Custard

I don't think that means what you think it does.

Really excited about this map and content pack, can't wait for WW2 combat to finally arrive in DCS. Honestly, this is me right now!

Got forbid players be given a choice.

Will we see an aggressor / VVS skin I wonder. A MiG-26 I wonder?

There's no disrespect intended, but I must call a spade a spade. Though perhaps I was foolish to see this series of events as an antidote to the perception of DCS organised multiplayer events as a rather exclusive business. Any event open to the plucky amateur has a certain appeal to me, and open favouritism towards the same few old hands leaves a bad taste. Event managers are of course free to run their own events as they please, and I wish you success. But I'm of the opinion that the openness of the early events is partly what lead to their popularity and large viewer count. I once tried to convince others to donate their module prizes from screenshot/skin/video competitions to these events, suffice it to say I wouldn't do that now. Good luck regardless, Cheers.

Must say, I'm hoping for a nice crop of fictional liveries with this one given the very limited number of schemes it actually operated in. This sexy JA scheme wouldn't be amiss either:

This might be interesting to some here.

>This time around, registration will be based on the SA Ranking. How nepotistic.

You called?

I hope it can be confirmed we'll be seeing AIM-9B & AIM-9P (Rb 24 & Rb 24J) options for period missions too.

What altitude are you flying at? The 21's radar now suffers terribly at low altitudes and has done for some time, afaik this is intentional modeling of the effect of ground clutter.

It's MCLOS, not SACLOS. Unlike the HOT & TOW you don't just look at the target and have the missile steer itself towards whatever you aim at. The Rb 05 is more like the Bullpup, the pilot steers it directly with a little controller transmitting left-right-up-down commands to the missile via radio.

I was under the impression ED have said they were against any more FC3 type modules being produced?

I think it likely, and since our RWR is an abstraction of the real functionality I don't think a declutter logic would go amiss. I find it hard to believe the engineers responsible would allow a flight of enemy aircraft to appear as an unintelligible blob on the display. Surely a spacing logic like on the F-15's TEWS was included to some extent?

F-5E RNoAF 336 Skvadron F-5E livery in the style of the Norwegian F-5As of 336 squadron, tail No. 374. Sorry to do this, but I've updated this submission as of 17/10/2016. I'm more satisfied with it in it's current state. I promise no more alterations. File is now attached to the post. Norway 336 sq.rar

I'm just trying to put it in the context of aircraft already in the game.

The 2000C is more modern. This is a 3rd generation aircraft, it's of a similar age to the MiG-21bis and F-5E. However the Mirage F1E has considerably greater BVR capability than either of those two aircraft.

Fantastic event Hook and thanks to all the organisers and sponsors! Looking forward to the next one, whatever the aircraft featured. Suggestions for next round: > Remove the ability for players to see the other team taking off and landing in the chat log. > Create a set of triggers that give time warnings/updates every 10 mins after match start. > Devise a script that logs each team's score and posts updates to the chat, the current method of peering at the scoreboard isn't ideal.

CALLSIGN: Custard TEAM: F-5E Tiger II COC & RULES REVIEW: Yes EMAIL SENT: Yes

The RWR is also in serious need of some declutter functionality to slightly separate the icons on the RHAW for easier reading, since there is no declutter button in the cockpit I find it very hard to believe that the RWR displays targets overlapping each other as much as they do in DCS. It can get unreadable when facing a whole flight of enemy aircraft.

It really is silly...

Find yourself an F-5E maverick employment manual and it'll likely happen, otherwise there is a ~0% chance.

Agreed, medium is much more sensible. Large is ridiculous, it even makes it hard to judge distances owing to how large everything is at every range.

Yes, thank you for that wall of text. I am perfectly aware of the modules of DCS, their respective levels of simulation and the acronyms that pertain to them.