canned_fire

Alerax, Thanks for this, appreciate all the work done. Finally got an OK on the F-14!

+1 What the first poster mentioned. I dont think disengaging with mouse (or bind) makes any difference, AP remains engaged. Have not tried the emergency disconnect.

NATOPS takeoff checklist (page 7-28 ) says : Controls – Free, 33° Aft Stick … I only get around 28° full aft stick (from trimmed at 0). Differential (left/right inputs) does get up to around 33°, but shouldn’t just the aft stick get up to 33°?

Just to be clear: TACAN was working for land based ones, but not for the carrier. If it is working in the carrier now, this is really good news!

Hello thanks for all the work. I would like to be able to set the TACAN for the carrier (at least I think it was not working last time I checked). Without TACAN case 3 are not possible.

Thanks for the update!

Just in case it helps: to me the flickering seems to be linked to when the sun is reflected on the instruments panel (F-5E). It happens much more during sunrise or sunset.

Ok understood now. Then I would suggest removing the red line on the ITT at 860C (for the CC version only).

Hello Vibora, First of all, the C-101 is now great, congratulation and thanks. I feel we got two aircraft for the price of one. Regarding the C-101CC ITT, at full throttle we can get 950C while O.T. 1E-25-1 Marzo 1981 says ITT above 880C would require engine inspections and above 930C would require an engine removal. Does the CC engine have the same engine limitations as the EB? Also could you elaborate a little more on the following: I find estrange a pilot saying: “I didn’t care about engine limitations”. Limitations are there for a reason and not just because the engineers want to bother the pilots. Exceeding the limitations (ITT in this case) may not cause the engine to fail after 5 minutes, but would certainly reduce the engine life, which would eventually upset somebody up the chain of command when engines start pilling up for overhaul. What does the pilot meant when he said “as long as needed”? Maybe he meant “during initial climb when heavy” or “during combat”? I find hard to believe they simply flew around at full throttle with no regard for anything else. Again very very happy with the C-101.:thumbup:

Thanks for the update Merker! Looking forward to it.

Does that switch works for you? For me the beacon remains on independently of the switch. The nav (green, red, white) switches work though. The throttle switch also kills the strobe, but I would like to only turn off the strobe because of the reflex in the cockpit.

I have the red strobe flashing inside the cockpit. I am the only one? Does anyone know how to disable the strobe light in the .lua or wherever? Thanks!

I would be interested to know, thanks. I suppose H/E would be the same as the TA-4J. Post 22 above says 16.25. PS: on the A-4 the hook only engages once the mains hit the deck, so H/E will not give the exact location, still interesting to know.

Enjoyed the video, thanks. On the A-4 I have the impression that a perfect meatball and on speed results in just missing #4 wire.

In real life the meatball is adjusted for each aircraft type to compensate for something called Hook-to-Eye distances. Basically it compensates for different aircraft lengths and angle of attack during approach. It is done by changing the horizontal plane of the lenses therefore moving the glide-slope forward or aft along the deck. NAVAIR 00-80T-104 (NATOPS Landing Signal Officer Manual) explains this better. Back to the A-4: I found that following the meatball all the way to touch down I was consistently high and missing all the wires. I believe ED adjusted the meatball to the F-18, and because of the Hook-to-Eye, it is a little high for the A-4 (disclaimer: I don’t have the F-18 but have watched the YouTube tutorials). Since I don’t like seeing a red ball to catch the 3rd wire I changed the glide-slope from 3.5 to 2.8 at: USS_John_C_Stennis.lua GlideslopeBasicAngle = 2.8, VerticalCoverageAngle = 1.7 I don’t know if it is all in my head but it seems to make things better, at least for me. Another thing is that the NAVAIR 01-40AVC-1 (NATOPS Flight Manual A-4 E/F) from 1977 gives a different approach pattern than the F-18. Instead of initiated a descent at the 180, you would hold 600 feet until intercepting the glide slope. There is the drawing but also text: The turn from 180-degrees position will be delayed so as to intercept the glide-slope wings level at 600 feet AGL (page 3-20). This means two things, one you had to maintain 600 feet until intercepting the glide-slope and also you must not start the turn “abeam of the end of the ship” because if you do so you will intercept the glide-slope way too high. On the F-18 you should intercept the glide-slope at approximately 3/4 mile from the ship, in the A-4 procedure The straight away, wings level, should be about 1-1/2 miles long. Obviously one can apply the F-18 pattern to the A-4, and as a matter of fact I find it easier than A-4 NATOPS. I just thought somebody else would find this subject interesting. Also searching for NATOPS patterns in the Web I found one for the F-4 holding 600 feet and another similar to the F-18, so my guess is that the basic pattern changed some time around the F-4 life. Community A-4E-C Team: thanks very much for this wonderful module.:thumbup:

When landing on the Stennis, if I follow the ball up until touch down I consistently overshoot the wires. To catch a wire I find I need to have a low ball or even a red ball on touch down. Is anyone else experiencing this? Is the angle of the ball adjusted to each aircraft, in this case we have it adjusted to the F-18?

Community A-4 Team: congratulations and thanks very much for this module, it is awesome !!!

Here is the A-4.

Here is the F-18.

Thanks for the A-4! In preparation/antecipation I was reading the A-4 Natops. My understanding is that it says you should mantain 600 ft through the 90 up until intercepting the glide slope still at 600 ft (carrier landing). I am correct? If so why the difference to the F-18 which (my understanding) you should intercept the glides slope at around 300 ft. Does anybody know why the difference? What explains it? Old thechnology? no Hud? Back in the 70s that how it was? Any clues?

Hi, sorry if this is a stupid question, but would the scrip work with the upcoming Community A-4? Thanks for the work.

Ok I have to ask. Rear cockpit is not ready but how about the AFM? Wasn't it in testing a while ago?

In the real aircraft where/how does the pilot arm (not activate) the ejectio seat? Thanks.

The only reason I bought the Mirage was because it was out of early access. But I am a little disappointed. A few things from memory: - Circuit breakers don’t do anything - No programed failures - Fuel control panel switches not working - IFF rotary switch (standby/on/emergency) doesn’t rotate (I know it doesn’t do anything in DCS but on other modules you can at least rotate it) - Landing gear emergency doesn’t work I still enjoy it, but I don’t think it is at the same level as some other modules.

Noticed yesterday that the glide slope for Kohkhi is not working (localizer is ok). Latest 2.5 stable.