Baaz

Not sure about doing it through coding, but it's quite easy to do with a simple flag on/off trigger. Start with airfield as neutral. When a red or blue ground unit moves onto the base it turns one flag on, and the other off, and vice versa.

If by "Mod" you mean full fidelity module developed by ED or a third party developer, I agree. One of only a few prop jobs I'm looking forward to flying. I really wanted to see the A-4 developed by the same, but not sure it'll happen now with the free community mod.

Without a means of turning this option off, this can be both a blessing and a curse.

Judging from the video Wags posted yesterday, it doesn't seem like we'll have to wait too much longer (month or two?). May just want to hold off and play it safe. Would hate to see someone invest a lot of time into developing a mission, only to see it broken soon after. In case you missed it:

Personally, I don't need/want the Pres-S system. Having a laser and missile warning system is more than adequate. It's not like the Pres-S is going to guarantee protection anyway. So, just tell me the direction, and I'll handle the rest. No, no we don't. Call me old school, but I absolutely hate modern glass cockpits. Agreed! So you all better get use to saying "Rifle," "Magnum," etc, otherwise you'll be freaking the hell out of a lot of people.

Sorry Mate. Was hoping it was going to be something simple to fix like the issue I had. Hopefully someone with better knowledge on the subject will be able to help you out. Good luck.

I've encountered something similar in the past. Check this thread for what I encountered, and how I resolved it.

You're absolutely correct, the "Synchronize Cockpit Controls..." option is unreliable at best; and "Off/IDLE/OFF/IDLE" is exactly what I have to do to sync the throttles once in the pit.

Yes, you can. You will find instructions on how to do so here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/500/

You'll find that to be the case with a lot of switches too. Prior to startup I'll go through and cycle all the switches and throttles to get them synced with the sim.

Not only that, but how to simulate 10,000 nails flying through the air without causing a HUGE lag spike. The only way I see it even remotely possible is if, for example, they simulate 10 nails flying through the air. On impact those 10 nails create, instead of a massive explosion, a small dust cloud (similar to what we see from low flying helicopters now) that would show the impact area of what the 10,000 nails would cover. Then some kind of blast area for those 10 nails would have to be developed to simulate the destruction of what 10,000 would cause. Unfortunately, all this would be moot if ED doesn't correct the issue with blast damage. Sorry mate, after making my last posting I went back and re-read all the previous postings within this thread. I then realized you basically stated the same thing. Sorry for stepping on your toes.

Helicopters at slow speeds will always have a slight delay between stick input and aircraft response. The slower it is, the longer the delay. You need to anticipate what its response is going to be, before it actually does it. That being said, two things I was taught years ago when trying to learn to hover: 1 - Light hands. You're not trying to choke the shit out of the stick. If you're knuckles are white, you're holding too tight. You wouldn't treat your junk that way, right? Right?? 2 - Very small stick movements. Push the stick in the direction you want to go, hold for just a moment (literally like half a second), then back to center. It's easier to fix a small mistake than a big one. This will help keep you from over correcting. Other than that, it's as @BaD CrC said, "Practice again and again." Good Luck! P.S. One more thing. Through it all, just try to relax. It's a game... correction, simulation, after all. There will always be a reset button when we fail.

I agree, even after I thought the BS3 was never going to see the light of day, BS3 is indeed looking very nice. Personally, I'm not too concerned about the President-S system. All I care to know is whether I have inbound or not. If I do, I'm certainly not staying there to see if it hits me. Flares, and boogey. After that, it hits me or it doesn't.

Calm down mate. He didn't say HOW they would be beaten; just that it could beat all third and fourth gen fighters. If you think about it, he's absolutely correct. Any Fox-2 missile can destroy any aircraft. Bullets in the air, can destroy any aircraft. If the F-5 can get a jump on the 3rd or 4th gen, it can absolutely destroy it. The F-5 is my favorite bird (aside from helos). Sure I come out on the losing end a lot... A LOT; but it's so incredibly satisfying when the F-5 brings down a more advanced aircraft. A good GCI and the F-5 can make dreams come true!

I will neither confirm nor deny any such statement at this time.

This statement is subject to interpretation and... well... sorry, but you're interpretation of what's "REALLY cool" is all wrong. Only my opinion of course. Honestly, the birds I find cool are those that saw action during Vietnam, before all this FBW BS came about. Let them work on what's on the list below, which I believe to be "REALLY cool," before bogging them down with BS FBW expectations. https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/vietnam-war-aircraft.php

I don't think anyone will argue that, "spinning rotor equals a higher RCS." However, I do believe ED is overlooking one very simple fact. The technology to determine what the RCS is (radars couldn't see the difference between a slow moving helicopter and a fast moving car), wasn't developed until the mid to late 90's here in the US, and apparently not until the early 2010's in Russia. Based on apparent patent information, Boeing didn't even get patent approval for the technology until 1997. So, depending on the date of the aircraft ED wants to model, and the origin, the model may not be able to recognize the RCS as a helicopter. https://patents.google.com/patent/US5689268A/en If that truly is the case, then maybe ED needs to develop technology that would allow for radars to detect street traffic. This would make it more realistic for helicopters to blend into cities and road traffic.

Actually, you are mistaken. At the start of the 1991 Gulf War, Iraq had one of the largest air forces in the world. It wasn't until nearly 2 weeks into the war that reports of planes being sent to Iran began to emerge in the papers. That's only after nearly a quarter of his entire force was destroyed on the ground. Do you really believe Saddam would order his planes to Iran (and yes, he himself actually gave the order), knowing he had one of the largest battle-hardened air forces in the world (remember, this is only a few years after the Iran-Iraq war), before they ever fired a shot?? If the US led coalition had such a, "numerically and technologically overwhelming" force, why did he sacrifice his fourth largest army in the world to that same coalition?? Fact is, up until the second week of the war, Saddam believed he still held all the cards. Getting back to my original statement, Apaches were sent in first because the US led coalition actually feared Iraqi air defenses. Better to send in Apaches flying 50 feet off the deck under the radar, than to risk coalition aircraft getting destroyed by radar guided SAMs. EDIT: A very interesting article worth reading that will help back up my statements: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/remembering-desert-storm-and-gulf-wars-odyssey-iraqs-air-force-part-1

Very interesting video on the subject matter: https://www.military.com/video/operations-and-strategy/vietnam-war/cobra-firing-flechette-rockets-in-vietnam/983606175001

Mate, I've been flying the F-5 for years, and never once had I thought about binding bogey dope request. Learn something new all the time. Thank you!!

Mate, this is a wishlist thread, so wish away. Just know you're not the first to wish for this. As someone who enjoys flying the MiG-29, Su-25T, Su-27, and knowing the advantages they have over the full fidelity birds, personally I have no issue with having to shut down my engines to rearm and refuel. The 15-20 seconds it takes for them to spool down is nothing compared to what it takes some birds just to align their nav systems.

While I appreciate everything modders can do that turns everything to gold, at the same time I see them as poison. I cringe every time I see a new mod come out (A-4 for example, a module I really want to see in game) because it doesn't give ED much incentive to actually move forward and do it themselves. Why is ED going to invest time in making troops deployable and such, when CTLD will do the same thing. Again, nothing against modders. ED just needs to step up their game. To the OP, I agree, something more universal needs to be done to make MP more enjoyable.

I disagree with this. What you fail to realize is the fact that FC3 planes can be shut down and started with the push of 3 buttons. There's no alignment of navigation systems or anything else required. They can be armed and rolling in about 30-45 seconds. Now granted, Non FC3 planes do have an slight advantage with a hot rearm/refuel, but if it's such an issue, you can very quickly and easily get in a fresh FC3 plane and be rolling just as fast.

I must admit I'm happy to be wrong on this one in regards to further development. Can't wait to fly with the new modifications.