wilbur81

Maybe the telemetry data you saw was bad data? No, there's not a single 4th gen fighter that will do M.1 straight and level at Sea Level with such a loadout in mil Power. Not sure even the Raptor could do that with 4 external pylons and stores at Sea level. **EDIT** Looking at your post more closely, I do not believe that 1090 km/h would be super sonic at sea-level... 1200+ Kmph would be closer to Mach 1 at sea level. What was the surface level altitude of the terrain he was over?

Hey, Gdoggyc... Quick question: Do you have any idea whether or not your grip is compatible with TM's Warthog Magnetic base? -Thanks in advance!

I did give this nvngx_dlss.dll update a try today. It may be placebo only, but it did seem to bring the ghosting down a few notches for me. It still is evident, but seemingly less so.

It is definitely a step backwards in everything but raw FPS performance. I'm only playing in pancake 4K, but I tried DLSS with sharpness at full about two times and went back to MSAA at 4x... MT already has DCS working quite nicely (in 2D) without the Nvidia feature.

Hey, Bubsy, would you be willing to part with that TrackIR and hat clip for $70(ish)?

It didn't for me.

Try to fly one of Baltic's Raven One campaigns to the end and then come back and tell us that the Hornet is boring...

After 2.9, you now have to be in burner to launch.

This is precisely why I am not using DLSS. The negative effect on cockpit displays is too much for me...even with Sharpening up to max. I'm using 2D, but I can't imagine how it looks in VR. I use MSAA still, and my performance is very good. If they could find a way to keep cockpit displays crisp and clean with DLSS, I would consider going back... but it's a no-go for me.

As many have done and documented here in the forums, you can map MFD PBs to your HOTAS. I control every single radar function this way, without ever taking my hands off the HOTAS.

All 4th and 5th Gen fighters will stall out in a vertical climb when drag, air density, gravity, etc.. catch up to it....the Hornet sooner than several others due to its lower TWR.

Very true... and probably with a fair deal of MACTBDCADM at play as well. (Military Aircraft Coffee Table Book and Discovery Channel Aviation Documentary Misinformation)

My pleasure.

This is the proof that we're in the Golden Age now.

This is 100% true...

Some more Legacy praise from Gonky: Legacy Hornet (A-D) will go Mach 1+ in Military Power, even with a center line tank, two pylons, and missiles on the wing-tips:

Agreed.

Cool, no worries. That makes sense. Thanks, Gortex. This further emphasizes that these Viper pilot G-modeling comments belong in their own bug thread and not under the title, "F-16 Still Underperforming." I agree that the Hornet pilot shouldn't be able to hang out at 7.5 G without stronger physiological effects...and that the Viper G model could be improved as well.

Gortex, just out of curiousity, maybe you could run and graph some of your turn-rate data on Hornet STR and ITR like you did with sustained G several days ago, without the Hornet paddle employed, at airspeeds b/w 150 kts and 550 kts? No pressure, of course... just interested. Some real-world E-M data apparently suggests that the blk 50 and lot 20 jets are actually quite close in turn rate in real life (of course without the Hornet paddle employed). I've posted below a screen-grab from a post awhile back to that effect. The account (in the blue text) recorded below was not written by me but to me in a private message here on the forums.

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/296724-paddle-switch-disable-option-in-mp/

Just read the white paper (on the Hornet radar... Absolutely BRILLIANT work, fellas! The entire ED team should be beyond proud! Thanks for keeping the users in the loop regarding the complexity, care, and time being put in to these modules. White paper link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/upload/medialibrary/751/420tvzzkl8vyxzukcdzamjf7gcrhwzmo/Eagle_Dynamics_Radar_White_Paper_v1.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1nYO05GSHwH0v8qkIaqklwi4ejWqt-bfAAgMNRkEyZXhuGswaDxt4yNN0

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/317116-praise-for-legacy-hornet/ https://forum.dcs.world/topic/296724-paddle-switch-disable-option-in-mp/

Gortex, Thanks for taking the time, bud! Good work. I hope people can see just how massive a difference the Paddle Switch is in the Hornet (if you have to win with the Paddle, you're not good at BFM in the Hornet). Additionally that 82% Viper fuel vs 51% Hornet fuel will make a fairly big performance difference too: That is, flying a lighter Viper with 60% fuel or less makes it even more of a beast. The Hornet (no paddle) owns the slower speed stuff largely because of the straighter, larger wing.

Awesome. Thanks, bud! If you have time, you might go for more realistic flight configurations for both a/c as well.... not just the configs for the E-sports crowd. But I know time is limited. That sounds about right on the "approaching .7M" bit. At 300kts and lower, the Paddle will do very little for the Hornet except bleed it dry. I think what people don't realize is that in the Transonic region (and higher), the DCS Hornet becomes seemingly ridiculous with the Paddle in use...especially with its less realistic pilot G-tolerance model at high g.

I guess we'll never know until Gortex runs the Viper vs Hornet tests without the Paddle with tracks included. What say you, Gortex?