MikeMikeJuliet

ED provides info, we create the hypetrain. If there is no-one getting excited, no amount of info creates these threads. See who is posting? Its us. I like calmly waiting for info. That way I'm not blindly disappointed not getting everything I want whenever I want.

That probably makes this "the thread". :D Before anyone continues the RWR political side of things, let me remind you that discussing political issues on this forum is discouraged heavily. And personal accusations arent looked at positively either. Let's be civil and adult about this. ... No better day than a friday.

...And on the point of crosswind. Fighters are not designed for strong crosswinds typically. Civil aircraft may, in many cases land at stronger crosswinds than a fighter jet, so no point in trying 30kt crosswind components.

Hold the phone, everyone.I want to get one thing straight just in case anyone thinks this the wrong way. Aerobraking is not the way to stop the aircraft the fastest. I understand we are talking more about lateral controls and running off the side of the runway, but if the problem ever is running long, then aerobraking will get you in trouble. Aerodynamic braking is done to limit wear and tear on the brakes. If you are critical with runway length, make a sturdy landing with the lowest possible weight and immediately after the nosewheel is down , apply brakes firmly. Now on the control side of things. If you use rudder pedals, drop your heels on the floor and control your direction with slight differential braking. If that doesn't help, apply a small amount of rudder and HOLD it for a little while. Key is not to chase the runway centerline, but to stop the deviation, and carefully correct your position. When you see this starting to happen, adjust pedals accordingly. Small error, small correction. If you let the error grow, your correction will cause trouble. On the landing speeds, on the top of my head a proper final approach speed is somewhere around 150-170 knots typically. Key is to keep the AOA at 22 degrees, and the runway threshold on 3 degrees below the horizon with the FPM over it. Adjust pitch and thrust to maintainthese values. If you find your approach speed to be closer or over 200 knots, you are either too heavy, or you are holding too small AOA. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Perhaps the area has significant downdrafts channeling through the valley due to the cold water? From my experience piston aircraft tend to have more power in the cold and less in the heat due to engine cooling characteristics and air density. I also have to disagree about the weather controls. They are way too limiting and simplified, and the weather simulation leaves a lot to be desired in DCS. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

I feel comm's are good for voice control, but it somehow feels awkward using the aircraft systems with voice... especially when an aircraft never had such a feature in the first place. Different story on the newest aircraft which have such functionalities in real life, though.

Did I win something, then? :D

Not bad either.

You could always go to the mission makers subforum and ask mission makers to take this point with them to provide.

Indeed. I mean, if the aircraft has been confirned, even though no official DCS material has been show, it still should have it's own subforum for the sake of clarity.

Wasn't it from DX9 to 11... that might be why you remembered it wrong.

I disagree on more options making the options menu hard to use. What it needs is proper tooltips and a good layout. More options is never bad as long as they aren't sporadically thrown in, but organized properly.

Agreed. I also don't understand the "zoom out" in the beginning of each flight. It has no purpose, and annoyes the user.

Well, I bet mission makers start realizing this problem as aircraft with basket-refueling increase.

If we are to keep with the realism here, that wouldn't really be viable. We either need a refueler with both capabilities simultaneously, or have two separate tankers. It's the mission builder job to make sure all required assets are placed in the mission.

This has been discussed in the following thread in the 1.5/2.0 wishlist section: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=173329 There have been some suggestions of how to do it. Im ny opinion the most important thing is not to force every VR user to use the same control method for this, since people may have very strong preferences. Instead, I would like to see a few alternative ways to control the cockpit. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Its nice such mods exist, razo+r, but that doesn't remove the need for an official nato tanker with baskets. You can't rely on MP servers to have every single mod installed. A greater interest on the subject is bound to rise after the F-18 gets released since so many will apparently be focusing on it... and not being able to do AAR with it without Russian tankers will probably cause the current situation to change. I hope.

You must have seen the A-10C model. All the FC3 aircraft (that is, the A-10A, F-15C, Su-25, all MiG-29 variants, Su-27 and Su-33) are low fidelity and non-clickable. All the others are/will be clickable and fully modeled given the restrictions of information available publicly. So in short. The F-15 will work the same way as the Su-25T you have with the free base game. If you want a full fidelity A-10, go with the C model. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

We could still do with another Su-25T campaign... just sayin'

It might be that the artist(s) in leatherneck have no task at the moment, so why not make a new pilot model? Not every team member is doing coding, so I don't believe this to slow down developement. Why the hostility if we are getting something little extra?

There should be a way to hot-refuel as well. Not sure if it applies to all fighters or attackers, but it should be there for the planes that actually have the ability. Considering your idea, it would be good if the ground crew implied that you still had engines running, and only activate the loadout screen after they are happy with your aircraft and ready to load/refuel. Either way would be a helpful addition.

I guess the ral answer would be to have a "drawing pad" purposefully made for this... same size as a real kneeboard, you'd draw with a pencil that could be wired to the kneeboard, and the picture would be replicated in the virtual cockpit... But that would require both the drawing accessories AND support from the sim... Someday perhaps.

The question remains, how would this be implemented? We all know mouse isn't the best drawing tool. I don't mean we would ever need to draw a Mona Lisa on the kneeboard, but circling items or drawing lines even relatively straight... nevermind writing something in a hurry can be quite tedious with a mouse. Writing with the keyboard seems OK, but that is about it. Any ideas? I do like the premise though.

... soon we could start advertising DCS as an air traffic simulator :D That ought to get some new people in.

The crosstalk between SRS and LotAC could expand the sim beyond what it is now. I am very pleased to see such ideas being looked at on this thread. And with less parts to juggle with, and the inbuilt compatibility...