BarTzi

Interesting. I will try to dig deeper. From what I can currently tell, they used to carry the missiles on the ter (as shown in the picture I attached) or use asymmetric loadouts. Here's another picture, this time with cluster bombs.

The attached picture is of an Israeli F-4E during the 73 war. As you can see, the bombs on the ter are mounted in such a way that allows carrying a heat-seeking missile without using the special weapons adapter. I don't think this was specific to the IAF, or a modification that was made at the time. I was wondering if this was ever considered as a possible loadout option.

Please confirm this will be a hotfix we won't be forced to wait another year for.

Ramat David was never a part of this map

Yeah. It's a shame every route is not a different file, sorted into folders named after the terrains.

Not really. Routes are inserted into files that are named after the terrain (every route in Sinai for example will be inserted into a file called Sinai.lua). This makes it harder to share routes, since instead of just dragging a file into a folder, you have to copy a route into a file.

Israel is such a small country, that dividing it like that is one of the dumbest things you can do. Sure - they will overlap, but who cares?

Did you look into restoring access to db_callnames? It's a shame to lose the ability to create custom names

Tacan issues, ILS issues, airport issues, AI taxi path issues - and I can count a few more.

Are you aware of the amount of bugs this map has? It has no fixes for more than a year - do you think that's acceptable?

A. This is indeed wrong, and falsely implemented. B. I will point it out in DM's, if my post bothers you.

It seems like you can't unless you choose the dedicated slot.

ED has their documents otherwise they would not have been able to create the JDAM display. This is what I'm asking them to check.

Don't reinvent the wheel where it isn't needed. Left click to drag is used by every program and application currently installed on my PC. The launcher should not be different.

In short, both share the same EFUZ sub-menu at the moment (including OFF, VT1, DYL1, INST). However, this is only correct for FMU-139. When using FMU-152, we rely on the JPF sub-menu (I'm talking about JDAMs). Therefore, the available EFUZ options are either ON or OFF when FMU-152 is installed. If you check your documentation you should find this statement to be correct (You might find additional inaccuracies such as the fact that DLY1 should not be available when DSU-33 is equipped)

Awesome, this is a great addition to the game. I can't stress this enough. Some pointers: 1. Assigning one template per aircraft type is not very useful as long as DTC is not implemented. There should be an option for the player to select a template when spawning (imagine choosing between a CAP or STRIKE sortie). As we mostly care about waypoints and radio freqs - maybe creating a dynamic template that shares only the waypoints with dynamic slots would be good (aircraft type does not matter in that case) 2. Additionally, showing us the waypoints of the selected aircraft before we spawn, would be a great addition. 3. How about an air start dynamic slot?

I don't know a single person who can land the plane correctly in DCS and experiences these issues.

You have to maintain a certain amount of fuel for multiple landing attempts. In his config, fuel should not be dumped. I don't think there's anything to gain from landing with those Aim7's, since he is starting from the air, and this isn't really a mission, but a training scenario with just one goal - landing.

Fuel should not be what you are dumping. Your jet is fully armed, exceeding the bring back weight. Drop some of those missiles.

Sadly, it won't be feature complete until this ship is able to turn towards the wind on its own. A basic feature missing since day one. Also, the ATC does not support MP, so maybe they should finally get to that.

This is exactly like the players who try to AAR before they learn the basics of formation flying, and then ask for an easy mode for AAR.

It looks like it, sadly.

Am I wrong or am I still seeing the BE bug in your screenshot? Just push a hot fix and rid us of this annoyance. Also, just to put it out there - bug fixing and feature addition are two completely different things. You CAN fix a bug, and don't have to WAIT for a big update that includes feature addition. If that's your excuse for not fixing some of the major issues this map is having, it's not a good one.

It does sort of work now. The easiest way to test this is in the 8V8 BVR instant action mission.

No, it's not about the realism of the loadout, far from it. It's about releasing a half-working feature, that does not support MP sync, does not support preset loading and is not fully functional (see the bugs about bombs going DUD for no reason, or fuzes not working). The appearance of bombs is not the issue here and it's not the bug I'm reporting. It's the SYNC in MP. If I have an airburst sensor mounted on my bomb and no one else sees that sensor, who says that the effect of the bomb hitting a target will be the same for all clients? We already have major sync issues with multiple weapons including slam-er. This just adds more.