bfr

They should do an F-111 module though, just so we can compare They were lovely looking things. I saw them a handful of times prior to being retired (been past the old RAF Upper Heyford a few times back in the day) and one of my brothers said he was practically run over by one on low level exercise in northern England when he was out on a big cross-country hike.

It would be fun to see these ladies mingle (not introduced) in a room full of pilots of respective aircraft and see how long it takes them to catch on.

True. Already seen replies to the Razbam tweet to the effect of 'what about this bomb or that missile or this other bomb', as if this'll be the final cut rather than the starting point of a long old road (if almost every other modern era module in existence isn't indicative). Going off what was announced (the ambiguity about what RWR there is aside) there is a fair bit there to learn and play with to begin with. Hopefully the pace of adding new toys in following updates is steady.

Its going back a few years but DID's F-22 Total Air War had an autopilot mode for AAR which could take over from about pre-contact position. I forget if any of the other DID titles that came before it had a similar optional assist.

To be honest I just read 'EA' and 'out of EA' as 'there will be more to come' and 'there might be more to come'

Yes, both the official and Chucks Guide manuals have their uses and I still use both even on the more mature modules.

I probably missed that by about a year (I think I started PC gaming in about 91 or 92).

Ah OK. Yes, that's possible. Can't remember if it has happened in official manuals but certainly I recall occasional placeholders in Chucks Guides.

I'm struggling to ever recall a case of currently unimplemented features being in the manuals for any module. It wouldn't make any sense to do so and it'd be somewhat tricky to do anyway as how do you get screenshots etc for something that doesn't currently exist? The manuals just usually get fleshed out as new stuff is added and released (sometimes a bit after with video 'how to' guides at time of update release to bridge the gap).

Yeah, I get what the division of labour is in real life. After all, if the guy in the back wasn't needed/useful then he wouldn't be there. The point is whether you'll be able to do a passable job in DCS without either an AI/human back seater or constantly having to hop in the back yourself. From what i've read it seems you should at least get by from the front seat in the F-15 (perhaps having to switch some things on in the back pre-take off) for most scenarios but I expect the F-4 will be a bit more like the F-14 where there are things you genuinely can't do without some kind of assistance/hopping in the back.

Yeah, its a tedious hassle (i've changed my HOTAS recently so I am feeling the pain right now) but one you mercifully shouldn't have to do on anything like a regular basis. The other obvious problem with having 'set once, fly many' in the settings is some users don't have everything precisely the same from aircraft to aircraft (e.g. your pitch and roll axis might well be the same for everything but not necessarily the case for axis deadzones and curves). And some areas are similar but not the same (e.g. F18 flaps have 3 distinct settings, a lot of other planes are simple up/down).

Thank you very much, I didn't realise that axis performed both functions! I will give it a try. I noticed the FOV button did multiple DDI pages (Mav, TPod) but never thought to try that axis with the zoom function.

When I still had CH gear then the pots weren't that hard/expensive to buy new ones for, nor difficult to change over yourself.

Yeah, it'd be nice to have something more dedicated. Yes you can map HOTAS to DDI buttons (and I have done for things like targeting pod zoom) but the big gotcha with that is it only really works on the assumption you're always using a specific DDI (e.g. right DDI). And in the targeting pod case for the F18 then one of the zoom buttons is different depending on whether you're carrying the ATFFLIR or LITENING (which i've managed to configure but means using an additional HOTAS 2 way switch to select which pod i'm lugging around).

Yeah, i've been doing similar (but use Joy2Key rather than Joystick Gremlin) as I have a VKB stick. Plus I could just reassign existing mappings to new buttons from my old throttle config set up the same way, which is saving a fair amount of time. EDIT: I ended up trying Joystick Gremlin as well and have started using that now as being able to do multiple things when the switch is thrown was useful e.g. as well as changing to another set of mappings, I can use it to set the aircraft master mode (e.g. press 1 when I switch to my AA specific configuration, or 2 when I go to AG). A limitation on Joy2Key was it'd change the stick config but not let you do anything else in response to that event.

Fair. I don't think I'll be going "well, this is dragging on a bit" until we're towards the end of June and it still hasn't dropped.

Undoubtedly 2 heads would be better than 1, although even with an AI back seater (as and when one comes) I expect its still going to require a fair amount of work on the human pilot's part to get things 'just so' unless they make a major step change above what we've seen in other modules. And yes, i've seen the video you mention (yes it is the NAVFLIR demo) and nothing looks any more daunting than flying the Viper or Hornet for a comparable scenario.

I've done similar but with Joy2Key (and previously with the bundled CH software until it became unsupported and flaky). For most modules I own I have 3 mapping profiles (one for take-off & landing, one for A/A, one for A/G) and can cycle through the respective set of 3 with one button on my stick. Switching to a different module's set of configs is also a one click operation. Very flexible and hasn't ever caused me any major headaches.

Yeah, I'm not a big fan of Jester either, although i probably need to dive into it again to see if its improved any. I believe the mudhen will allow the vast majority of things to be done from the front seat and won't be as dependent on the backseat to fight. Front v back seat workload will also likely hold me back on the F-4E until I've seen a bit more about it.

I'm not sure why you mention 'easy mode for DCS' as I didn't suggest any such thing. It would be a very specific assist in what is a pain point for a lot of users. A game that already has quite a few assists/cheats in it should you wish to take advantage of them or not.

You'd have to ask ED why they ditched 'game mode'. Was it too much hassle to continue to support? Was hardly anyone using it? Clearly a decent amount of interest exists for some kind of AAR assist as this thread and many other previous ones testify. And you look at some third party campaigns that've adapted to those who struggle with AAR and they've adapted those so people can get by without actually hooking up. And yes, repeating the line up lights a la Supercarrier would be a start. And to be honest, i've no opposition to a configurable auto-refuel mode that does some/most of the work for you once you've formed up with the tanker. Certainly there is a wider balance to be struck of convenience v realism but I fail to see how softening the considerable learning curve for newbies or people who can't pour hours and hours into the game to practice is harmful. It might make the difference between someone buying into DCS or not and more sales/users is good for everyone.

And plenty of other sim titles have various levels of aids that soften what can be a considerable learning curve (e.g. driving games with ideal line/braking indicators, gear change and traction/braking behaviour assists). If you want a slightly dumbed down experience in some areas for single player then you can have it. If you want a hardcore-only experience in multiplayer or campaigns you create then you can enforce what is/isn't available to users (as you already can in some areas of the game that could be considered as cheats, like highlighting enemy units, certain view and map modes etc).

Jaguar would be potentially good fun. I'd have to seriously improve my AAR skills if a Lightning ever came out as you'd presumably be spending an awful lot of time around tankers. Buccaneer would be great fun and hopefully would be another jet for carrier ops.

I think both the GBU-15 and AGM-130 were on Razbam's list for the F-15E, as well as the datalink pod (which is different to the one in the Hornet module). Although at what point they appear is anyone's guess. And like you say, buddy control is a whole different ball game and probably well down the priority list.

Good question and I can honestly say i've never tried. IIRC in real-life you could "buddy guide" a Walleye via the DL pod so the same might well hold true for a SLAM-ER, but no idea if its a capability implemented in the game for either weapon. I'd assume not as surely the channel selection as implemented wouldn't work very well if several weapons from multiple aircraft are in the air at once within pod range and a non-launching aircraft tried to "tune in" on any given contended channel?