Inseckt

Forwards Arming and Refueling Point. Mainly (at least in DCS) used for chopper field deployments... Edit: In DCS it's a static object with helipads...

I guess you're right, it does make sense at least...

I mostly agree with your post frostiken, but I presume that they already got ED's consent for this thread seeing as forum rule 1.9 is VERY clear: Weather the first post is advertisement or information probably depends on interpretation though....

Why would we? I think the reason is that ED has more than one potential candidate. Like this (hypotetical situation): ED: Hey, the next fighter is F-18C! But, remember, everything is subject to change! Community: Yeah! Cool, we love ED, eta yet? ED: Sorry, it's an F-15C, like we said, everything is subject to change.. Community: Damn you! you promised! [burns ED] ED: *sigh So the only reason I, in my humble capacity, could think of reasons not to tell, is that there's a small chance it could still change.. :P

Because we really want to know what the next US fixed wing jet is... :)

Do you have master arm on? IIRC it must be on for weapon cues to display...

The encyclopedia should indeed not be trusted. I did some extensive testing of ranges and max altitudes myself, se here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1319858#post1319858. Furthermore, RL data should not always be trusted for in-game operations either. Also the "tygers?" did some elaborate testing which I think is available on their home-page... Otherwise, nice work, and nice pictures... :)

I also took it with A-10A in FC1. Just load up two of the biggest bombs, then fly directly behind it at an height of approx 3-6 ft. While using CCRP, pop up right before and drop two. It uses some time from radar acquisition is established to actual missile launch, so I sometimes got away with it, and the bombs did the rest...

The JTAC needs to be in visual range to get type 2. Then you have to select "lase" from the designate field in advanced attributes. Proceed as usual, using LSS of the TGP. Laser code should be default. Haven't tried it myself yet tho, but perhaps I should give it a go tonight...

Yes, sorry ralfidude. (read quick, reply quicker :music_whistling: )

I think he is considering MP. SP is of course another matter in that regard... then like Jona33 said, perhaps FC3 is more fit for such a free modding environment?

I don't totally agree with the above. One of the most important and advertised aspect of DCS, is the so called "DCS - standard", and I think this "standard" is more advanced than it may seem for others. Opening the simulator to other contributers, would surly increase the content at a faster rate, but who would "approve" any addons to be DCS-standard? We could get a plane that is advertised with AFM and "a lot" of functional avionics, but in the end, it is probably not equally advanced modeled as stock-airplane... I fear we could end up having some advanced and some less advanced addons, and I don't know how I would tell them apart.

Decided to revive my thread to vent this: I wish that SAM systems with multiple launchers, would act more tactical instead of firing all launchers at the exact same moment, and then you have three missiles flying in formation towards you.

This is incorrect. In manual mode, the CMS will still run the entire program, or until you press "stop". There isn't any "pop-one-flare-button", unless a "pop-one-flare-program" is selected....:)

there's no such thing as "pretty much the same" in DCS fidelity...:thumbup:

There could be several reasons for this. The first thing that springs to mind is that it might be rounding off, (which they do), but only upwards? Second; I can't remember off my mind, but the tanker might be giving "flight level" which will differ from your barometric reading if you are adjusted for barometric deviance from "normal day".... Edit: Read you question more thoroughly, and I think he is supposed to give his own altitude, and not altitude minus 1k...

If I am using NVG's, I find that it is best to leave the HUD in day-mode, since the night-mode tends to appear more "smeared". Only based on how it appears in-game, I believe that night-mode is only used when flying without NVG's. (I [could] guess it's because NVG's don't amplify the green frequency as much as others...) On-topic: Using TACAN and NVG's is a successful approach for me, if you are close enough and at correct altitude, the tanker should be quite luminous and easy to pick up from the background. (tip: fly slightly lower than tanker altitude, as it is usually harder to spot from above than below)

lol, mine too. But why does speedbrake affect control authority. I thought they where symmetric? Does pac use aileron separation for control inputs???

Actually, it's only from my memory of your emergency checklist's, which I thought was based on the real -1. Of course, since it's coming from you, I must be mistaken in my assumption. Please disregard my post :music_whistling: :doh: Ps. I love the way any erroneous assumptions will be immediately shot down in this forum. The pooled knowledge of this community has always amazed me. :)

It seems that an aircraft carrying a pod (targeting/ECM), it is not allowed to belly-land, and is instead encouraged to eject. Seems pretty extreme to me. The reasons for not enabling pod ejection must outweigh the cost of an entire aircraft loss...

Yes. Yes it would. But first we need a pilot...

Sucks! The hole thing about something that sucks or doesn't suck, comes down to expectations me thinks. And it's all valid if you ask me. Only a blinded randomized test off several opinions can tell if something truly sucks...:D

that did indeed look stunningly realistic. Is this using the addons you mentioned?

They are not random, they do in fact follow timetables (in relation to mission start time I suspect). Some train parameters can be configured in a lua file, like number of carriages and speed. I don't now how civ setting on high vs low affect the trains though. So making a mission where a train is at a certain place at a certain time is possible, but you can't force civ setting on player. meaning it will only work reliably for your self...

Good luck with the installer effte. If it's not too much to ask, I would appreciate hearing about your first impressions and experiences. BTW, I'm not accusing the objectivity of you or anyone else in particular, rather commenting on an apparent "trend" seeing myself as rather neutral, but I guess I might already be biased since I have gotten a taste of the promises of X-p10. (it can indeed happen fast sometimes) :)