Kang

Yes, it is. Also doesn't seem to use the same texture at all. Plus side: you can still dim it to make it even darker.

Guess it's true that scales are just different in America... I'd say perhaps wait and see what that mysterious and legendary dynamic campaign is actually going to be like before worrying too much about the details.

You've been around here for far too long to still be shocked by something like that. Anyway, I see two ways of handling this wave issue - provided ED wants to do anything about it in the first place: a) simply disconnect current wind and wave state. Comparably easy to implement, I guess. The criticism I'd have here is that, while it of course is possible to create realistic conditions, by default there would be no meaningful connection between these two anymore. b) have a complicated system that calculates wave states on geographic location and previous winds? While that would be rather realistic, the obvious problems are that it requires a whole more lot of work to implement, plus it's likely to be rather complicated in use for mission designers, many of who might decide to not bother. An additional problem I see here is that it would easily be one of those things that are done very well in DCS just shining the spotlight on things not far away from it that are mediocre at best and in my opinion would be much more important.

Ironically there has been a thread just last week in which somebody complained that ED ripped him off entirely on his A-10C because it didn't carry any AMRAAMS, which it totally should, as some bizarre mod on BMS let him do just that...

Are you sure the control is bound correctly and working then?

AI helicopters seem unable to land on the Arleigh Burke class destroyer in DCS. While a corresponding flight plan can be set up just fine and they approach quite alright, they never land and instead just vanish into thin air when within a few hundred yards of the ship.

Perhaps those missions have easy comms enabled and enforced by default. Look through your controls and make sure you use the in-cockpit radio button rather than the generic comms menu button. Most common problem about that.

Oh, yes, that is what I originally thought you said, but those pictures seemed like you really meant the headlights. Can confirm the flood lights in cockpit are absolutely useless.

Would be nice for sure. But then, after all these years it's still not even possible to use a pilot model as an infantry asset for CSAR-type missions, and that's a model that already exists with full animations. Not hopeful.

This may sound stupid, but have you adjusted the pointing? The Mi-8 headlights are by default pointing straight down, further so than in the Huey, and thus need to be extended (swung up) in order to appear in view.

I know what you meant. I was a new user once. Did it just like that anyway. The problem you describe comes down to things being in early access for a long time at the end of the day. Otherwise you would have a proper up-to-date manual and proper training missions that talk you trough the procedures. Practicing those is just a matter of clobbering together a simple mission by yourself then. This week saw a major push of things into the 'stable' version of DCS. That puts them out of the fluid situation of being in testing, more or less, and opens the way for manuals and training missions to be adapted to them soon.

Either what Flagrum said, or just incorporate them in missions you previously built.

Look at your options, there is one called 'unrestricted satnav', which lets you use GPS wherever and whenever you like.

You can change all of the presets in the mission editor. Just select the MiG and go to the frequencies tab.

No offence, but that's precisely what I said: you built a mission with the specific plan of wanting to include a necessity for in-flight refuelling. You burn a lot of fuel when going full burner all over, absolutely. You could just as well go for the challenge of actually watching your fuel economy. Yes, obviously you made sure that isn't an option in the mission you built. Again, I'm not saying it's impossible to build such a mission, all I said was: for the vast majority of missions in DCS it is entirely optional.

At least it's specifically what you did not mean, the 'in mission dynamics', rather than the 'in between missions dynamics'.

...and they don't dim at all either.

I noticed on night flights that the wingtip vortex cores seem to retain their daylight visibility. In turn that makes them seem overly luminous at night.

Considering how ground unit damage is generally done... none of the above.

On the whole other hand: what is really to gain? I mean, how many missions actually require you to inflight refuel? Most missions that ask you to do it pretty much just do so for the hell of it.

If one was to be serious about a 'focus on naval ops' for DCS, I would consider it much more important to make the naval assets in the game work. Some ships disappear at range, some ships randomly disappear when looked at from certain angles, ship wakes sometimes get cut off in a straight line after a hundred feet, torpedoes - while certainly being worked on right now - aren't quite a thing yet, anti-ship missiles display questionable behaviour at times... More variety in ships would be wonderful, but revising their function is important.

I'll be honest: I have no idea whatsoever what you are trying to say here.

Even if the answer was that it wasn't equipped, that co-pilot might make himself useful and say a word when the 'LO' light on the radar altimeter went on.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember that the Ka-50 doesn't have a tail rotor to begin with.

My thinking was that for a given aspect angle a higher speed leads to a higher overall deflection, thus any error makes the pipper with higher amplitude. As in, a little unwanted change in G makes it wander much more than it does at lower speeds. But then, what do I know.