doedkoett

Most large screen systems is made up of two or more screens in the same bezel. They look like one, and act as one, in the same way dual screens on a computer work. But if one fails you still have half the display area left. Should both fail, you still have the main instruments on the HUD/Helmet display. There are also usually a few more displays in the cockpit that can display back up instrumentation. At least that is the case when it comes to the JAS 39E. In addition to the WAD it has two smaller displays, one on each side of the pilots knees. Both can display backup instruments if needed. It also has a HUD and a helmet display. The Gripen, while having a touch display WAD, still retain bezel buttons, so it is not relying on touch inputs for anything important. I guess it is the same for many other WAD equipped aircraft.

To get this trainwreck back on track... I very much fly a module for a period, then I fly another for a while.. Often due to playing multiplayer campaigns with my friends in "37:e stridsflygdivisionen". Earlier this year I flew the Viggen. An aircraft that is very dear to me. I love that module. Now I fly the Hornet in the current campaign we're running. I haven't flown it for a long time, but the Hornet is nice too. I also plan to learn the Phantom more in depth soon, because I have an idea for a multiplayer campaign for it. In addition to the fixed wing modules enjoy flying helicopters a lot in DCS. Especially in VR. Currently I am flying the old Huey a lot, part because it still works fine in VR, part because I am working on a multiplayer campaign for it. Before some update from ED or Meta messed up VR for me, my fav helicopter was the Kiowa, it´s so fun and easy to fly!

The Heller Viggen - I have built my fair share of those. In fact, one was the first ever model kit I ever had, when I got my dad to buy it for me at an airshow at Saab in 1982. The Heller kit was nice for its day, but is sadly lacking in detail and finesse. The last two Viggens I have built was the Tarangus boxings of a JA and an SF. I was quite happy about how the JA turned out. The SF isn´t finished yet. It has been on the shelf of doom, awaiting weathering, for a few years now.

I agree, the promised AI J 35J Draken would go some way to help create a reasonably realistic Swedish Air Force in DCS. But given the choice I´d prefer an AI JA 37 Viggen over the Draken. Given that the AJS 37 we have is a 1990's aircraft, and by that time the Draken was used only by the F10 wing in Ängelholm in the south of Sweden (where they build the Koenigsegg hypercars today), which is very far from the area of Sweden present in the Kola map. (But on the other hand, not very far from the small part of Sweden included in the GCW-map!) If I get to wish some more, an AI SF 37 photo recce Viggen and an AI SH 37 maritime recce would be cool additions too. (Also, I´d love full modules of either, with working cameras, but lets be slightly more realistic)

The problem is, to make it feel like a real JA 37, not just a grey Viggen 3d-model with a generic cockpit, you will need to use accurate HUD-, radar and TI-symbology, in a correct way. While a lot can be inferred from publicised photos and media, to make it right would probably require access to the user manuals (SFI), which are still, to my knowledge) classified. That precludes the creation of even a FC Viggen. Also, I think a too simplified JA 37 would lose some of the stuff that makes the JA 37 interesting, like the autopilot assisted gun mode.

Only if the parachutes worked.. (you all know the video I am thinking of, right?)

Nice model, Kurnass1977! What scale and make?

You guys are talking about different things. Flutter, in the aviation world is when a control surface starts to self-oscillate. This is a serious problem which can lead to the destruction of the control surface or wing. The aircraft resistance to flutter is thoroughly tested during development. This is what mkellytx is talking about. The movement of the fins on the F-15 in the clip are merely vibrations, which itself can have a detrimental effect on the longevity of the airframe, but when the maneuver is ended the vibrations stop. If it was flutter, the fin might not stop shaking, and the oscillations might increase until the fin separates from the aircraft.

Why wouldn't you be able to? You can do that in the Viper and Hornet already. In the FC Eagle too, I am sure.

The attachment points must be tilted off to the side due to the geometry of the missile. Seen from the front the fins take the shape of an X with the mounting lugs on top, as you say. But to be able to fair in the missile properly in a semi recessed mount, it has to be rotated 45 degrees to a configuration resembling a + so that the top fins stick in to the fuselage. This rotates the mounting lugs and umbilical connections 45 degrees off to the side.

The simple answer is that the mounting point for the missile in the recesses, is inboard on the forward recesses, and outboard on the rear ones. Why, I do not know. My guess would be that it has something to do with safe release of the weapon, but it might as well be something else, like lack of space for the pylon mechanism. Anyway, this means that any missile, Meteor or AMRAAM, will be rotated 90 degrees between the front and rear mount. Edit: attached a photo of the belly of a Typhoon I shot last summer.

The two different steel pipe cargo objects are a bit iffy too. I also find it rather funny that several of the cargo objects, that AFAIK have been in the came for a long time, are too heavy to lift with any of the older helicopters. I saw another player almost pulling the rotor off his Mi-8 while trying to lift a set of logs, while the Chinook plucked them up with ease.

You also need to map the safety catch in front of the release button. You also must select the hook used (so far only the middle is useable, so middle or "all") and arm the hook before release. This is done on the panel in the overhead control panel.

Yes there is definitively something related to the CPU. I had serious FPS problems with the "Hook" too, but I deleted the shaders and set textures to medium, and now it´s mostly flyable. But then sometimes, for some unknown reason, the FPS drops. I checked the performance monitor in the task manager and saw a sharp drop in CPU load (from 25% to about 20%). But the funny thing was, that when giving the CPU graph a hard stare, the FPS returned, for a while. When they dropped again, I alt-tabbed out and in again, and got them back. I have an Intel 14700K, and when playing DCS it runs at around 25-ish %, which I think is rather low? I am thinking maybe it is related to the E-cores problem?

Sorry about that - I just wanted to make the code part stand out, so it was clear what to copy/paste. I´ll use a different font the next time!