bbrz

Oh, that's great. Didn't know that I can install it on my laptop too! :) Btw, the F-16 product description says that you need 2.5.5 stable!

Is it possible to install/run one add-on on more than one PC?

That's really strange since the F-5 behaves very similar on my PC. One more item, we are only talking about clean config I assume.

Running out of ideas.....sorry!

So even when maintaining the centerline at higher speeds, e.g. 80kts, the F-16 starts to again drifting to the left? Have you tried doing mil thrust takeoffs where you have more time for corrections, just for testing?

I've switched from pedals back to twist grip rudder controls and on the F-16 I'm using a rather large 33% curve. Neither the A-10 nor the F-5 need such a big curve. Just tested the F-5 and the NWS is also rather sensitive. I'm surprised that you don't have any problems with it. Are you using a curve on the F-5 rudder axis?

Do you have the F-5 and/or the A-10 for comparison? As mentioned before, the initial alignment is also very important. E.g. at Sukhumi the alignment isn't perfect and I doubt that the alignment will be perfect if you do your own lineup. Especially during the initial stages of the takeoff run you should always anticipate necessary corrections to maintain the centerline. The NWS on the DCS F-16 is very sensitive, but since you never need the rudder during flight, you can try e.g. a 50% curve for the rudder.

Downloaded your left yaw takeoff trk and didn't notice anything abnormal when I took control. IMO you are simply having the wrong expectations about yaw stability. Even if this would be/ is bug, I honestly don't know how that tiny amount of initial yaw is making the F-16 'unflyable' and 'game breaking'. Unfortunately I can't test the left roll trk because I don't have anything but the Caucasus installed. Just tested the A-10, slightly more left pull during the initial takeoff run and the F-15 which 'suffers' from a very slight right pull. I've never read any complaints about these two....

1.E.g. the F-16 not being perfectly aligned with the runway causes this problem. Compressor & turbine rotation might cause this as well. 2. Again, I've never flown any jet IRL which doesn't require constant tiny corrections. Furthermore IMO you can't compare the F-14 and the F/A-18 due to the noticeable different gear design. Twin nosewheels, more weight on the nosewheels, wider wheel track and longer wheel base etc. That said, even the DCS F-5 with its wider track and requires constant corrections.

I've just watched the track and I definitely wouldn't call that a 'pull to the left'. That's exactly what I'm experiencing as well! I've never seen any jet IRL or in DCS which perfectly maintains the centerline without tiny corrections. With the F-16 it's usually just a tiny (right rudder) input at the beginning of the takeoff roll. Thereafter she maintains the centerline. In your track I didn't notice any 'pull' to the left either. With a tiny correction right at the beginning she would track perfectly along the centerline. For me a 'pull' is a continous trend to turn/yaw to the left which needs constant or repeated corrective action, which definitely isn't the case here. edit: Noticed that the F-16 isn't perfectly aligned with the runway heading in many (if not all) cases I've tested. Most of the time she's slightly offset to the right, but the nose points exactly at the centered runway end, which means she does already point slightly to the left when starting the take off roll.

Simply hold down the speedbrake extend button, but the slighty higher extension angle doesn't make a very noticable difference at these low speeds.

LOL, why should this be very dangerous? Btw. it's from the -1.

If you need the shortest landing distance possible, you need to start braking immediately after touchdown while maintaining the 13deg pitch attitude as long as possible. The brakes are currently at least 30% too weak.

No need to introduce new feature, I'd be happy if they would simply fix old bugs, like the annoying head/tailwind performance bug.

Hm, SP here as well.

R U experiencing this problem in SP or MP or both? Some bugs are e.g. only surfacing only in MP?

The real altimeter setting range is from 28.1 - 31.00. (>2006 27.5 - 31.5) IRL QFE is very seldom used, especially not in mountainous terrain, for obvious reasons.

Apparently this issue doesn't exist with for all (many?) users.

Neither does mine.

That's very strange. There's not a single jet in DCS which requires any noticable amount of rudder during take off in no wind conditions on my install.

Off course a tricyle gear airplane does exhibit this behavior. Don't forget that only between 10-20% of the aircraft weight are resting on the nosegear. Furthermore the tail of the F-16 is very big and provides a lot of surface for the wind.

If there are pitch oscillations as well you can try the pitch override switch and rock the F-16 back and forth in sync with the oscillation to increase the amplitude and hence to force the nose down to get her flying again.

Even with the gear up and the FLCS in cruise gain the flight controls are way too ineffective at low speed/high AoA. Just watch the F-16s flight 0, how incredible responsive the F-16 is and it perfectly demonstrates why the reduced gain was necessary! https://youtu.be/5BJP7H52_YM?t=12

The crosswind in the youtube video was most likely much lower and since the FLCS controls the flight controls movement, it's impossible to tell what inputs have been actually made. I agree on the landing gear being way too stiff presently, just compare with this landing... https://youtu.be/5BJP7H52_YM?t=12

Furthermore FLCS takeoff and landing gain disables the CATI/III function, hence no difference when switching.