=OPS=Slider

I believe you meant to say push far RIGHT to turn on your RWR and then far LEFT to run the BIT test ;).

I am reffering to DCS most of the time. NORMALLY we should indeed put the launch bar switch in the RETRACT position once connected to the catapult, BUT in DCS you can take off with the switch down and it will switch up itself once off the deck. As a result you should be able to retract your gear.

Launch bar retracts automatically as soon as you leave the deck. If for some reason the launch bar is still extended, but the system doesn't feel any weight on all three landing gear, only main gear will be retracted and nose gear will stay out. If he doesn't have random system failures and it's not scripted in the mission editor, then the launch bar should retract and gear should go up as soon as the handle goes up.

What does it have to do with not being able to raise the landing gear and flaps?

Instead of posting a screenshot from TacView, make a video of this replay. I think most people think that falling leaf is a flat spin but it's not what OP and some other guys are looking for...

I feel like people here are talking about two different spins… From manual, description of specifically 18s falling leaf: In my understanding, you cannot recover from this with any input on the controls, you can just patiently wait and hope that the aircraft will recover itself, otherwise you have to eject. In DCS I've tried many times to enter this kind of stall but every time I was able to recover with the stick input, so it means it wasn't falling leaf… That's it from me, I think it's enough to assume that falling leaf is NOT modelled.

Prove it... Just saying you can do it doesn't mean ANYTHING at all.

Little update. Today I was flying on a different server, and vapor overall (both lex and over wing) was working the same as it works in singleplayer, for everyone, me as well as other players.

Yeah I agree. To be honest, to model these effects it's a really hard task as there is a lot of factors to make vapor visible. Humidity will add more realism to it, but to add more to that, air is not humid the same in every spot. This is just one of the factors, and I really don't wanna go deeper into this as it's kinda scary to think that someone is modelling it.

Regarding question No.3 I like to help people, but in this case time zones are the biggest problem to be honest, so I can explain stuff via Steam (on chat). And I believe there's a lot of people in your area that can help you :). Oh, and about key bindings STICK THROTTLE

In this case we are talking about not how it looks, but when it's visible, at what circumstances.

This shouldn't happen at 2.6Gs right? Once it's visible it doesn't like to go away. I was watching other players in 18s and once they pulled some Gs it wasn't going off even when they were flying straight with 1.0G.

And over wing vapor has been added in the latest patch.

It's still pretty much WIP. We should just wait and see how it goes :).

In DCS wheels do lock up even with with the anti-skid on, that's the problem... Also I produce tire marks because WHEELS LOCK UP. About that missing info. Runways at Anapa and Gelendzhik, weight, about 3500lbs of fuel, no payload. Speed about 135-140 knots. And I've deployed the airbrake because there was NO WIND. At Anapa it's possible to stop with enough of the runway left. At Gelendzhik it's hard to land without going off for another try.

Sooo, any new testing "achievements"? I've tested the brakes on the Hornet myself, and here are my thoughts (not professional). I need almost entire runway to stop this thing with anti-skid on while still trying to avoid brake locking. If I lock up the brakes I leave very nice traces of braking (black stripes down the entire runway...). Of course landing is as it should be, on speed, correct AoA, flaps full down. I extend the airbrake on the touchdown. Pumping the brakes doesn't help as mentioned earlier. If I go full on the brakes, I'm afraid I can pop the tires, and if I don't, I can barely manage to stop, sometimes have to use NWS HI to turn around.

Thanks for the correction Home Fries, without unnecessary roast as it likes to happen… I got a bit bamboozled as in Mirage special options you can disable INS alignment and mentioned earlier gyro drift. IIRC in Mirage it's also 7 degrees off.

This is called "gyro drift". It also happens in real life, that's why instead of 1 waypoint straight to a destination, you have a lot of them depending on the distance between points A and B. You can also "update" your position by updating coordinates. If you fly Mirage-2000 you should know that, if not, I hope my answer is clear enough :). P.S. Check this out: https://www.flightsimaviation.com/faq_9_q1_What_is_gyro_drift.html

I was thinking more like a belt which would ONLY detect in-game G and then check if you are squeezing your muscles or not to hold the Gs, nothing else. Electro shocks, noose around the neck...I heard about all that and people are crazy, that's all I can say. My device would be more user friendly.

Haha, looking forward to see that! It would be a real game changer, because then pilot would not have to be "programmed" for G tolerance, if we could hold it ourselves. Then if someone would blackout, then it's only his fault :).

Well, I wasn't sure about that, but something similar happened to me I believe 2 days ago. Payload, only 2x AIM-9M. Locked on a target, shot it down, and then circle of the Sidewinder went to the bottom right of the HUD. At this point I thought that my Sidewinder is useless, but I locked on another target, and heatseeker also locked on the target. I'm not sure how I managed to do that, as I was switching between radar modes a couple of times… Happened only once.

Ok, but how can we help someone that already knows what and how he has to do it, he practiced it many times and still can't get it done. That's the problem of this kind of people. They know everything about AAR, but just can't do it. For some people math is a black magic and for others AAR is impossible. We've been over it hundreds of times. Now about "Is it realistic or not?" It's not realistic YET. The hose with the basket should be wiggling around a little bit. The basket itself should also interact with the refueling boom, depending on what angle we put it in, more from above, below, left or right. In short, every contact between basket and boom should cause some reaction (for example shake it a little bit), not only animation that it's connected. It looks a bit more realistic once an aircraft is connected and refueling because then the hose follows the airplane which is actually refueling. Another thing, there is no such thing as fuel leak from the basket (once connected), and this might happen sometimes. I think that's it (for now). And a video: P.S. The biggest issue to get it realistic (in my opinion) is that we don't have "dynamic" air. Even if we set the weather to dynamic, it doesn't have air, we are flying in nothing and we have programmed flight model. We don't have any "lag" between input and reaction to it. Just check out some landing videos. Control surfaces are moving like crazy and plane seems to not move at all, it's just some small corrections. If we try to do that in DCS, we will be all over the place.

Okay, define high speed, you can go fast with AB, over 1000km/h, for it's high speed. AI is over performing in everything, nothing new. IR signature, I can get a tone on Su-27 which is on the ground starting up, not even idle, just spooling up.

So we both have the talent of putting the thing into the thing :P. I also find it easy as it is now. Can't wait to have it a bit more realistic and challenging. For everyone who find it difficult now, curvature and patience is the key to success.

To clarify that even more - higher speed = higher pressure = less elevator deflection needed to achieve 7.5G. Without FBW, elevator deflection depends only on pilot's strength, like in WW2 planes for example, so pilot had to keep an eye on the Gs he pulled to not overstress an airplane and not damage it in effect. In modern planes, all that is done by FBW/FCS. Hornet example is the interesting one. At low speeds, it's hard to get 7.5G, which leads FCS to allow full elevator deflection in order to achieve it. This can lead to mentioned in my previous post "sliding" in the air, high AoA which then leads to high drag and in effect bleeding airspeed. At high speeds, it's a bit different. Pilot can pull the stick to it's full deflection, then FCS takes into account information like speed, actual stick deflection, maximum G (in this case 7.5) and then controls the elevator to achieve 7.5G. Obviously this entire process is much more complicated and I simplified it to just give a picture of what's going on and why. I'd also like to add that I'm not an expert, and I can be wrong, feel free to correct me :). P.S. And again I forgot about something. Notice how the nose of the airplane in your video slows down while still gaining speed and maintaining G.