probad

the aim-120 in dcs is a symptom here is the actual problem that people dont want to solve

the guy demonstrably fails to comprehend the lift generating capabilities required of the hornet's capabilities and then suggests that being able to take off with wings folded is a developer oversight :doh: deplorable.

no, i think it's a worse fallacy that you think bad examples should be perpetuated for the sake of a consistency that is not in line with dcs's core values.

whats sad is this inability to adapt you all are always asking others to make concessions for you

not enough to be a practical issue, least of all not when they're intentionally designed to be so close together to minimize asymmetric thrust effects. come on you guys, it's insulting how you act as if this wasn't already solved irl by people far more invested and qualified than you

it will be released with the module itself in the meantime nothing prevents you from reading the real manual that it's based off of these sorts of requests really puzzle me, you make it sound like you want to take initiatives to learn about the airplane except the information is already lying literally everywhere around you but you just won't pick it up. so which is it?

you guys are really good at imagining everything except reality

post your track or your claims are quack

i think it's a somewhat inane question because firstly lighting visibility limitations has been a well known, chronic issue for dcs, and secondly anyone paying attention to developments for 2.5 and since would notice steps taken towards addressing engine capabilities in regards to light visibility. you all recoil when you think other people are "rude" and "insulting" towards you, but give no quarter insulting the intelligence of capable and competent industry professionals by asking questions that imply a lack of awareness on issues they've already been working towards addressing.

requires significantly less reference material

remember those f-15 players having issues with chronic yaw and it just turned out they never spooled the second engine?

upload tracks if you really want your issue solved

allowing your audience directorship is a marketing practice, but never a good industry practice

this shouldnt even be left up to a vote ask yourself what points of merit sets dcs apart from its competition and you will find your answer

why dont we just ask for the entire rest of the module while we're at it

just what do you think lazur capabilities are i am curious???

mk1 eyeball, the original mlws

the su-25t that comes free with dcs is essentially an fc3 module, so you can go off of that.

you see 7 people i see 1 echo chamber

according to this logic then the lowest common denominator is still lower after all, there is still the entire casual market to be captured move aside ace c*mbat

trying to purge disagreements by creating a new thread and artificially generating support by only encouraging positive responses is not a convincing argument.

if that's the idea then it's not working because china knows the f-35 is good literally everyone except the media [and canada] knows the f-35 is good.

pd bignose radar vs smallnose "nothing major" heh

its yet another "lalalala i cant hear you over the sound of my internal fantasies" thread

no, it's accurate that radars are horizon stabilized for search. if you want your "look where im pointing" modes that's what boresight and vertical scan modes are for.