Volator

Ja, da hat sich in den letzten Monaten einiges gut entwickelt. Man kann zu Recht viel über die KI in DCS schimpfen, aber es gibt auch durchaus gute Aspekte.

Setze mal die F/A-18 auf “return fire”, dann sollte sie nur feuern, wenn sie von der Flanker angegriffen wird. Eine andere Möglichkeit wäre, den skill der KI Hornet zu reduzieren, u.U. beeinflusst das ihre max. Angriffsentfernung etwas. Es könnte aber auch sein, dass sie gerade dann viel zu früh feuert… Generell ist es interessant, dass sich die KI trotz identischer settings immer wieder anders verhält und verschiedene Taktiken anwendet, das habe ich auch schon öfter beobachtet.

Great opportunity to practice that circling approach then Or do the DCS multiplayer thing and give a heck for wind and active runway and land with a tailwind and crash into sb. taking off on the active. I think it’s actually mandatory in DCS multiplayer to fly like that. Sorry, I’m digressing

It's a bug, and I think it was announced somewhere that it'd be fixed in the next update.

OT, but: Is that realistic btw? I would assume if there's a freeze function on the radar, putting the cross on the right spot during sweeps must be possible too?!

I'm not certain and by no means an expert, I am only currently learning to operate the F-16, but I think the missing GPS is part of the problem. I tried to simulate non-GPS Cold War flying by disabling GPS via year and taking NAV fixes via the TGP (yes, I know this anachronistic too), and it showed that it was not possible to take precise NAV fixes that way. While the DED indication always showed 0.0 deviation from the waypoint, the TGP would always point off the intended STP when pressing CZ, and it seemed that the deviation was getting bigger and bigger with every fix taken. Interestingly enough, the deviation got so big that while I was lasing a target, the aming cue in CCRP was totally off and the LGBs were dropped so far off the target they could not aquire the laser any more. Now WITH GPS everything worked just fine, but then I did not have to take any fixes as the navigation precision was always very high and spot-on. I'm not sure whether the whole thing is a bug or whether the TGP itself needs GPS to place steerpoints correctly and CZ, but it's clear without GPS the whole TGP fix-taking doesn't work.

Negative AoA at nose wheel strut extended? The Dash-1 doesn’t mention any yanking the aircraft into the air. It says you apply (full) aft stick at t-o, and I assume from that point on you are able to control a smooth rotation speed with slightly releasing back pressure, otherwise those smooth formation take-offs seen on the internet would hardly be possible. In DCS on the other hand F-5 pilots are all over the place on take-off. Since you mentioned it, what is the correct technique to two-point land the DCS F-5E and aerobrake without the nosewheel touching the rwy first? I have yet to see this executed in DCS, and even jf it really was possible, it seems overly difficult compared to the real thing.

I totally agree with you, this is really annoying. Of course it's a high wing load aircraft, but I think the effects in AOA behavior are exaggerated in DCS. With the F-5 I think it's tolerable, but with the MiG-21 and lately the -19 it's really bad. Something I'd like to add why I "hate" the F-5E in DCS: Take-off and landing characteristics. You can't do a proper, smooth rotation on take-off, the plane is glued to the ground and then suddenly jumps into the air. You also can't do a smooth two-wheels touchdown with aerobraking, the nose will always fall down the instant you touch down. Both of these things can be done with the real F-5E, as several videos show on the internet. In general it's a cool aircraft, but these aerodynamic flaws combined with the ever-lasting RWR bug (where ED stubbornly refuses to change it) make it unattractive.

Given the fact that Razbam and Miltech-5 have gone separate ways very recently and the deafening silence after that, we can assume that flying and fighting in the DCS Bo-105 has just received a major setback.

Best DCS news in a long time! F-4, Tornado, F-104, G.91... I'm in Cold War GAF heaven.

This is a great find, the Huey feels and flies a little more plausible with the old engine model - even if it evidently has some flaws, but it's better than the new one IMHO. ED should make it a selectable option in "Special", so one doesn't always have to edit the FM file after an update.

True, I'd rather take two more R73s or the 27R/ER than the T/ET. The latter simply doesn't offer any advantage, even range-wise in a tail chase it is only minimally better than the 73 but at the cost of more weight and drag, and head-on its sensor will fare no better than the 73, severely limiting its usable range.

Will this break integrity check for multiplayer? The new flight model for the Huey is really a turn-off.

Sure, but just because of a system failure, or are there conditions in which the detector is unable to detect a flame-out, that's the point of my question.

Interesting, thank you. I'm wondering in which situations you would need the switch then if there's an automatic system. Would be great if the manual covered these details as well, I find the current manual a little "thin" on the technical side of things on the Viggen for us nerds.

Just checked taxi vs. landing lights - for me the light pattern doesn't change one tiny bit. Taxi light is the very same as landing lights, which would explain why the landing lights do not light up in external view when they should, while the taxi light does, when it shouldn't.

This is very probably the most exciting map to be released for DCS so far.

Revisiting the manual it seems the volume knob in the FR24 panel controls volume for both FR22 and FR24. With SRS it only works for FR24 volume only unfortunately…

Haven't tried the Viggen at night yet to check on the landing lights, but in external view they are not lit, only the taxi light...

Does the FR22 not have any volume control?!

Hi, does anybody have an idea how to fix this beautiful skin? https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/2081356/ For me it looks like this: Searching the forum, it looks like many older M2K skins are affected by this.

It appears that it is related to all objects that are NOT visible in the ME but are still there in-game. For example some of the super-large russian fuel trucks are visible in the ME and can be removed, see screenshot 1. Some are not visible in ME however, like one at Anapa, but in-game it's there and cannot be removed by a trigger, see screenshot 2 and 3. You can see that the smaller trucks are also not visible in ME and cannot be removed by a trigger. (I know in the last screenshot there is no trigger zone, I already deleted it as it simply wasn't working, as described by other users)

Helis sind nicht nur teuer, sondern tatsächlich sauteuer. Für 1h R22 kann man ganz grob 2-3h C172 (charter vs. Verein) rechnen. Zudem braucht man für jeden einzelnen Typ ein gesondertes type rating, während bei dem PPL/LAPL-A SEP ein class rating für eine ganze Breite an Flugzeugen reicht. Chartermöglichkeiten für Helis sind zudem rar gesät, und wenn einem der einzige Vercharterer in der Region wegbricht (was gar nicht so selten ist), steht man dumm da. Zuladung ist auch ein Faktor. R22 mit zwei erwachsenen Männern kann nach dem Tanken eng werden. Man sollte sich sehr gut überlegen, ob man auf PPL-Basis wirklich auf Helis gehen will. Es spricht eigentlich alles für PPL/LAPL SEP, außer der nicht zu leugnende Coolnessfaktor von Hubschraubern.