scitaborea

The Huey is every bit as good as the Mi8. The Mi8 has more going on in the cockpit, is larger, and requires more patience to fly as it is more susceptible to VRS and you really have to pay attention to your descent rate in a hover. Both will challenge you and infuriate you at first, but once you get the feel for hovering and learn their eccentricities, they will also be immensely rewarding! You really cannot go wrong with either and buying one will undoubtedly make you want to get the other. Both are excellent modules and the pinnacle of helicopter simulation. Caveat - there is the multicrew aspect that has yet to be implemented, just don't purchase either thinking this feature will be added anytime soon.

I wholeheartedly agree and do not mean to sound ungrateful in the least. I LOVE your guides and find them immensely helpful. I also enjoy reading and learning from the manuals themselves. I see a lot of questions asked around the forums and elsewhere that can be answered with a quick search and reference of said manuals. Apologies. Thank you for all of the work you put into these!

From the NATOPS: 4.1.7 Weight Limitations. The maximum allowable gross weights are: Location Pounds Field Takeoff 51,900 Landing (Flared) 39,000 FCLP/Touch-and-go/Barricade Before AFC 029 30,700 After AFC 029 33,000 Carrier Catapult 51,900 Landing Unrestricted 33,000 Restricted 34,000 Also, be careful to not touchdown with too little descent rate as "the WOW switch may not actuate immediately. In this case, the throttles cannot be reduced to ground idle and may be inadvertently left in the flight idle position, thereby reducing the deceleration rate and extending the length of the landing rollout. "

Great pictures! Love it!

Stall "speed" is simply exceeding the critical angle of attack. Many aircraft (especially GA) will give you the stall speeds, but they are the same - at that speed you will exceed the critical angle of attack. The optimum angle of attack for landing is on speed (The donut and the bracket). Don't think in speeds and focus on AOA. For landing, lower your gear and flaps under 250. Then trim for on speed aoa (trim so that hands off, the VV - Velocity Vector stays inside, near center of the bracket), once you do use very little stick for pitch, control your descent and speed with throttle. You can descend in the pattern as quickly as you want / need. Once you are on short final, adjust your power to touch down ~500fpm. This seems to be good for the Hornet on land and the boat. If I'm a little high, I will put my VV a little short of the runway, then as I get closer, I'll cushion with a little power so that my VV moves to the landing point and my vertical speed slows to ~500fpm. Jettisoning ordinance and dumping fuel will lower your weight and also your landing speed (governed by AOA). You simply land and take off faster with more weight. Honestly, my throttle never stops moving. Constant little (sometimes big) adjustments. Velocity Vector not to be confused with Vertical Velocity Indicator Also, the Velocity Vector is the airplane symbol. The nose points at the -vv- looking symbol. The difference between the Velocity Vector and that -vv- symbol is basically your angle of attack. The actual angle of attack is the measurement between the chord line of the wing and the relative wind (velocity vector / direction and speed of flight).

On speed AOA, but watch your descent rate. I typically land the Hornet with a Vertical Velocity of 300 to 400 fpm. That is a bit heavy. You could also jettison and/or dump some fuel, switch aft of the throttle, near your left thigh. On the checklist page on the DDI, it gives your aircraft weight, too. The above 300 too 400fpm is what I had been using for landing on runways. I was curious what I land on the boat with, but never really noticed because my eyes are always ball and lineup. I stole a few glances and after boltering a few times because I took my eyes off the ball, I finally trapped a few while looking at my fpm at touchdown. Landing on the carrier, I am typically between 500 to 600fpm on proper glideslope and on speed AOA (of course). So, check your landing weights, landing with fuel and ordinance is pretty heavy, but more importantly watch your descent rate. I checked NATOPS and was not able to find any documented max landing weights with a quick search. I selected the loadout with 2 sidewinders, 4 mk82s and 2 fuel then took off and landed with a landing weight of ~43000 lbs. I kept my descent rate between 300 and 400fpm and it did fine.

Chuck's guides are amazing and I read most of them. However, all of this information is already in the manual, just condensed. The FA18 manual is an excellent resource that explains everything you need to know. Take the time, reference it and you will learn a lot!

The Yak 55M is one of my all time favorite planes. I love seeing them next to much smaller Extras, Pitts, etc at various acro competitions. And who doesn't love a big radial? Especially that Russian M14P!! I will be perfectly happy with the Yak 52.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=210350 For the instant action missions, Wags said it's set to 55X. For missions that you create, the Stennis currently defaults to 1X. It can be changed in the mission editor by clicking on the Stennis, then "Advanced (Waypoint Actions)" and edit.

You can find the TACAN in the Advanced (Waypoint Actions) window below the waypoints of the Stennis. You can then edit it and change it from 1 to whatever you wish.

Thanks!

The coremods and mods folder for the Hornet is FA-18C. This should be the name of the folder for the kneeboard as well, however it is not currently working for me. C:\Users\mypc\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Kneeboard\FA-18C Has anyone been able to get their kneeboard files to work yet? Edit: Thanks to the thread linked below! The path is: C:\Users\mypc\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Kneeboard\FA-18C_hornet

Even the derailed cat thread has derailed. :music_whistling: I'm not going to say dogs are better than cats, but if a dog were a taildragger and a cat were a nosedragger, I would go with the dog!

Honestly, reading the comments here might just be more entertaining than actually flying the hornet. It'll be here soon™. I think one thing to realize while some of you rapid fire post is that ED is most likely working hard to get it out the door (so to speak) and doesn't have time to answer every single impatient customer. The change log has been posted, you know it is imminent. Just relax and wait for it to be ready.

I just tried the P-51, 109 and the Dora (neglecting the Spitfire because of its known tailwheel issues). All three had their special auto rudder unchecked and take off assist fully to the left. It seems to me that this has more to do with some sort rudder assist as mentioned previously in the thread than with the actual torque. After take off, I pulled power to idle in all three. Each immediately rolled to the right with the lack of power (torque), then when applying full power, it would seemingly stabilize. Clearly, pulling power to idle and quickly applying full power this quickly would not be recommended (as landing the 109 without an engine following the test would emphasize), however doing so seems to corroborate the idea that there is some form of artificial rudder stabilizing at work despite the options being selected otherwise. Perhaps it might have something to do with torque settings, as well, though the sharp rolling tendency when pulling power to idle seems to suggest that it is at least modeled.

wx = weather

My thoughts have not changed since I wrote that. I do agree with the majority of your last points, with the exception "this can be a slippery path with no end". I think the artists at Eagle Dynamics can come up with an average female pilot the same as they have with the male pilots, if they wish to do so. As I said above, however, I'm fine either way. Looking down in my VR cockpit and seeing gloves and boots really doesn't affect my enjoyment of flying in DCS.

Absolutely beautiful video! Cannot wait to fly it!

No, the gist of the OP is to open dialogue of adding female voices and possibly pilots and to have a forum where all are welcome to discuss DCS, regardless of gender (in this case). She clearly has had several instances where she did not feel welcome. After reading many of these comments, it is easy to see why this is the case. Many of you have been very respectful, but there is a handful who are beyond any sense of respectful behavior in any community or online forum. You may not agree, you may fervently disagree with the whole premise of including females. Some have already stated that they do agree with the idea of female voices, even pilots, but disagree with how the OP was presented. Regardless, be respectful and courteous and discuss it in such a manner that doesn't attack each other. Anytime someone mentions that they are female on any kind of gaming forum, this kind of thing erupts. I was a moderator for another game forum during such an event and it astounded me the way some seemingly normal people responded and devolved to unrecognizable levels of common humanity. We all love flying. We all love flight sims and the potential that DCS has aspired to over the years. The minority of you who are so threatened by someone other than your ideal infringing upon that are just that, the minority. It's nice to see others who are welcoming and, while some may disagree, they do so respectfully.

Not having this has not deterred me or my daughter from enjoying DCS, however it would be a nice feature if time and resources allow.

Totally agree with this!

To be perfectly honest, it is those types of reactions and responses that keep me from posting on most forums. I agree that it shouldn't matter either way, that being the point of equality. I prefer to just stay out of it rather than deal with people like that. Life is far too short to put up with rude people. I have enjoyed DCS for many years without ever having participated in the forums. I do not think this is what Elysian Angel means, though. She is speaking equally about the forums and the community as well as the game. The sad fact, though, is that there will always be jerks in every crowd whether that be online or in real life. Confronting them enables them more. I find it best to simply ignore them.

I have been flying the A10C since 2011 and own almost every module (minus the Viggen, C101, and combined arms). I have never bothered posting on the forum, only using it to read, research, and learn. I am also a private pilot (tailwheel and complex endorsements) working on my instrument. The fact is that we are very much here. To assume that that girls don't fly flight sims is merely that, an assumption. My ten year old daughter and I regularly fly the L39C together and we both just bought the Hornet. She is a total nut for the Blue Angels and cannot wait to have her own! Maybe listen to liveATC sometime and realize just how many female pilots and controllers there are in the real world. Personally, not having female voices has never bothered me as I rarely use the DCS controllers. Once they look into reworking the ATC, I do think it would be nice if the pilot could select to have either a male or female voice and throw in a few random voices (a woman or two) for the controllers. I have never had an issue with the pilot bodies. I am totally fine looking down and seeing gloved hands on the controls and boots on the pedals. Happy Flying! ;) :P :pilotfly: