Raven (Elysian Angel)

Oh I need to check that then. The combination of MSAAx2 and quad view normally works brilliantly for me. *edit* I just noticed ED removed the “cannot reproduce” tag

As mentioned earlier, this will likely be fixed once ED implements the DAFCS. We’ll have to wait and see

Quite odd then that I *wasn’t* prompted to restart my pc after the update. I’m running W11 23H2.

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/355683-no-ffb/

People complain about bad performance and ED’s response is “cannot reproduce”?

Early RHAW gear was designed to warn crews of the presence and current activity of S-75 batteries. Airborne radar guided threats didn’t exist at the time.

I tested pretty much all of the modules I own and the only native implementation I found lacking is the F-5’s (forces far too low). If I can pick and choose which native implementation gets overwritten and which doesn’t, I might give it a try

We'll have to wait for DAFCS to be implemented. I don’t see the need to use telemFFB yet, so for now at least I’m using my Rhino natively.

That was my first impression too, yes. I kept swapping back and forth between F2 and F1 views to check. I then leaned forward to see where my forehead would hit the dashboard frame and compared that to the pilot in F2 view but again hard to tell without pilot model.

It’s the exact same behaviour as the OH-58 and UH-1 with force trim turned off, isn’t it?

If it doesn't work, you could try swapping faces with your wingman (sorry I couldn't resist)

The improved sound directional tuning is very noticeable. Thank you!

No it's not just you. Performance is much worse than for example the Apache, and the VRAM demand is also much higher: 2GB more compared to the Apache. As it is, my 6900XT doesn't have enough VRAM to fly the Chinook on the Afghanistan map (on the included hot start IA mission the framerate dropped to 4 (!) - yes that's not a typo).

Yes the default seating position is too much to the right and too much forward. It's hard to tell exactly without pilot model, but I corrected it to the best of my abilities.

Dead stick here too (also Rhino user). But then again, we were told there would be no force trim on EA release.

null

Perhaps try disabling those for a bit until you can test the mission again, and see if anything changed? Mods can cause weird interference sometimes.

null

Do you possibly have mods installed which might interfere?

Heatblur

Besides, the T-38 is not an "F-5 variant". The F-5 is a T-38 variant. Other than the 2nd seat / multicrew issue which has already been pointed out in this thread, there are also significant aerodynamic differences between both aircraft (such as the LERXs for example - not even the F-5A had those) which means a completely new flight model would be in order. It would be an entirely new module indeed, not just a "$10 addon".

Something to keep in mind, is that you don't get lock tones from airborne radars in the F-4 either (which has been confirmed as being correct), and both systems are from generally the same era.

Back when the F-14 launched, a lot of people had problems with the SoH BVR IA mission, and IronMike stepped in and explained how he tackled that mission. He gave tips on how to give the AWG-9 the best possible chance of picking up both MiG-29s, and how to put yourself in the best position for high-pK Phoenix shots. This helped a lot with understanding the AWG-9 / Phoenix combination. Perhaps he or someone else at HB can put aside a bit of time to do something similar for the F-4? I bet that would help a lot of people

I couldn't agree more

Yes that's the proper way to deal with that A good few years ago my boyfriend at the time wanted to buy an Africa Twin and have me riding pillion. I refused, saying I'd rather buy my own bike. And here we are