Dehuman

Low landing take and take off speed, I'd dare to say carrier ops will be a breeze in this little bird

Corporate lobbying?

As much as any other armchair wikipedia expert ;) From what I understand range comparable to 120B and R-27ER but shorter than 120C,D and R-77-1

Mica don't reach all that far either. that's why France is now also buying MBDA Meteor

If they only fix one thing I'd like it to be this.

Many, myself included would beg to differ.

:megalol: DCS in a nutshell

Well you'd have a Russian wingman given that Russia has a base at Gudauta (Bombora)

This is a good attitude. I'm not one for early access purchase either and never pre-order. I wait until it's at least not frustratingly incomplete. However I understand that a fair portion of people want a module as soon as it's shape vaguely resembles the real thing and it can fly. Just look how many posts are on every modules development threads stating "gib" Choosing the point in development for an early access release is always going to be a balancing act of damned if you, damned if you don't for any developer.

Most of the time? OB 2.5.4

You can add them as regular units, and select "uncontrolled" Then you can load them up and some aircraft even have nice touches like boarding ladders and covers

I don't think coding a few steam gauges would put a serious dent in coding the far more complex avionics and tageting systems on the Harrier. Then there's the whole, there's a different team on each project thing... Industry (every industry) standard to have concurrent development. Eagle Dynamics may not be so sharing with their progress as RAZBAM but we know they at least have some of their resources devoted to the F-16 and Mi-24 despite the Hornet, and the sim in general, still requiring work. (Not to mention all their existing modules). Similarly you can guarantee that the other third parties have as yet unannounced modules under development.

..and you'll be banned ...and all your previous posts and mentions of you deleted :bye:

After much experimenting I figured it out. It was the Dynamic Mission Briefing page from kneeboard builder that wasn't playing nicely

I would, Gauges over MFD anyday!!! I don't need a simulator to experince sitting in front of a set of LCD screens.

I should have been more specific. I agree that i prefer their map boundary suggestion than the previous.

Depending on the mission, I usually load 2xR-60M, 1xR-13M-1, 1xR-3R. Fly high radar on and let the F-5s come to you.

Agreed. Plus the Suez Canal is always going to a spot for future potential conflict. Just like anywhere else with oil and shipping.

Yes I never get the cleared for visual call when i get close

I've not been able to spawn into an aircraft on several missions (can spawn as tactical commander) DCS freezes and has to be closed via task manager where it shows not responding. I've tried spawning into the missions offline as single player and still no joy. So far I can only confirm the problem is not any of the triggers or scripting (removing them from the mission didn't help) Missions that are working just fine are: Phone Booth Five points Supervision Missions not working are: Ossetia Open Range Sail Ahoy! When The Mountains Cry Elbrus I'll keep digging at my end to try and find the problem but if anyone has any hints that'd be awesome.

I find DCS uses four cores quite well. This is what I and most people have. Indeed pre-Ryzen (not that long ago) Intel was quite happy for that to be the consumer standard. For more you had to look to workstation and server CPUs at the cost of frequency. Big core counts will become the mainstream with time (thanks AMD) and software will follow suit. Likewise don't expect to utilise the ray tracing capabilities in your GPU across all titles anytime soon.

Nice to have the EF as an AI in DCS! Please ED European fighters are desperately lacking as AI assets, especially with the pivot to modern with Hornet and Falcon

:thumbup: glad it worked, in that case, this should add the kuznetsov although the gear on the Viggen may not be up to it. TakeOffRWCategories = { [1] = { Name = "AircraftCarrier With Catapult", }, -- end of [1] [2] = { Name = "AircraftCarrier With Tramplin", }, }, -- end of TakeOffRWCategories

Happy to help :thumbup:

No they are being phased out and replaced with Su-35, Su-57 and Su-30SM. Modernised airframes will be around for a while longer but the writing is on the wall for SU-27S