RED

Wow, fantastic news to me. Keep it up! Having a frontline fighter that also is a conversion trainer is something missing in DCS at the moment. Looking forward to it.

But you can only do that for a units in the ME, right? Is there a good solution to check for coalitions for MP scenarios?

The video also shows differences in procedures. In DCS the tanker deploys the hoses when you formed up and not before. The primary hose should be the one on the outside of the turn and not the one on the inside (DCS tanker only do left hand turns -> right hose should be the first option for the leading aircraft).

Beide Angaben beziehen sich auf den Zeitpunkt, zu dem die Waffen ihren Effekt am Ziel ausüben sollen. TTT wird meist mit einem Time Hack verbunden. Funktioniert in der A-10 super, in der Hornet muss man da momentan noch kreativ werden.

Great idea

The reason to ban the 120s is mostly that it lead to "AMRAAM throwing/spamming". People shooting those things from several miles and flying home. Pilots missed the "dogfights/getting close". Even Strike/CAS aircraft now had a chance because the AIM-7/R-27 don't stop you from trading with a good placed AIM-9/R-73. The problem is, limiting weapons is only a workaround by the community for the lack of dynamic Rules of Engagement in DCS. All fighters do magic and know on which side that aircraft is. You want a server with more dogfights? Change the ROE, make em ID the target with their eyeball. Best example is the Cold War Server. You can't ask for more dogfights on that server. Everybody has to ID the target. People would start thinking about tactics to get an advantage at the merge, ways to intercept to get the ID first. All that stuff is missing at the moment. We shouldn't ask for a weapon the DCS F-16 does not have. We should ask ED to not oversimplify the IFF and to give us options to manipulate it.

Might have something to do with the engine modelling of the MiG. The engine turns off when you engage AB. Check out the log in SP, you will see multiple changes between ON/OFF. I recommend you make a short track in SP.

Husch husch, das ist der Viper Thread, die schnappt nach bedrückten Helikopterpiloten... :smilewink: Aus unserem Werkzeugkasten wurden gerade die Stand Off Werkzeuge entfernt. Erklärung findet sich wahrscheinlich hier: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3916231#post3916231

Soweit ich weiß, ist das noch "WIP". Das heißt, momentan bekommen wir nur bei Nacht alles notwendige an.

Ich habe auch mal die Modul Beschreibungen kritisiert und verbessert, aber seitdem waren alle deutschen Übersetzungen wirklich "on point". Gerade die Handbücher sind sehr gut übersetzt. Wenn man sich die englische Version des L-39 Handbuchs anschaut, bekommt man das Grauen. Dagegen ist die deutsche Version ein Segen. Ich hoffe, die Jungs übersetzten dieses Jahr noch mehr Ankündigungen mit der Zahl 16. :thumbup:

Hehe

Jup, mit schlaueren SAMs wird SEAD/DEAD erst wirklich sinnvoll aber ohne offensive ECM auch verdammt schwer. Da werden wir wohl wieder mit den Eichhörnchen auf einer Augenhöhe sein. Ein Tornado würde dabei einen guten Eindruck machen...

free map -> WW2 map DCS airplanes/vehicles -> 1943+/west front/Europe theater future carriers? -> water I am guessing either it will be something around Malta or maybe closer to the Alps.

Let's hope they think it will be a good idea to return to improve DCS after most of their staff worked on their new game. I also think this is one subject of many other (weather, tanker operation, mission planning, rearm/configuration options, ...). They might have also pushed this specific issue to solve when they get the carrier module ready. The best solution in my eyes would be if the client could choose the parking position on an airfield or carrier.

Aus dem Handbuch Ich sehe wenige Gründe, warum man auf P-STT umschalten würde, wenn man in PD-STT ist. ECM spielen wahrscheinlich eine Rolle (eher weniger in DCS). Da Ziele über dem Horizont sowieso nicht vom dort inaktiven MLC Filter rausgefiltert werden, hat P-STT keine Vorteile außer bei 0 rel. Geschw. Ist das Ziel unter dem Horizont und "beamt" dich, verlierst du beim Wechsel auf P-STT sowieso sofort das Ziel; außer es ist vielleicht durch Range Gates noch nicht eins mit dem Hintergrund. Aus meiner Sicht sind die Aussaugen in deiner Zusammenfassung für die PD Modi auch nur mit aktivem MLC Filter korrekt.

There is also a big difference between what a camera can see and what a pilot would see looking outside his/her cockpit.

I am not so sure about that...

No, you are indeed not. This issue exists since Hornet Release or 2.5. I don't really remember. Probably just not high up on their list. It stands in line with other issues/bugs concerning tanker. Tanker setting you up for the wrong hose first. Tanker not extending the hoses and being ready before you are in the stern position. Tanker flying at the wrong altitudes when the air pressure/temperature deviates from standard. Tanker initiating turns with a rather high roll rate while not giving you a heads up first.

I guess ED will use the "IP Points" from the mission editor as the GPS waypoint database for the Hornet. (Which would be useful because they are currently set up in missions and used in the A10). It would be really helpful if we could select the GPS waypoints in the MDC to create sequences because it will take a while to create a flight plan from GPS waypoints through the UFC. This would also help with the current lack of a mission planning tool as a client in MP.

The MDC will be very helpful for people using the Multiplayer. The mission designer usually does not plan for each individual flight. Public server or private server of a group, the client aircraft usually have only waypoint 0 and are parked cold on the ramp or an aircraft carrier. There is no way he coordinates with 20-60 people what they want to do. The MDC will get really useful if we can load flight plans, sequences and programs for weapon and CM.

Much appreciated! :pilotfly:

Nice video! Still a bummer that the tanker deploy the wrong hose first.

:thumbup:

Will we get a new tanker for the F-14? We currently have 3 available tanker which should be nice. One of them looks outdated and the crew of the other two can't tell left from right when it comes to deploying hoses. Maybe something like this?