lemoen

Not sure what you're trying to show. The indicated airspeed is the speed of the air moving past the pitot tube, *parallel to the pitot tube*. In these cases the aircraft may well be accelerating, but not in that direction, maybe towards the nadir if you're level but has zero speed. I would still however expect to regain airspeed about as fast as on takeoff, with the burner on and the nose and wings level, at very low airspeed, faster with the nose down.

Yeah no campaign. There is one for NTTR (Desert Tiger 76) and there's a bunch of multiplayer servers with missions for the F5. I'm in the same boat, got it over the weekend. Had fun on Blue Flag and the 99th Server (2.0) already.

SLOWER than the Huey!?!?! The mind boggles.

I have it. 10/10 would buy again.

So, currently, destroying, or trying to destroy runways doesn't that well in multiplayer. In singleplayer it kinda works but the effects we have and the results from bombing a runway doesn't seem effective. In multiplayer there's the issue that some planes can just take off over the small craters left, the craters aren't really visible and people logging in after the runway was damaged doesn't have the damaged runway. This is an important part of multiplayer servers like Blue Flag where runway denial is a viable and important tactic.

What would be even better is to be able to control warehouse variables directly from a script e.g. # Let's assume python airbase = findAirbase('Mozdok') airbase.warehouse.Jetfuel = 100 if (fueldump1.destroyed == True): airbase.warehouse.Jetfuel -= 50 You get the idea. It would be grand if we could change the stock levels and other attributes on the fly.

Not necessarily. The trick is to start the dive precisely, so that your pipper is on target immediately. Do the burst and pull away. If you see the tracers coming during the burst, pull away immediately. Make sure you have a few 1000 ft at the lowest point, else you'll get shot.

Weird, if it is set to CONT, then your IFF interrogator is On. In the HUD, the square over your locked target should show an "A" if it is a friendly and nothing if it is a Foe, when you do the interrogation. It goes away after a few seconds. You need to keep interrogating to keep the symbols.

IFF is not set to CONT on the panel.

Glad I could be of help. Enjoy!

Make sure your radar altimeter is switched on and that the "RS" button on the PCN is on. Previous comments covers the rest.

The CAS mode is for A2G gun, the A2A mode is on the HOTAS. It is called "Select A2A gun". That button on the panel only selects A2G gun.

It works. When you have set up the bezels in surround, you need to change the resolution in the nvidia panel from 5760x1080 (or whatever 3x your display width is) to the larger one that includes the bezel correction. Then you need to set your in game resolution to the same (Use the 1 monitor option).

This.

This is basically why I was being facetious. The F15 doesn't need help. Its a good plane. The Hornet is going to have similar A2A performance, its a better dogfighter than the F15 no matter what, but so is the Mirage 2000. No reason to use up dev time to implement and test something that isn't needed or necessarily wanted by the users. There are other more pressing matters to attend to.

Yeah I know, I'm stretching things too far but it illustrates what you want, but to a greater degree. The rest of us, with different favourite A2A planes (M2000 in my case) must deal with the fact that our favourite is going to be outclassed in A2A by a mudmover. <shrugs/>

Because your argument doesn't make sense either. The module is the module. The chances of a FC3 aircraft being updated to a different spec is small to non-existent. To make your request logical we should update the Su27 and Mig 29 to Mig 35 and Su 35 specs too, update the Mirage 2000C to 2000-9, upgrade A10 to latest software suite, ask BST to update the hornet to latest block for C model etc. Face it, that won't happen. The F15 is not *meant* to be the best air-to-air plane in the game. Its just another plane. The mix of modules we have in the simulator now is kinda non-sensical already, we have to make do and come up with scenarios for the mix of hardware we have. The same argument can be applied to, say, the Mig21. It was arguably the best interceptor in the 60s. We're getting a Mirage F1EE at some point. It is superior to the Mig21BIS in every way. Does this mean we should now upgrade the Mig21 to a modern day version with a glass cockpit so it can compete with the Mirage F1 or for that matter, with the Hornet, that is also going to outclass it in every way. This is my point.

The Hornet will be able to lase its own GBUs! This will make it a fast jet with LGBs. I demand afterburners on the A10 so that it can be better!

Effectively they have a low noise detector that does the same as a plain NVG but for 3 different color bands. Imagine you had 3 NVGs, one with a red filter, one with green and one with blue. You take the image from each and make a color image and show it to the wearer.

Thanks guys.

Nobody's going to nerf the F14 Module. We're going to get a system that is as true to the real thing as they can make it.This may well mean that the Tomcat will be able to engage targets from very far or maybe it won't. We don't know yet. If the addition of Tomcats on a particular team is going to cause the that team to have easy mode, then its up to the mission creator to make sure its not unbalanced, not the module creator.

oh I know I can get elevation data for free, but I want the actual data from the game, because it may or may not match real data. I guess I'll just use a lua script in game to query the terrain height over a grid of lats and longs to get what I need.

Maybe it has a Peltier cooler and CMOS chip? You can see outside in the dark (no colour) on a dark moonless but clear night and your eyes have a quantum efficieny (% of photons caught) of 1% or so. CCDs and CMOS upwards of 90%. Add a big lense, a physically large sensor with physically large pixels (catches more photons) and you have quite a few photons to work with. Source: I'm an astronomer.

Why would it not be possible? Older night vision (low light not, infra-red) used to take all the light and amplify it so you can see it. They did this because the sensors used to be inherently noisy, so taking all the light and just making a grayscale image resulted in better images. Today we have sensors that doesn't have such a large inherent noise so you can take red/green/blue light seperately and make up a colour image. Simplified it works like this: For each image, each pixel gets a value: p = (R + G + B) + N where RGB is Red, Green, Blue photon counts and N is noise in the sensor. N used to be quite large. Nowadays it is much smaller so you can have each in their own channel and the noise doesn't overwhelm the photon counts in low light. Then afterwards you can make up a colour image from the R,G and B images.

Here's a better and fuller explanation. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=76273