VZ_342

Not everyone knows about the difficulties of making a module...it is a good idea, and it would be up to ED to act on it or not, regardless of any words of wisdom or simulated Words of Wit from the Peanut Gallery™.

Looks like a Mig-25/31..?

I saw the teaser...they flew like they were professionals or something. :pilotfly::lol: I’d think VR is better, especially if you’re used to turning your head X degrees and having a POV change by X degrees (real world movements). When I first started using TIR (low cost alternate) it took a few days to adjust the input/output curves (“X input = Y output”) to be useful *and* expected. Until then, it felt like I’d had too much caffeine...jitter jitter shake jitter with just normal head bobs.

Yup, but I suggested making a FARPish base, just because it is there. Part of the process would be to see if one could land on just the image (the image itself shouldn’t have rocks and bumps unless placed there as part of a programmed global config, so a smooth landing could happen)... Except it didn’t with a conventional aircraft, so...I played around a bit with Mission Editor buildings, FLaK 37’s and 38’s, until I got bored. On to bigger and better things! (BTW, you can’t put a carrier on land. :^\ )

Just on a lark, I tried landing the A-4E on the “image” of the longer Fallon runway...very gentle touchdown, just realized “ok I’m on the gr....BOO-oo-OOOM!” and I made a spectacular crash and burn site. Has anyone successfully landed on the image?

My choice for USAF bomber would be the B-58...3 man crew, easy for 1 pilot with AI for other two, supersonic, high altitude, one screamin’ sonova... Sure, it’s nuke only, but so was the BUFF before Vietnam.

The ultimate Bomb Truck!

I’ve noticed that every aircraft has a “bugs” subforum. This creates a difficulty when reading about new bugs, because often the report title is a simple description of the bug, but not the aircraft involved. For example, one might see “cockpit lights flash when firing guns” and it’s listed in the “bugs” subforum. The aircraft is not readily identified, so I have to click on it to find out which plane it is. As interesting as that might sound, I’d rather not read bug reports unless it’s of a plane that I fly (and of course no one knows which those might be;) ) And if I was a dev, it’d be nice to be able to quickly see that a bug was related to a product that my company makes. So my request is that we start putting the aircraft name in the title, and/or that ED change the name of the subforum “bugs” to include the aircraft name. Thank you.

...now if a pilot who ejected could walk up to a Jeep and..ummm...”acquire” it, it’d save a lot of time gettin’ back to the O Club...

So open the ME, park a couple FARPs on it, a dozen fuel trucks, a few HUMVEES, and a roach coach and hey presto a functioning NAS Fallon in a mission template. Tip: only fly southeast after takeoff. If they can refuel Viggens on the roadside...:pilotfly: Not trying to be facetious, just thinking of options. Hadn’t heard of any mods to take advantage of this.

Hmm...not sure if there’s any facilities there (fuel, re-arming), but can it be designated as such in the ME? To make it useful as something? What say the reconnoiter aircrew?

Are you saying NAS Fallon is actually present, just not named as such?

Lag isn’t always a sign of hackers being evil...most of the time it’s normal, given the ping rate, population numbers, weapons fire, etc. TacView simply records unit positions and vitals, and doesn’t have to calculate perspective and highly detailed model rendering (which also create lag). Do you know your system specs and settings you’re using?

No mouse alignment issue with my A-4. I hover, find the green “go” color, and click. The color is more important than being absolutely centered.

Some in-flight emergencies don’t have specific protocols. You simply treat the symptoms if possible, and if flight control is unrecoverable and/or below a certain altitude then one ejects. For example, in the EF111, the -1 describes “uncontrolled 3 axis gyration” with essentially two sentences: 1. Do not separate wing stores; and 2. If flight control has not been restored by 20,000’ AGL, EJECT. Somehow I don’t think the aircrew would try searching for (or reading) emergency procedures during an emergency. :joystick: Tinkickef handled it quite effectively by treating the symptoms as they presented. :thumbup:

Vietnam war era:

TrackIR knock-off. Quite happy with it.

Jet Fighter 3

Very nicely done!

Instead of the Warthog ($~500ish) I’d have bought a decent video card, at least a 970. (And a motherboard that can use it). (Don’t recall the brand, just Google “970 video card”) Any $40 joystick is a better choice than any gamepad. You definitely need more RAM, at least 16gb.

If I were inclined to fly a big plane, the C-130 would be the first on my list.

Patience is a virtue. Pilots must have patience. Therefore, pilots must be virtuous. :pilotfly:

Several comments like this one...the problem is NOT that some people (and companies) “give in” to the trolls and the lawsuit-happy, but because one has to choose their battles. The investigation panels and the courts are generally of the highest quality, seeking truth and fairness, BUT there are exceptions, especially when the lawyers, officers, and/or judges are out trying hard to pad their List of Conquests in order to get that next promotion (or election). It’s all well and good to stand up to trolls and suits, but what are the risks one faces when doing so? Are those risks truly worth it, when “showing duly authorized fun videos” is on the one hand, and “losing my source of income for an extended time while I defend these fun videos” on the other? This also runs the risk of losing one’s family, and if the chicanery of unethical lawyers, officers, and judges (yes, they do exist) succeed, then you might be facing jail time and/or fines. Please don’t criticize the decision to abstain from the so-called “Good Fight”, because just like there are those who don’t know what is or is not classified, many don’t know just what is involved in a courtroom fight.

Awesome idea! If I had a squadron... Can you do different aircraft and backgrounds?

I'm using it in DCS release, and passes IC. Edit: Odd...it passes IC the first time I start up MP and join a server...then if I leave the server it shows failure due to A-4E textures. (Using SU-25 in MP)