Jump to content

TheSnark

Members
  • Posts

    166
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TheSnark

  1. Usual procedure IRL is to set the QFE for where you takeoff and land, and once up high enough go back to 1013 so that all the aircraft are on the same altimeter settings. What did you set and when?
  2. Looks like an interesting series of changes for the upcoming campaign! Looking forward to it!
  3. It's been doing this for quite some time, no idea why actually.
  4. That is a very cool feature! That will be very useful to make quick reference points in a mirage flight!
  5. I do hope so, I've given up on using the Hotas Cougar cursor for it, even with saturation it's impossible to gain a lock. I just use the keyboard.
  6. I think this is in the bug list isn't it? Something got screwed up in the last update that makes the TDC act almost as if it's a binary input, ignoring the initial range of the axis that is being used.
  7. The plane has enough static trust to start rolling if no brake mechanism is applied. It is only fair to put on the parking brake at the runway if someone is jumping in a hot aircraft.
  8. In the previous patch the TDC pipper worked fine, but in the current 1.5 version it has become insanely quick. Is this a bug or a permanent feature? If so I know if I need to change my curves.
  9. Haven't played throughout the week but REDFOR is doing a damn fine job this campaign. Then again, the numbers were much the same I played the first time and I was on Red. we won in the end even though we got pushed back into PAK 1 and 2, so really anything is possible.
  10. Greg is correct though, same complaints about the numbers were made in the previous rounds ;). I picked blue because golly gosh, I love my Mirage 2000. It was either the 21 or the 2000 I would fly, and since the 21 doesn't stand a chance without much of a GCI I figured the Baguette Fighter would suit me better! Especially since lives are very limited when flying fighters.
  11. Reflections that bounce up from the ground become a return signal that the radar knows not what to make off. But yeah, the stability of the Mig-21 Module seems to be out of the window recently. Lets just hope they can get it back on track!
  12. Outrun? No not always only if the enemy fires at an unfavourable moment. Otherwise use normal evasion tactics like flares.
  13. Aha, yea the AFS does not do anything with that, doesn't mean there isnt a ADC somewhere that does change the deflection based on speed, just not one that I know about unfortunately.
  14. If control responsiveness is a problem, why not simply apply curves, The MIG-21 developers recommend a certain setup of the control stick to get a responsive feel that is closer to the real thing. Or am I missing something here? As far as I know it's supposed to be a rather snappy aircraft? EDIT: found the relevant section in the AFM, haven't found a AMM yet unfortunately. But, given that it's a full hydraulic system it means that the pilot only feels through the artificial feel unit, and it doesn't change the actual angle of the flight control surfaces.
  15. Well no, it's to give the pilots a feeling of the pressure on the elevator surface instead of having the pilot look at an indicator. That's why it's called an artificial feel instead of having a direct feedback back from the mechanism in the form of cables and rods. EDIT: Again, this is the A variant, they very well might have changed it for the E version.
  16. Well done Skatezilla, looks just like the real tank!
  17. If it's the same as the A, then it's a electrical actuator and a spring that provide a force on the stick based on airspeed and deflection input. But that shouldn't matter in the simulator since the system will create a force for the pilot to feel, not to limit the actual deflection. The only group of people that should notice it are those with a FFB system. Note that this is from the AMM of the A variant. No idea how it's done on the E, I can imagine that this system has changed over time.
  18. You seem to get awfully angry about aircraft that have a very mundane and basic level of simulation. If ED wants to change any of these systems then it's only for a full-sim variant according to their statements. Besides, I don't think it has ever operated in FC3, which is the product you got. It seems strange to demand some fictional functionality to be honest.
  19. The tanks look good but they are too far forward, if you'd move them about 20cm backwards they would be spot on. Well done so far!
  20. There's something to be said for that argument. I love the M-2000C and thus joined blue to fly it.
  21. I think that's a good idea. Perhaps even limit the F-15/SU-27 lives with one less. So you get 3 go's at a new'ish fighter. 5 at the generation before, and 8 at helo's. Just a idea, not saying those numbers ought to be absolute, but it might mix it up a bit more throughout the evenings.
  22. Bill, you need to give the radar some time to find the targets, and you are relatively close and low. All the clutter at the bottom should already give you a good indication that the last 10km on the radar is not useful. I do admit that it's strange that it's picking up the targets quickly upside down. Not sure why.
  23. The whole F-10 map will be removed next round? What is the plan then for flight planning on checking where the smaller targets are? How will the Mirage be able to align itself(the intial coordinates are not always correct and need manual adjustment)? Without a proper alignment the mirage is rather tricky to navigate.
  24. Just flew for about 1.5 hours on the 21 vs F5 server. Radar seems happy at altitude with finding targets, has a hard time when down low and is pretty useless due to the ground reflection. I think it pretty much functions as expected. You really ought to provide a track if you think it's broken so we can look at it and see if you are either doing something wrong or experiencing a bug.
×
×
  • Create New...