Tiger-II

Thanks! I read it worked that way but wasn't sure. :thumbup:

Hmm - I'm not understanding anything of what you just wrote. :helpsmilie:

I did. Read my quote in my previous reply. He says it was 0.12 now 0.15. So he was simply looking at the wrong missile?

Great! No more cheating.

Hi, Is it correct that TWS RADAR gate size can not be changed with HOTAS RIGHT? It works with RWS mode, but not TWS. Instead, the MFD button must be pressed.

Hi, A new problems seems to have appeared in the last update. RADAR is in RWS, at 60 degree scan. Target is "soft locked", and the gates narrow, but they remain centered and ignore the cursors. If the target is off to the side outside of the gate limits, the target lock appears to be dropped. The target must be dropped, the RADAR mode cycled to unfreeze the gate, the gate resized to 25, then slewed over the target and the target re-locked. This happens any time a target is designated in RWS 60 scan mode.

WOW. NICE. I figure about a 3% increase in climb efficiency, and about a 5% increase in cruise. I think the wing tanks are carrying less drag, too. At 33000 ft with an air-to-air combat load (800L wing tanks) I had to throttle back to 90% to maintain Mach 0.83. Previously it was 97.6%. I calculate a cruise fuel burn of 1360 lbs/hr.

Wow... so you're saying she now has more performance than she already did? I need to go run some numbers... I figure at 35000 ft with an air-to-air combat load at MIL she was burning about 3200 lbs/hr. Is this figure improved (more efficient)? I burned back the other night 160 NM at MAX AB at 53000 ft, covering 160 NM at Mach 1.4, and burned around 1700 lbs of fuel (that included a max climb from 3000 ft). I only had pylons and SPJ left on the jet.

So it was changed since release??

Interesting.

Is it ACCURATE though? If the SD-10 battery can last 6 hours, I expect it to last 6 hours; not 10 seconds for "balance", or any other arcade game reason. I thought Deka had good data on this, and that data said 100 seconds? So why reduce it suddenly?

You can STO up to MTOM, but you need to be at 20000 lbs or lighter to VTOL (4500 lbs fuel and two bombs, TGP, and gun pod). Between 20k lbs and 24 k lbs you can do what is called a "short vertical landing". You can't arrest the rate of descent, but it is slow enough to land safely. It's a super-slow forward landing with ~20 kts forward airspeed. Above 24000 lbs you need to do rolling takeoff and landing.

I mean I think it works (for weapon guidance) but it just doesn't appear to work when you look at HUD symbology, etc.

0.75 NM = 4557 ft. A 3 degree glideslope = 238 ft, so it's about twice as high as necessary. Isn't the glideslope 2 degrees on the carrier?

Just say the sale is expected to end imminently as it is due for release today (hopefully).

Be sure you know how to make a lasing turn. If you over-fly the target you are likely to have the weapon lose the laser lock, and miss. After release, you should make a hard turn AWAY from the side of the aircraft with the TGP to put the target at the 10 or 9 o'clock (assuming TGP is mounted on the left wing). You then roll into the targeting pod and turn such that the target stays off to that side of the aircraft. The roll angle required to do this is such that the aircraft does not mask the TGP. This keeps the laser point on the side of the target you started with when you pickled, so it should remain illuminated the entire flight time of the weapon (roughly 25 seconds).

I put this on the mini joystick of the throttle after finding the slew rate was such that I kept overshooting the desired location of the target.

It's WIP (no, I'm not trying to be an A$$). I think it works, but it just doesn't display so.

I'd like to see more PG campaigns as well. Lots of potential there for many types of missions involving many of the different modules we have.

Actually mass-module maintenance should be relatively easy as any breaking changes caused by ED are common to all modules, and consequently the fixes are the same as well.

Oops! Structure copy not element copy. ;)

I've seen this as well. Wasn't sure if it was a bug.

Absolute madness. How can a cockpit TEXTURE mod give someone an advantage? If they're already lousy pilots to the point they need to start cheating, then against a competent opponent it won't make a damn bit of difference. The major checks are already being done: visual model changes and systems/flight model changes. This matters. The rest? Not so much. Seriously? How does this help, really? If they need crutches like this to assist them, good luck, because none of that affects me as the opposing fighter. I'm fighting a weapons system primarily, controlled by a human opponent. There are things the human can do to make things harder, but at the end it is still a weapons system and physics. None of that changes because someone marked up their RADAR display with a few lines. If they start hacking the sim however to get a "God's eye view" of the battle space, then that is a problem.

Oh... interesting. I haven't tried placing statics on the carrier yet. I've seen the desync issue in the Tomcat. Both times I was host/RIO. Doesn't happen as host/pilot. Client/pilot sees folded wings.

Tomorrow hopefully. Keep mashing that F5 button!