Baaz

At present, as the image shows, the HVAR rockets are not listed under the Resource Manager. Only HVAR Smoke Generators are listed under "Misc". P-51's cannot load HVAR Rockets if playing with limited munitions.

Personally, I don't like this idea. I'm certainly no expert on model variations, but regardless of which model had what, I like the fact that no matter which model I'm in, at the very least I can scout for targets and relay target coordinates to those who can use them. "Thanks for your updates, hoping to see more updates and the OH-58 soon." -- Schmidtfire And I second the above quote.

Sorry if said already, but: Ability to copy/paste trigger zones, PLEASE. To further build on that: The ability to copy/paste trigger zone list for easy transfer to scripts. If the above is possible already, could someone please take the time to explain, thanks.

Hello Idrisguitar, and welcome to DCS. Great to hear you're enjoying yourself. In my opinion, you have one choice that meets all your needs in a single purchase: F/A-18C. Fully clickable cockpit, good mix of A2A / A2G, good speed, air refueling, naval ops... I mean, this thing can pretty much do it all, and will certainly give you that fix you need. The A-10C is a good choice too, but again in my opinion, the F/A-18 is just better. The A-10C can carry a large ordnance package that the F/A-18 can't, but it comes at a cost: SPEED. She's slow as hell. Depending on range to OP area, the F-18 can be there and back before the A-10 even arrives. I love the A-10C (my favorite plane in reality); it was my first fixed-wing aircraft purchased. But it being so slow, not designed for carrier ops (though we do try in DCS), and no BVR capability at all (F/A-18C is capable of conduction CAS/CAP/SEAD in a single sortie, and at the push of a button), I've basically put the A-10C on the back burner; flying her only a couple times over the past year. Don't fret over the number of pages a manual has, or if it will stretch you "too thin learning it all", because if you're truly enjoying it, it won't matter. There's plenty of videos and how-to's out there, that learning it will be the easy part; putting it into practice a whole other matter. Whatever you choose, you'll be happy with your decision, I'm sure. Good luck, and I wish you well in your future DCS endeavours. EDIT: The above statement was made with the impression that you were looking for a fixed wing aircraft. But if you really want to experience the best of DCS, then you have to get the Ka-50 Black Shark. Obviously not as fast as an F/A-18, and still slower than the A-10C, but anything the A-10 can do a Kamov can do with more style. Furthermore, ANYONE can fly a plane, but it takes a pilot to fly a chopper :) just my additional two cents. LOL

While I do wish multi crew was a thing, it's certainly not a necessity. This whole statement is fraught with issues. 1) "Flew the Gazelle M one time into combat..." Hardly qualifies as giving the bird a chance. 2) "...hovered about 5 km from target..." You were never going to hit the target at that range as your max is 4.1 km. 3) "...switched to copilot / commander seat..." You can still fly the helo from the copilot seat, scout ahead through the camera, and engage targets if necessary, all at the same time. 4) "...got sniped by a tank right away..." You got sniped because, while 5 km from target, you were less than 3 km from a tank you failed to scout. I regularly fly this bird, and enjoy it greatly. Flying solo it keeps you busy; about as much, if not more than the Ka-50. Like the Ka-50, it requires practice and the ability to multi task. Coming to a hover is all part of the process when engaging targets. Multi-crewed or not, not being in a hover can make things a P.I.T.A. for your number two, as the camera does not stay perfectly still when moving. It's constantly making slight adjustments. Compound that with having to keep the target painted for the duration of the missile's flight, and you can have a very difficult time on your hands. Even TOW equipped ground vehicles come to a stop when engaging targets; and for good reason. It's extremely difficult to keep target painted when bouncing around on uneven ground. I do wish Multi-crew was possible, as it would make things a lot more fun; but to say that it's needed or required is a false statement. FYI, the last time I tried to fly multi-crew with this aircraft, I started the bird and flew towards the target area for 10 minutes. Suddenly my number two say, "I'm ready to go whenever you are." Turns out he was still sitting on the tarmac waiting for engines to spool up. We had a good laugh about that; and how there was a total lack of communication between us. Definitely a learning experience. Server crashed a few seconds later.

Engines must be off to arm/rearm any FC3 aircraft.

Experiencing the same issue here. Outside of DCS button works fine, but not getting any response from it once in DCS.

Actually, that's not entirely true. Less than (if i remember correctly) 90 km/h, AI fighter aircraft will not see you unless at altitude. Staying at or below treetop level is a must. that typically means 15m or less. If possible I will fly at 10m or less. As for AI ground (SAMs, Tanks, etc.) you're typically safe at 10m or less. No enemy tank, or ground unit will typically engage beyond 4km. So, if you use you're head, and more importantly your eyes, you can practically walk that Ka-50 right into the thick of things. You can stroll in to about 5km, put yourself in a hover, and take your time picking off anything you like. I love making it a point when the F-18s are up there wasting their HARMs to fly in low with the Ka-50 and kill them from up close. Only against human opposition should you have a need to worry. If you know there's a human opponent close by, my recommendation is to land that girl and sit tight till friendly CAP clears the area.

Please, change the comms menu to sort by UNIT NAME rather than type. Bit of a pain trying to figure which ship I want to call when there's several named "CVN-74 John C. Stennis," or "Oliver Hazzard Perry Class." I know they are also sorted by radio freq, but with lengthy names, sometimes those freqs are hidden. It would be much appreciated. Please, and thank you. -Baaz

Yes, I would be interested in an updated F-5. It is one of my favorites, and any additional features would be welcomed. HOWEVER, I do love the current F-5E for its simplicity. I appreciate having to judge approach angles, speed, wind, and all other variables required to put bombs on target effectively. I think few who fly the F-5 really appreciate the skill required to handle the plane, and most don't like to use it in MP because it's so outclassed by more advanced modules. But that's what those of us fly the F-5 enjoy as well. Rather than time being spent to update the F-5, I'd rather time be spent developing other modules, i.e. the F-4 Phantom or AH-1.

The Russian FLIR was/may still be, horrible. My understanding is that the FLIR components for the KA-50 were actually of French design. That's coming from Wiki. But I'll take poor FLIR over no FLIR.

ED, if you're going to upgrade the avionics package, lets GO BIGGER. Let's give Reds a night attack capable aircraft. Something that can compare to the FLIR abilities of the A-10C, AV-8, and soon the F/A-18. Lets upgrade the Ka-50 to an N or Sh model. I'll be happy to pay even more!

@Wags Let me carry Vikhrs and Iglas at the same time, and I'll fork over my first born! edit: Kidding of course, but you would certainly make me a VERY happy camper.

Whenever these topics come up I always can't help but wonder if the same people who complain about paying a small fee for an upgrade every few years, are the same who will pay full price for Madden year after year. @Wags I appreciate the work you and the crew are doing on the Ka-50, and will happily fork over my money for the new features.

My only question: Am I going to have to give up Vikhrs to carry Iglas? Looks like they are carried on same station. Were vikhrs ever carried on the inside? Fairly certain I know the answer, but asking anyway.

I think people would surprise you. I for one have been dying to see a flyable C-130 or C-17, and even more so a bomber of any kind really. I'm not much of a WWII guy, but a flyable B-17/24 would certainly bring me into the realm of DCS WWII. Yes, Normandy alone is rather small, but consider the Caucasus region which actually saw action. Even the Persian Gulf could be used. Imagine if the Desert Fox conquered North Africa and pushed straight through to the oil rich fields of the Persian Gulf. Yeah, both these maps are rather, well... modernized, but I'm willing to work with what I have available. Don't strike the thought of a bomber just because the primary map designed for WWII is quite small.

Link, please, to whatever this solution is. Thanks EDIT: NVM, I found it already.

We don't know if they're activated even with TrackIR.

I'm not saying that at all. The last thing I want to see is DCS turning into War Thunder, World of Tanks, or the like. Do you really want to spend days, weeks, months, or even years of grinding to unlock an aircraft like the F-18, or F-16? I sure don't. No, what I'm proposing is that ED drops the "free to play" idea. If you want the most realistic flight experience, it's going to cost you a monthly membership. First month free, and here's a Su-25 and TF-51 to wet your whistle. After 30 days you're paying for the modules you want to buy, and the monthly subscription covers the development of things like the WWII assets, this new carrier, updating the communications, future maps, and all the fixes needed to get this game to a standard everyone can play on. It's honestly the only way to not break this community into tiny pieces of shattered glass.

I've said it before, will say it again. A $10-15 monthly subscription fee puts EVERYONE back on a level playing field and supporting DCS World as a whole. I'm willing to bet the costs of your carrier module would be covered within the first three months. It could then become the standard within the game for ALL to enjoy. You could possibly see to it that the new carrier communication upgrades are applied to all airfields as well. Furthermore, you may even earn some extra cash to hire more personnel to fix those issues that many have been waiting YEARS to see fixed. Or... we can go on arguing for another 34 pages.

ED could offer a premium service of some sort. Example: For $10/month get 10% off all purchases, increasing by 5% per year of membership up to say a max of 25%, and access to Open Beta. Would generate steady income to pay the monthly bills, and may even allow ED to hire more staff; increasing production times, and repairs. Those of us hardcore enough to pay for the equipment we have to run the game should be able to spare $10 a month.

Image from Chuck's Guide 1. Turn your Artificial Horizon Source Selector to "DOP" This will give you a set of needles on your Main Artificial Horizon. 2. Center needles by chasing them. 3. Ensure your Vertical Velocity is as close to Zero as possible. 4. Depress your Auto-Hover Toggle. It's as simple as that. After time and practice you won't have to rely on the gauges so much (or at all); you'll be able to do it visually looking out the cockpit.

But, it's DCS, Digital Combat Simulation, not DCFS as in Digital Combat Flight Simulator. Its very name indicates it's designed to be MORE than just a combat flight sim. Just Saying. :music_whistling:

While not covering every detail, Wags does a great job of explaining things in the following videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJjKFzMqHRo Hope they help. /r

The problem with this is the fact that no two profiles are exactly the same. Lots of different variables come into play, such as: distance from the sensor your sitting, height of the sensor in relation to your head, how much movement does the individual actually want to perform; just to name a few. I play on a large screen (45"), and my sensor is a little higher than it should be, but with some tweaking I make it work. I actually spent several hours tweaking. I actually started with these two websites: https://turningpointpt.com/pain/neck-pain/neck-range-of-motion-at-turning-point-physical-therapy and http://www.hazardcontrol.com/factsheets/humanfactors/visual-acuity-and-line-of-sight to get a good idea of just how much movement I should be getting, then tweaked my TIR5 to only have to move about 30 degrees to get those limits, and further adjusting the speed of the turn so TIR5 doesn't go wild from just a little bit of movement. TIR5 is a great asset, but it's certainly not a plug and play. It takes a bit of time and personal preference to get it right.