Jenrick

Not that it helps, but I have the exact same question.

I don't have red flag, so I can't speak to that. Mjolnir is a good starter campaign IMO. It doesn't ask anything crazy of you, and the mission progression is sensible in what you're being asked to do. Now it doesn't hold your hand, you'll need to clear on what switches to set to what when using weapons, know how to turn on the radar etc. However with either the FM or Chuck's Viggen guide, it's easily handled. Mjolnir is a decent tutorial-like campaign, and without giving away anything, unless you do something stupid (such as controlled flight into terrain), it's relatively low risk and relatively lax in mission completion (ie no failing because you were 15 seconds off ToT, etc). So for me it was a great place to start after going through the training missions.

Sorry for the late reply. I have never ran into any of the issues you've mentioned on a fresh start of DCS (aside from the RENSA, which I have never used). If I restart the mission or click fly-again I have all kinds of weird issues, so I just stopped doing that and don't have problems.

Rockets (well western ones) are area effect weapons, I don't have anything handy with a CEP on it, but I'd guess 50m probably. You shoot a bunch of them to hopefully hit something. Off the top of my head I don't have a clue what the max range indication on the reticle would be, my guess is probably where they rockets still have enough velocity to provide a reasonable firing solution. For most US weapons systems with dynamic range cue'ing it's normally max range to min range, with halfway being optimal/ideal range. You can absolutely fire out of range, and if you wanted to spend the time you could make or find a chart for the manual reticle depression and shoot them from WAY far back, in level flight.

Range bar would be for break-X (ie don't fly into the ground trying to line up the shot).

Remember real trim simply takes pressure off the stick, you literally just relax your hand/arm as you trim. There is really no way to accurately reflect that in a non-ffb stick, as the stick stays in place so you know where it is (sort of like how your gas pedal works in cruise control on most cars). You don't fly by trim in a real AC (well, okay you shouldn't but some people get in a bad habit) you fly with the stick , and use trim to reduce your fatigue from having to hold it in a certain position for a long period of time. You put the stick/yoke where it needs to be, and the trim so that it's comfortable. On a non-ffb joystick when we trim it's add trim, move stick, add trim, move stick, etc. until we're back to center. If you want the experience of holding the stick in place for a bit I guess you could add a delay to a trim button, but honestly the end result is the same the stick is held in that position until your trim it some other way. I get you want more trim resolution, with no time in an F-5 I can't say if that's realistic or not. What I can say is realistic, is that the trim feature should allow me to quickly and easily set the desired stick/yoke position to allow me to relax and make minimal movements of the stick to fly the profile I want (whether that's straight and level, or a 45 degree dive on a target). Real on stick/yoke power trim is super easy to use, and super intuitive. The current way trim is handled by pretty much every flight sim for non-ffb joysticks, is not. Is having a single button "accurate" in the sense I pressed and held a button for 2.5 seconds and then held it a different direction for .25 seconds to get level while not moving your stick? Well no. It sure is a lot closure to how you actually feel using powered on stick trim than the current click - relax stick - click - relax stick - click - relax stick - click - relax stick - click - relax stick - click - relax stick dang it too far, click the other way and so on. All the while you'er bobbing around in the air like a drunken duck. There are already plenty of simplifications and "usability" enhancements to flight sims that dramatically effect combat. No ones strapping a 50 lb weight plate to you head hooked up to a magnet to simulate G's when you're using TrackIR or VR, to go to the far extreme from the get go. So why not have a little bit of usability in trim particularly since for 95% of the non -ww2 aircraft available for DCS (that is totally a guess, I didn't bother to do the mass on the non-ww2 stable of AC to see what the exact percentage are) it wouldn't change anything as they already have AP and FBW.

So a couple things to test: 1) Without trimming (ie total hand flying), can you keep the F-5 level (within +/-5 degrees and +/- 50') when in a normal flight range (say 10K, mach .6-.7) with no weather? Shoot for about a minute. If you can't then you probably need to check your controls. Real world this is MUCH easier (well in daytime) as your vestibular system will tell you if you're titling in some way and your eyes will confirm that, leading to very little need to check the instruments (no wind remember). 2) Once you're stable can you trim the A/C to level (within +/-5 degrees and +/- 50') in a normal flight range, with no weather and fly that way hands off for a minute? If so I think you're about as close to good as you're going to get. True hands free level flight for long periods is not something that was usually designed into short range fighters back in the days of hydraulics and cables. Having absolutely 0 stick time in an F-5 (I'd sell a kidney if that was an option), I can't say if it was beautifully harmonized or slightly less so. One thing I would really like to see in DCS for those of us who don't use FFB joysticks (so I'd say most of the crowd), is a button to set trim just like the KA-50 had. Is this a "realistic" feature in terms of having 1 button? No, absolutely not. However real trim is so I can relax pressure on the stick/yoke instead of having to hold it. You don't dial in trim and relax the stick, dial in, relax, etc. Getting the AC in the attitude I want, pressing a button and then being able to relax is actually pretty dang close to the actual experience of using trim.

I haven't had quite the same amount of trouble, but if you are reloading the mission or selecting fly again that can cause all kinds of trouble. Something to do with various states having to be reset each time the plane is reloaded, and not all of them have been properly caught in the code so far to get them working correctly.

I have that happen in the F-5 and the AV-8 off the top of my head. I think it's actually something under the hood regarding the runway mesh and how it interfaces when the tire smacks into on a hard landing.

There's another one in the works?! Well I am delighted to hear that:thumbup: Keep up the good work, and the progress on the Viggen. Absolutely one of my best spur of the moment purchases.

I just wanted to say I'm enjoying the campaign quite a bit! It's a good stair stepped introduction to the jet, well produced, and of reasonable challenge. Great work guys!

Okay so if you're by more than 1 (the number to be determined by testing) lockable targets you loose tone? Now are we talking the general "growl" or the actual lock tone?

Alright, after an uninstall-reinstall and rebinding my controls radar bombing is functioning as manual describes. I still find it an odd design decision that you can't use the radar to select a return and pass it along as the radar bombing point, but who knows what the Swedes and their transistors were thinking at the time. Radar bombing would have some utility against a LARGE radar return, such as ships, possibly large vehicle formations, and if DCS ever models buildings having a radar reflection. It is VERY hit or miss (mostly miss) as you're ripping along at M.8 so even small alignment and timing errors have big consequences. I can see it as a last ditch way to deploy ordinance if the weather is soup.

Just so I'm clear, so I can see if I have the same issue: After a period of time (how long?) the AIM-9 stops emitting the search tone (or the lock on tone, or both)?? Does the tone return if you do something or is it permanently lost?

I'll play with this more. There's a point where you're supposed to go UNSAFE, and I'm curious if that does anything. Part of the issues is that the DCS manual doesn't have a great break down of each mode and how it works. Also thank you for the docs, good reading. The main issue I have, is that manual is VERY unclear on what is supposed to be happening. I'm guessing in the real world flight manual there's much more information, or at least a chart of High Drag bombs X alt and Y speed, Low Drag bombs P alt Q speed, etc.

So it may be a translation issue with the flight manual, but the procedure makes little sense. Basically you turn on the radar, and fly until the mark on the screen is over the radar return of the target. Fine, easy enough, but what is the profile for this (altitude, airspeed, angle, etc)? It's trial and error right now, so it's tremendously inaccurate for me at the moment. Considering you can update your nav points with the radar to adjust for drift, you'd be FAR more accurate just bumping your target way point with a radar nav update and bombing in Nav point bombing. I would have assumed you'd select your target via the radar, designate it, and then steer the AC into acceptable parameters. The lack of precision in the radar would be the major issue with precision strikes. Apparently this is not the case, and it's VERY rudimentary currently (no clue if this realistic or not). -Jenrick

I plan on picking it up, as I don't have the Mig-15, Mig-21, or the L-39. I've been interested, but on the fence, so this is an opportunity to try them out.

Don't forget that real trim in an AC is designed to minimize the force required on the stick/yoke to easy fatigue while flying for long periods of time. Real world you get the AC level with external reference cues (ie the horizon) in day time (and the instruments at night), and then trim to reduce force on the stick. Real world, you'd level out, trim to something comfortable and make very minor corrections to pitch with the stick almost without thinking about it. Sort of like when you drive, you get in the your lane, and you stay there without having to really think about it. Why do you need to fly hands off for long periods? You're not taking sextant shots, updating charts, etc. You're in a short range high performance fighter. One of the biggest transgressions sim pilots make in real AC (and I know from personal experience) is paying WAY too much attention to the instruments over what's outside the window. If I can see the horizon and we're level do I need to stare at the ADI? Conversely most simmers have little trouble picking up the instrument scan required to fly IFR.

So I was playing around with Nav point bombing tonight. If you have your nav point set directly on the target, and you follow procedure you're pretty much guaranteed a shack. Pretty dang accurate. I'll mess with radar bombing tomorrow, as I have only taken a cursory look at it so far

On a fixed target you can do a radar or nav point bombing run using standard non guided bombs. Not precision in they way we think of it now (LGB/JDAM/etc), but for an area target (say warehouse complex, port etc,) it would work reasonably well with a good flight plan. -Jenrick

I use a little forward pressure on the stick to keep the nose down until I hit 270 km/h. Then I relax it and the Viggen flies itself off the runway. I had the same issue you're talking about till I changed it up a little. -Jenrick

I worked in the gaming industry for a few years (Acclaim Entertainment, QA Lead). Language localization done poorly is easy. Done well is hard. Good voice acting in the first place is an actual commercial product that costs money. Bad voice acting can be worse then no voice acting at all. So if you're hiring talent in a non-English speaking area you have to find someone who can actually do voice work AND speaks the language. That's hard, really hard. What you usually get is someone who doesn't speak the language, and you try to fake it. To a native speaker this is incredibly apparent, to everyone else it sounds great. Secondly the script needs to be written by a native speaker of the language you're trying to localize. Idioms, terminology, where sentences and phrases naturally pause, etc all are extremely difficult to do well without a native speaker. Computer or dictionary translations usually fail badly at being correct. Unless you have a native speaker (or a really fluent non-native, and I mean really fluent) on your dev team how do you review your scripting? Language localization services are big money business in the gaming industry, and they need to be as it's not cheap to do anything close to a good job. -Jenrick

MULT is the # of stations that will deploy ordinance QTY is the # of bombs that will drop from each station So QTY 2 MULT 2 will drop 2 bombs from 2 stations for 4 bombs total. With the intervalometer not working currently, all 4 will pickle off close to each other. With it working it SHOULD space them out to the given interval. So for example if have 3 MK 82's on 2 different pylons, I can drop QTY 3 MULT 1 and clear one pylon completely, or QTY 1 MULT 2, and drop 1 bomb from each pylon. QTY 2 MULT 2 would be 2 bombs from each pylon. -Jenrick

The Harrier currently is more then "playable" and realistically has about the same functionality as a real world A-4 or A-7, plus a kinda working targeting pod. If you step back from dropping PGM's on everything and do some bombing the old fashioned way you are really only missing the intervalometer for weapons release spacing, and the ARBS being able to following a moving target (so an early A-4 in that regard). So feature complete, heck no. Still a heck of a lot of fun to fly and fight, absolutely. -Jenrick

It's not impotent, not anymore so then an F-86 vs a Bf 109, or say a F-14 vs an A6M2. Yes both of the prop jobs turn better, but I still know which jet I'd prefer to be in. If you play to the other guys strength you are doing it wrong. You don't turn against a fighter that can out turn you, and you try to avoid it with a fighter that has parity with you. The opponent can climb better then you can, then don't get in that match up. The F-5's advantage is the big E, energy. It has an almost 400 knot top speed advantage, so you use that. Have a higher energy state at all times. They can't climb with you, or dive with you at that point, meaning you can extend at your leisure dictating the fight completely. The Mig is 100% defensive, all it takes is one mistake and they are yours. All you have to do is not make a huge glaring mistake (like getting slow or being pulled into a turning fight) and you can do it as long as your fuel lasts. For boom and zoom you come in at a significant E advantage, whether that's climbing with the throttle in full burner and being 200 kts faster then the other guys Vne, or dropping in from up high like a hawk on a mouse and diving away 400 knots faster then they are. If you come in with a comparable energy state you aren't booming and zooming, you are walking into a knife fight (bad plan). If the Mig is already throttled up, then don't play until you have a E advantage, throttles up (burner if needed) on and extend until you get speed/height/both. IF (big if) you can catch them at a major E disadvantage (say bouncing a Mig on final, where they are low AND slow), then you can successfully pounce without needing to already be at high speed, though you still need to have HIGHER speed and altitude so you can trade both of those to make room to escape. Make no mistake a good (from way higher, and way faster) boom and zoom is straight up premeditated murder. Done correctly the other guy has almost 0 chance of escape, and should never even see it coming. It is by far the least "sporting" method of shooting an enemy down with guns, it is also incredibly effective. A fighter is meant to be good at killing enemy aircraft, not at providing a sporting contest to allow the two pilots to measure their stick and rudder skills. Treat the F-5 as a less pointy F-104 in this match up and you won't be far off how to win it. -Jenrick