=475FG= Dawger

The HB manual addresses the CSD and oil leaks

Seems I hit a tender spot.

Thanks. I will check it out

Change the word order. Don’t think in sentences. Stop trying to make Jester sound like a B movie character “Left, Seven, Fishbed” Instead of “Uh, we got a Fishbed at our seven o clock” Yes it sounds more modern but I guarantee the WSO would be providing a constant stream of Sevens until the pilot called Tally no matter if it is 1969 or 2019 Word order makes a world of difference Left gets the head moving in the right direction, Seven narrows it down and Fishbed gives the what, all in three words Trivia Note: Jester has over 80 ways to say “Uh” Holy pointless development, Batman.

The issue is he is terrible at some very basic stuff and the effort to give him “personality” seriously detracts from his performance. We would have been better served if HB had concentrated on making him competent before making him annoying. His tendency towards verbosity plus inherent lag makes everything he says ancient history. If his communications were precise and concise, all HB would have to work on is speeding up the delivery. Instead, they have figure out how to speed him up enough to make up for his loquaciousness.

No need to apologize. While the Phantom is an exceptional module overall, HB seriously lost the plot when creating “Jester”. Instead of focusing on creating a competent simulation of the second crewmember, they chose to focus on creating a personality with predictable results. Of course, those who participated in the creation feel slighted when his obvious flaws are exposed. That doesn’t mean those flaws are not real and pressing and it is a bit ridiculous for Zabuzard to suggest disabling such an important feature because you don’t “like” it. Jester isn’t a real person. He is a set of instructions meant to perform required tasks. Ascribing human emotions to a player’s relationship to a bit of code is part of the problem. Either the code is fit to purpose or it isn’t and, quite clearly, Jester falls short when the purpose is “simulated competent WSO”.

He asks when you turn on the left generator no matter what.

The AOA Indexer has a brightness control on the right wall. I have never touched it but you never know. I have never hot started (I wrote a cold start macro)

I find DCS improperly models engine and wind noise. Wind noise should completely drown out engine noise at high speed. Wind noise is also a direct clue to airspeed and is absent in DCS. I find engine noise is louder than wind noise in DCS Individual sliders for wind and engine would be welcome additions to overcome this

Which means it was seriously over built and still flying 6 decades later without ever having lost a wing.

I suggested the most appropriate fix, in case you missed it. Tell the devs If wingsoff then electrical = false and hydraulics = false and thrust = 0

Hydraulic fuses exist as a protection feature in many hydraulic systems. However, any such protection designed to preserve hydraulic fluid in the case of ripping the wings off would get laughed out the engineering Christmas party. For the F-5, there is no evidence a wing has ever catastrophically failed, so we can safely say we have crossed over into never never land with this particular issue. The fact that both wings fail precisely simultaneously, generating this issue repeatedly, is further evidence of the silliness of the whole situation. Wings just don't fail that way in flight. At the G level required to crack the wings off, there should be many, many other associated failures. Its likely the engines would fall off their mounts and control surfaces would rip off. Everything should be broken and the only course of action available to the pilot would be ejection before the G forces of the out of control aircraft GLOC'd him. Just instantly shut down everything electrical and hydraulic when the wings come off and call it a day. No need to spend time researching systems. The whole scenario is a bit far out there in arcade land.

Damned if you do, Damned if you don't. ED's F-5E has absolutely no modeling of the artificial feel system for the pilot, resulting in the ability to generate instant 13 G and subsequent catastrophic failure and the general community response is "git gud". Hardware setup doesn't matter much and flying it like a real airplane will kill you, so you have to learn to "game" the module. HB at least tried to model the system actually used in the Phantom to provide feedback to the pilot. Yes, this system does require a higher level of hardware to appreciate fully or even partially but that is the price of admission. Maybe they should add some peripheral hardware recommendations for the module. So I say, invest in floor mounted stick with a 20 cm extension at a minimum or FFB for the ultimate experience or don't get/fly the Phantom. Don't ask HB to dumb it down for folks trying to fly on an Atari joystick.

Absent hydraulic fuses where the hydraulic lines enter the wing, all the fluid should be pumped overboard in a very short period

Generally the ailerons and rudders are on separate hydraulic systems. The question is which system the HStab is on.

A stick extension is helpful for fine control such as in this instance

I wouldn’t get wrapped up too much in real world procedure or not. Do what it takes to fly the airplane. When the nose comes up, forward stick is required. It is tough not to overcorrect because you have no real feel, just visual clues and in this case, visual is far too late. Practice is the only remedy.

Can you crack the wings off in the FC Tiger as easily as the FF? Only reason to buy it is if the wings stay attached.

We had five on last night and Shrikes were guiding. The SA-2 wouldn’t shoot at Phantoms but thats another story.

What are you hoping to achieve? What do you gain in attempting to prevent this issue from being looked at? Four of us flew over and around an SA-2 battery for 90 minutes in Phantoms and the first non-Phantom, flying with two Phantoms got shot by the SAM battery. This is unusual behavior and I hope HB looks at it.

The reason we found this bug is I built the mission and tested it multiple times before the patch and it always fired at the Phantoms. Immediately post patch the very same mission would not fire at Phantoms I decided to run the mission anyway. We had 4 humans flying Phantoms over the SA-2 site that never fired for two sorties of bombing and strafing all over Rota Island. On the third sortie, a fifth pilot joined in an F-5, and the SA-2 promptly shot him down. The tracks are just a demonstration that, under exactly the same conditions, it fires at Tigers and not at Phantoms.

Weird one. Not sure if it is terrain or plane related. S-75 no fire Phantom Marianas.trk S-75 fires at Tiger Marianas.trk

I appreciate the reply. As it turns out, I appear to have discovered a fairly specific bug. The S-75 (SA-2) will not fire at the F-4E in the Marianas terrain after the update. I will report it over at the Phantom forum.

550 knots or so At about 7 nm, 4 G pull, release at 45 degrees nose high. Slice back for egress.

Never once have I seen a rain drop on a jet windshield in flight.