Dino Might

Just a friendly recommendation to edit your screenshots with the declassify block overlaid or otherwise attached so people don't get all spun up. Was there no separate distribution restriction (e.g., distro D)? If so...don't tell me. I, personally, had the "oh shit" reaction before I read your comment. Assume you don't want to mark up your copy, but if you don't care, I'd black marker redact all the classification markings if it's reached the declassify date.

Two months. If you react strongly to unmet expectations, then play it safe and plan on 21 MAR release. If you're like me and have fun with telling yourself it will be out next week every week, then have at the speculation, but don't join the vocal minority in crying about some particular conspiracy theory on release dates not panning out. I can guarantee you that when HB announces the official release date, you will know within the day because it will be EVERYWHERE.

DDD display, is the vertical scale closure rate? What is the arc on that display signifying?

So, with the need for pitbull signal from ownship, that means losing TWS lock midcourse trashes the missile? I'm curious whether it makes sense to start shooting Fox3s into a scrum. Only concern for blue one blue there would be that the missile seeker loses track after it has gone pitbull and then re-acquires on friendly, right? Suspect that is less likely than ownship losing midcourse TWS track, which is a big concern for BVR 120 shots into the furball.

Wouldn't be the first time that the manual and "how it's really done" don't completely agree, though pointy nose aviators are a special breed when it comes to verbatim compliance (this coming from a former nuke). :music_whistling:

Why not 1024 * 32? For thosnof us that are computer illiterate, is the pagefile size dependent on RAM, disk space, something else?

Very much appreciated. This is my favorite format.

So far, this is my favorite early distro copy showcase. I have to say that I think Chuck has done more for me personally (and probably many of us) in terms of making DCS approachable to the casual user than anyone else. I might be printing a nice copy of this and binding it. Can't decide if I want it in a kneeboard version or not.

It's a win-win. The sooner it's released, the sooner we get to play with it. The later it's released, the more complete it will be.

And I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that catching the 1st wire is the worst of all the wires. If you dropped lower, you might have hit the fan tail. If you catch the 4th wire, any higher and you'd just bolster and have to go around, so the first wire has the least remaining margin for error.

Yep. Looks like CEII. He seems to be one that enjoys trolling. Technically, none of the text statements are incorrect. It is a first in DCS, and has a rear seat. "Because it's the plane DCS deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So we'll hunt it, because it can't defend itself. Because it's not our plane. It's a gunless gizmo, a watchful onlooker. A civilian aircraft." I'm actually kind of excited to see the CEII, and I do intend to use them as stand-ins for some WWI aircraft (with some reskinning). And then have F-14s shoot them down, ala Final Countdown, but now it's back in 1918. "The First Countdown." :megalol:

I doubt the Cat will make so much of a difference in levels of play between the 4th gen jets. Right now, the F15, Su27, M2k, and F/A18 can all win a fight amongst themselves on any given day, depending on who flies better. I don't think the Cat will be thrashing everything in sight, but I do think that it holding its own will earmark it for the above comments from the deniers who continue to believe Yahoo answers claims of "only an interceptor," and similar nonsense. At the end of the day, they can complain all they want. ED won't bend to some small coterie that makes claims based on feelings rather than facts. All these Hornet Bros would probably start going nuts when they saw my F5 outturning a Flanker in a sustained rate turn to get guns on him (because they'd ignore that I'm doing 600 kts to make it happen).

I want the VF-1 liveries... They were at Miramar in the late 80s early 90s, right? I was too young and didn't go see them up close to check markings. Just saw and heard them flying two ships overhead all the time.

I'm planning on doing this. Got a second acct ready to go for it, and will hopefully have the wife try out RIO a bit, and if she doesn't like it, will either use laptop or app on tablet to try and do some RIO things myself.

This whole thread reads like, "hey, please make missile x perform better," instead of, "Hey, please make missile x have more realistic performance." The latter requires documentation or other evidence, instead of, "I feel..."

I hope one of you enterprising individuals sets up a VA profile for this bird and posts it here for us to use. Not that I'm lazy, but I'm quite lazy... I'll give it a go myself, considering anything someone makes will have to be fine tuned and customized for each user. I have had VA for a year now and never used it. Just knew, "one day, I will need this."

Fun video that gives an idea of the timing between pilot salute and shooter return salute, then safety checks, and finally the launch signal (also delay from shooter signaling launch to cat actually launching). Here's the more serious, straight-forward one: Another small, but nice-to-have detail to incorporate, if the animated deck crew is still in the plans, is for the shooter to return the salute with the non-signaling hand (left hand salute if signaling from starboard side) and do that whole station-check arm signaling move, though this is not consistent in all the videos I have seen - have seen one with shooter always using the right hand to salute and giving a thumbs up to signal launch.

Curious as to whether the same setting will be involved on the CE2, but the warbirds have a "takeoff assist" option default set to 100, and I find that setting to completely mess with ground handling. It only helps if you are not paying attention, and hurts if you are. Once I turned that off, my warbird ground handling improved leaps and bounds. Be sure to check the special options once you get the CE2 and make sure that "takeoff assist" is off, if that option is implemented by M3.

Hollywood and Wolfman were the unsung heroes.

I'm with you there. The minute it was flyable with a decent FM, I would have taken the Chromecat and not griped one bit. I still enjoy the Hornet a lot and have since day one of early access, mostly doing pattern work, some stints on the aerobatics online server, and the occasional training mission. I think I might have burned myself out on PvP flying so much and so frequently on Blue Flag that I'm now just wanting to have some relaxing ferry flights, cats/traps, and AAR. I know that I will be spending plenty of time in the Cat just flying around and hitting F3 over and over again. Lots of flying on aerobatics online and the like.

Half the fun is the anticipation, trying to find the Easter eggs, and speculating wildly. Those who cant handle the "disappointment" when their wild speculations don't come to fruition ought to know better than to join in. All the recent hate and discontent has been of our own making. If you can't just enjoy the anticipation, then ignore everything until release and let the rest of us have a nice time instead of trying to bring everyone down.

More hype has been generated by us Tomcat lovers than by Heatblur. I think they have played it relatively well. Enough teasers to keep people entertained, and tons of development info, which I tend to prefer. All of the foaming at the mouth in this forum has been (generally) from two things: 1. People dropping in and posting Tomcat urban legends, claiming to know something about the aircraft, aerodynamics, basic physics, etc. 2. Impatient people who are unhappy and will use any excuse to try and drag others down with them. I'm looking forward to the next text update. The ones to date (e.g., engine modeling, weapon performance analysis) have been awesome.

Yes, you are getting at a relevant measure; however the analysis must be dynamic, most easily done as a time stepped function. Doing the static "bubble" calcs require the aircraft to achieve that lateral separation instantaneously, or for the missile to not move until that lateral separation (and angle off boresight) is achieved. This is not how the engagement will play out, because the missile will be adjusting velocity as the aircraft does. Neither the aircraft or the missile can achieve a new velocity without moving through the intervening ones.

I don't think he was trying to imply that no realism is needed in the game, but only that this aspect (stick visibility) is really insignificant in terms of immersion/realism compared to other elements we have to live with anyways, so why not provide a QOL option? I have a hard time understanding why people would have a problem with turning stick visibility off without instead calling out things like trackIR allowing you to have owl-like head rotation and see things you normally couldn't if strapped in. The real argument against, in my mind, is that its just another bit of code that can muck things up with new patches and textures and the like. And there is a finite limit to what can be included as optional QOL features. Gotta decide which ones are important. For me, key mapping options, like use of 2 pos vs 3 pos switches, and other accessibility concerns take priority, because not everyone can build a full simpit or have the latest and greatest hardware. We still have guys flying with a keyboard, and i want them to be able to play, too, so the snapview provision is a great one.

Your turn radius discussion does not make sense. Saying that the missile having a larger turn radius means it cannot effect an intercept makes no sense. Turn rate and turn radius are not the same thing. Turn rate is only part of the equation. You are finding one metric that is easy to calculate and trying to draw unrelated conclusions across an entire spectrum of situations. In short, Shag, there's nothing to argue with because you haven't presented anything of substance.