. But that's a very US mindset, not every operator does it that way. Most countries use what's available and train their aircrews to do everything because they do not have the luxury of specialized equipment for every senario.

That makes much more sense then what we have now.

Oh ok I see, I was gonna say mark points could help to some extent but they are not implemented ATM. So in the future, we should be able to make designations with the pod without that changing waypoints?

I have a question for the viper people, is there a way to slew the pod around without it also moving the selected steerpoint around with it. In other words; I want to have the jet remember my Flight plan as is and designate attack targets with the pod independent of my mission waypoints. Right now when I select the pod it slaves to the waypoint and when I decide to slew it, it takes the waypoint with it. Is that just how it is? or is there another way?

I have heard several hornet pilots on these forums state they can adjust the CMDS programs while on the ground. What do your SMEs say?

Nice shots, can anyone tell me what the little letters inside the track files represent? can't seem to figure it out.

Unfortunately in the squeaky clean EM environment we have in DCS comparing missile Dynamics is like comparing unicorns to leprechauns since ECM is arugably a bigger factor then aerodynamics in this day and age. How the missile "flies" is somewhat accidemic if it can't attack it's target properly. Also Guidence logic is incredibly important and is not equal across the board like it is in DCS. I think the SD-10 and other modern missiles might have better motors and kinematics then the the AMRAAM for sure but IRL that doesn't matter nearly as much as it does in DCS since we fly in a vacuum when it comes to ECM. The real life story like always is a lot more complex.

Set it for night and bump up the contrast and its fine.

Looks great textures are breathtaking

Could I ask you to educate us a little? I mean that in most respectful way possible. All I have to go off is the manual and it doesn't give you much in terms of "how" your supposed use that information. I'm under the impression that these kind of fault monitoring systems are important for troubleshooting from the pilots perspective. Are you and Klar saying that in real world you'd just kind of ignore that page completely and work off what you can and cannot do by trying it, In Flight rather then go through those pages? I guess In other words what mentality would you have?

No I'm talking about the Periodic ones. About half of them "work" in the sense that they say nothings wrong. But a bunch of them show failures on the BIT pages. The Ibits are more of a TO/Launch/maintenance thing like you said. One that really annoys me, is the dispenser turns off as soon as wheels touch the deck and causes a bit advisory for ALE-49 that shouldn't happen. I'm talking about stuff like that. Even if its a simple Go/No go situation, I don't think its unreasonable to ask for that. Almost all the other jets in DCS have them to some degree. If the level of complexity is too much for deep system and subsystem failures to be accounted for, I could understand that. But At least give us a Go lol

Even That would be preferable to what we have now. Right now the BITs tell me I should abort.

Well in the real world you can’t just pop out of the cockpit and look the aircraft over. Your Bit and FCS pages may be the only indicators that you have a problem, along with the caution lights and are probably gonna be your only tools for figuring what happened and what your gonna do about it. They’re essential in the diagnosis of problems, especially little ones that don’t require you to go home or leave the jet. Right now damage to the aircraft is simplistic and catastrophic. In real Life tons of things can happen that don’t outright create an emergency. Many of which have nothing to do with combat such as getting swiped by the basket, lightning, or goddamn birds. But they do require attention, and or action on the part of the pilot to continue with the mission and can drastically complicate other tasks. The aircrafts fault monitoring system is pretty important for stuff like that.

It’s beautiful now, makes me excited for the Marianas map

Agreed, the BITs are also important when the aircraft sustains damage. I personally do not just end the mission when I take a hit. But one day when we have proper a damage model to go with it. We can put the stripped section that comprises half the manual to use. Right now it’s a lot of cowboy seat of your pants flying, without many of the consequences that go with that, and while that’s certainly is fun its not really representative of what it’s actually like flying around a multimillion dollar vehicle. Which I think is the whole point playing this game vs something like Ace combat or war thunder. And when we have dynamic campaigns it certainly seems possible to build in the reality of down aircraft and aborted missions/ground accidents or other events that directly influence mission execution and readiness states, without it being too absurd from a gameplay perspective. So while of course 100 percent is certainly out of question, I think it’s in the realm of possibility to get reasonably close in sim we have. But like I said earlier I think most people would agree, the “functional” aspects like sensors, flight modeling, weapons, and navigation definitely need to come first. Then afterwards the nitty gritty bonus points stuff like BITs and Degraded modes. *Edit* Which is why I’m happy ED asked for our input on what next. :)

YW :thumbup:

I have a TMW on a desk mount (no extension) what I use is 3 for dead zone and no curve, you want the aircraft to respond quickly to your controls this trains your hand eye coordination, The stick and throttle are always moving, there is no set and it forget it. IMHO trying to desensitize the stick will be counterproductive because you'll then have to work harder to get the aircraft to move the same amount, and you'll also notice a difference in control-ability at low and high stick deflections. Station keeping with the tanker or any aircraft is a matter of noticing trends and staying ahead of your own aircraft. It takes LOTS of practice to master. I know lots of people use curves to help them out, and that's fine. This is just my opinion. Also you shouldn't really need to touch the rudders during unreps, it introduces to much input and you'll start over controlling. Make sure the tanker is going fast enough, and do not cross control. Observe the tanker and correct one thing at a time.

I think the one we are going to get is a fully programmable decoy that will fly a flight plan with waypoints and dispense countermeasures. The one for the tomcat is just big brick right now.

I want the BITs necessary for a proper cold start per the RL procedures completed. Right now we are missing the FUEL Bit and its page and JHMCS Alignment mode off the top of my head. The other "problem" is the IBITs that show up on a cold start after pressing AUTO on the bit page show most of all the systems as failed. Probably because the respective systems are either not complete or missing altogether. In reality you wouldn't want to see any failed IBITs on the BIT page, before launch or TO..or at least not with systems like weapons or sensors. I'd like to see all that taken care of at some, point. Not at the expense of the things you mentioned however, just at some point.

No ones giving them a trophy I’m not happy with the state of the hornet or the fact that we’re looking at beyond 2020 and EA for completion. But it is what it is. Trashing the developers, the people who want it complete more then anyone on this thread, is not the answer either. It’s not constructive, it’s toxic and pointless. For myself, I was waiting for the hornet to come to DCS, years before it was released, I remember when it was officially announced and I’ve been enjoying it ever sense it came out. It’s been a roller coaster but Im certainly not about to give up on it, or abandon ED when we’re finally talking about the Finnish line now.