Scaley

If this is what I think it is it has been extensively reported a few times, but I'm not sure if ED have realised the connection between bits of it yet. Whenever you fly under some objects (wingman, bridge, structure)you will have a pitch down sudden transient. You will likely re-trim the aircraft and continue the flight. On approach to landing at low altitude (which I think is the boundary for ground effect to kick in) you will get that same pitch transient in reverse (nose up). It will only happen on the first approach, so if you go around again then your next landing should be fine. Is that what you are experiencing? See also: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=154018 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=154325 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=154018 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=154901

I know this isn't what you asked but, personally I wouldn't bother trying to put things into the in-game kneeboard. The checklists are small enough to print out, or have as a PDF on a second screen, iPad, tablet, etc. It's generally a bit easier to use them that way rather than covering up part of you in-game view.

The KY-58 is already supported. The power, radio select and key select switches are fully functional.

As mentioned at the point of disconnect you are in a close situation (i.e the boom is more than 50% compressed). When the disconnect happens it will immediately extend to the 50% out position. If you were further away then it would immediately retract. Just aim to be a bit further aft as the disconnect approaches and you won't have a problem.

At the moment safe disconnect is possible, but you have to realise that as soon as you disconnect, or the boom operator does, the boom will immediately go to the neutral position both up/down and in extension. If you are high or close then you will get hit. If you are further away and/or lower than the ideal position the boom will move away from you and thus there will be no collision. In order to have a safe disconnect you need to make sure that as your tanks approach full you move a little bit away and down.

I'd sort of agree with this and would love to have a lighting upgrade that both reduced the brightness of some of the white lighting (taxi, landing,etc) and also to increased the visual range of some of the anti-col and strobe lighting. It seems that the lighting effects aren't affected as much as they should be by the ambient lighting. They are way too bright in the daytime and the range you can see them at is too low at night.

This is what this boils down to in the finish really (and the same could be said about the repeated engine power debate). Accessing the technical specs of the engines in such a level of detail to actually know how the components are constructed is reasonably difficult. This means any system model designed component-up will contain some estimates. Mostly these produce reasonable behaviour. Being as we do have (as a community) access to the aircraft flight manual we can see if the aircraft system behaviours match what the manual says they should be. In certain cases (like the hyd pressure on engine failure) they clearly don't. The model written may be largely sound, but for some reason it's producing behaviour divergent from how we know the real system behalves (assuming USAF documents are accurate). This divergent behaviour is probably due to missing data when the model was built being replaced by estimates. In such cases even if we don't know exactly the components of the model that are inaccurate, parameters can be altered to produce a total system behaviour closer to the known behaviour.

And when someone (in this case noodle) attempts to post some real word data it's magically disappeared a few minutes later? What's the point in having a bugs thread if we can only report the bugs ED want to hear about?

So the official bug thread has been closed with a "no bug" comment. I guess this is going to be a lifelong issue with the module.

Yep, the static aircraft parked at Nellis are the main frame rate killer for me too. The range objects make far less difference.

There is a setting on the CDU to change this. If you go to the "FPM" page and press the LSK next to the name of the fightplan you are on it will toggle between auto and manual.

A lot of it you won't want while flying, it's more reference material. There are some tables and key bits that you might want. I've clipped a few key pages out into the tablet I use in-flight.

Maybe an odd technical question, but interested in the way navigation is done and thought about in the attack community and A-10 specifically. In civil GA we have the constant debate over how much we should use the automation/GPS/glass cockpit etc and how much nav should be done with a paper map looking out the window. I'd be interested in how much the A-10 guys do of each and how they plan.

Just made this - hope it helps....

Not that I can help answer what ED are doing but.... I've found if you adjust the contrast of the display and the gain of the FLIR you can get a very much improved image.

Sorry...... Assuming you're not in easy comms.... You shouldn't need to touch the big back select knob to get a tanker on 254 uhf. Check: Right frequency Uhf on/off knob set to Main or Both Manual/preset knob set to MNL Then mic switch down should let you talk on the selected UHF frequency

The selector only affects what you transmit on when you use "mic-switch-forward" (normally the VHF AM radio). Creech tower works fine for me.

Do you have easy comms enabled?

Anyone tried this with 2.0a?

I had similar happen n 1.5, but now you mention it I can only think nk of it happening with a relatively light load. There also appears to be a similar effect around other aircraft - a big pitch down when crossing under another fighter for example. I assumed it was rather aggressive wake modelling.

This is probably the problem. Sometimes the very bottom of the HUD will still not be close enough and you may need to be slightly nose down to get the cursor close enough.

Has anyone found a way to resolve this? I'm also trying to get AI flights to keep their lights on but can't find anything in the scripting wiki that helps...

Is this reproducible in other missions? I had a mission that had this behavior but it was fixed by deleting the player fight and creating a new one in the editor.

Similar issue: Taxied onto the runway and the following AI A-10 (different flight) taxied onto the runway and took off - missed me because I'd lined up for a formation takeoff position as practice. Of note no radio calls heard at any time from the AI A-10 despite being on the tower frequency on VHF AM. AI Takeoff.trk

Exactly the same issue - updater runs and looks from the log like it completed. DCS runs fine, but the updater hung in the "cleaning up" stage and had to be closed from task manager. Log file: autoupdate_log.txt