Lace

I voted British FGR for a number of reasons. Firstly, I am British. Secondly, the UK is hugely underrepresented in terms of 'modern' aircraft. Hawk - dead, Eurofighter - German version, Harrier - American version, Gazelle - French version. Spitfire & Mossie - WWII. I would love to see an accurate UK version of any aircraft depicted in DCS, so until the Tornado GR1 is announced, I'm pinning my hopes on this. Complete with standard issue RAFG overcast and drizzle please.

Show the Apache drivers how it's done.

I'll buy two.

It's not about one-upping anyone, it's correcting simple misunderstandings - your OP (which you have since edited) claimed adverse yaw was a result of p-factor, made no mention of parasitic or induced drag. You called spoilers slats. There are a lot of pilots who also play DCS, and having a basic understanding of aerodynamic principles will help you and improve your flying. I've read some gross errors of thinking by non-pilot gamers on this forums (one even claimed that the rudder was to correct the difference between course and heading in crosswind conditions!! - imagine a real pilot flying a whole leg with the aircraft uncoordinated, just so the nose was pointed in the 'right' direction!). It is easy for novices to pick up this stuff and assume it is lore because the post count of the poster implies some level of knowledge or experience (often incorrectly). Anyone reporting a technical or handling issue should at least have an understanding of that issue in reality. I learn things on this forum all the time, and am happy to do so, but I am also happy to explain and point out errors of understanding if I see them. It is not meant to shame anyone, so apologies if you took it that way, but we should all be striving to improve our understanding. Aerodynamics and aircraft design is a complicated field, and as with many complicated fields, there is often more than one way of achieving the same result.

Flaps increase lift by increasing the angle of incidence of the wing. It is essentially rotating the wing backwards about the main spar in the lateral plane.

Spoilers are designed primarily to reduce lift, not increase drag. That is what air brakes do. Granted there is some crossover and some applications have a combined function, but as I stated earlier, the majority of your drag is induced as a function of lift. Less lift=less drag. I'm not an F14 expert by any means but I believe their spoilers can work as vertical speed adjusters by function of the DLC to allow for correction on landing by directly dumping lift, without reducing aircraft airspeed - they are not adding drag.

Another point of order here - spoilers do not necessarily increase total drag, they increase parasitic drag, but by virtue of the reduced lift they 'spoil', they reduce induced drag. generally less lift=less drag. Spoilers are used to reduce lift without affecting the aircraft speed, otherwise frequent roll inputs would necessitate power changes to correct.

Agreed, but that is a completely different question. That is down to EDs flight models, and not real world physics.

Just thought I'd pull this point. Adverse yaw is not a result of the propulsion method and is not necessarily more prevalent in props than jets. It is caused by the downgoing aileron causing more drag as a result of the increased lift, and the upgoing aileron reducing drag and lift. This is why you will yaw outside the turn, rather than into it, and it is not a product of P-factor. It can be eliminated or reduced by various methods, such as differential ailerons (i.e. the downgoing moves less than the upgoing), spoiler deployment, or as I suspect is the cause of your confusion - a flight control (FBW, pilot gets a vote type) system as fitted to modern jets, which will automatically counter any adverse yaw and is why the effect is not generally witnessed in those aircraft. Apologies if you are already aware of this and I'm teaching you to suck eggs, but the wording of that sentence grabbed my attention.

Like you say, different times. I sometimes fly with an ex-Aéronavale Super Étendard pilot. I'll have to ask him next time - he's still a big smoker.

Well, that was a surprise... South Atlantic who?

I use a lot of nose down trim, pretty much through the full flight regime. Helps with over rotating too.

Below your left elbow, waay at the back. How French. Seriously, what is it?

Planning. One pass, haul ass. No need to loiter - this isn't an A-10.

I can manage fine in VR. It is a push pin, below the ejection loop between your legs. You need a mouse scroll to 'wind' it out. It looks like this but with a 'remove before flight' streamer:

There are arguments for and against. On the one hand - an experienced (or even trained but inexperienced) pilot will have far more cockpit time than your average DCS'er, running various drills and scans so that most operations will be second nature and switches will quickly fall to hand when required. On the other side of the argument, they will also be dealing with additional stress and more importantly, manoeuvring G-forces, something notably absent in even the most realistic PC sims. This means either reducing loading, or making slower, more deliberate movements, not unlike moving a mouse to the correct switch in terms of the time taken to interact with a control.

I imagine you don't. You want to get all three wheels down sharpish so you can start slowing with the braking 'chute. Of course, if your SOP says no 'chute, then aerobraking will make more sense.

I really like it so far. Simple systems, good (but not fool proof) handling, excellent performance. Dynamically similar to the MiG-21 and F-5E, but with more Gallic charm. Good selection of weapons but no hand-holding CCIP/CCRP or IAMs. Just good old fashioned, disciplined, by-the-numbers bombing. Easy to learn, hard to do well. Not really touched the A/A and RADAR yet, but very satisfying as an 80's analogue A/G platform.

Rift S, 3080 Laptop, i9-11980HK, non-Steam. Runs as smoothly as anything else I have. Better than the Apache (worst performance IMHO), only flown SP in Caucasus and SoH so far. Love the RADAR hood in VR.

That is exactly how I play. No additional mouse/trackball or VR controllers. Just LMB/RMB/mouse scroll mapped to HOTAS buttons. For any switch manipulation which is not natively on the HOTAS (gear, MFD buttons, etc.) simply look at them and click. I feel a lot of people overcomplicate playing in VR. This approach works brilliantly. I'm sure you already know, but it is possible to double (or even more) the number of HOTAS buttons by using a modifier - this means that non-HOTAS, non-clickable functions can also be assigned to your HOTAS. For example, with the Viper stick, the trim hat is the LMB/RMB/Scroll up/Scroll down mouse when unmodified, but when holding a modifier button on the throttle it is the trim hat. 'mod+CMS Push' toggles the kneeboard, 'mod+CMS Right' is next page, 'mod+CMS Left' is previous page, etc. Views, NVG, Eject, Esc, VR Centre, can all be mapped to physical HOTAS buttons. I've attached an example of one of my setups. The point is, there is no reason ever to reach for the mouse or keyboard when flying in VR.

Agreed, would be far more useable as a kneeboard page, rather than by the ESC menu.

I really hope the recce element plays a part in the dynamic campaign, giving a genuine purpose to target recce and BDA missions. Rather than just being fed intel, there is the requirement to either assign or fly these missions before and after a strike.

Exactly this. There is no need to leave the HOTAS as long as you map LMB/RMB/Mouse scroll.

^^^ The point of VR is that you don't need all of those superfluous tablets. You look, you click. What can't you click on in VR (apart from HOTAS functions which are catered for by your physical HOTAS)? But I get that it's not for everyone.

Is the correct answer.