Frederf

Yeah it'll be in the SMS menu with CCIP CCRP DTOS LADD. It isn't in the quick rotary when pressing MSL STEP though.

MAN is a manual alternative to computed release as a backup mode. As far as I'm aware CBU-97 fuze can't be altered from cockpit (reality, definitely can't). Cockpit changes just alter computations and display. SUU-64 cans can have a secondary "point and shoot" mode (FMU-140) by pulling the option wire but I don't know if that applies SUU-66 cans or if DCS models it. In Mk 20 cans the option time is adjustable but with FMU-140 It's fixed at 1.5 or 2.2 sec or something. But really BLU-108s need that height to operate. They lose a lot of effectiveness without the 1500' or whatever of height.

New information! I noticed that the expanded HSD wasn't expanding about the exact center of the HSD cursor but was offset. When expanding, at least at the EXP2 level, the actual cursor location and the apparent cursor location are not the same. It is possible to select steerpoint with the cursor when it is offset from the actual object being selected. As indicated in the first post it appears that the EXP2 feature when in DEP/CPL mode is placing the cursor in a position totally wrong compared to the unexpanded position. In one situation this issue wasn't happening in CEN/CPL mode but in another test (in track) there was an issue in CEN/CPL mode as well. F16 HSD cursor position CEN DEP CPL DCPL EXP1 EXP2.trk

The above statement is incorrect. When your selected waypoint is equal to designated target waypoint then speed scheduling will be direct path from current position to target. If waypoint is selected on sequence before target then speed scheduling assumes you fly to selected waypoint and then sequentially through the flight plan to the target waypoint. If a final leg speed is entered the speed scheduling will attempt to get you to the waypoint before the target waypoint such that the final leg is at the entered ground speed. If this is not possible then the entered ground speed for the final leg will be ignored. For example I am 2.8nm from waypoint 3 going 280kt GS. The flight plan from present position through waypoints 1, 2, and then 3 is 72.3nm. I have selected waypoint 1. The speed guidance is telling me to fly 280 knots and that I will arrive in 15.5 minutes (04:25:00 TOT, 04:09:30 current). If scheduling was direct then I would arrive at waypoint 3 in 36 seconds, not 15.5 minutes.

That's probably straight out of the limitations section of the real manual. Those are set by flight tests and engineering analysis mostly based on structural factors. Actual takeoff safety performance isn't a fixed number but TOLD calculations on a case by case basis. The idea is that rolling down the runway at 100 knots and hitting a bump above X weight might put too much stress on metal joints or tires than is safe. Even if it doesn't fall to pieces that run the loads may unacceptably shorten the lifespan of the vehicle. Max weight limits are almost always more about physical damage limits than flight performance.

No, you need roll/yaw trim in stores asymmetry. It's a common misconception that FLCS magically sorts out such effects.

Sure, you can. That's kinda how the Mirage 2000C is set up. Paddle on, maneuver, paddle off. It's not a bad way to fly around. You should notice the breakout force from attitude hold is annoying. Just ripping the stick without paddling is possible but isn't something that's a nice way to fly regularly.

If you are interested in an area around a steerpoint then select it and TGP will go to STPT. If you are just interested in kinda "up ahead" then snow plow is for you. You can always use DTOS/EO-VIS and slew a box from HUD. When you ground it the TGP will go to the SPI.

I usually trim a bit. The FLCS will hold pitch up to 10 AOA so you need a little nose up if you want to approach stick neutral at 11-13 AOA. Trim is a pilot aid, there's no can't/must do about it. You can approach and land with 1G trim if you want but it takes some back pressure to hit the 11-13AOA.

"\" key is the game communicate command. It represents simply talking, no radio, or hot intercom. It also is used for "easy communications" assist mode as the automatic radio choosing command. This causes a lot of confusion because some users have "easy communications" assist on and other off so they will see different behavior. In full simulation settings a cold airplane or helicopter may have "\" work because pilot voice can be heard. Then canopy is closed and "\" doesn't work because canopy blocks pilot voice. Then battery comes on and intercom is powered so "\" works again (ground crew plug telephone into side of airplane). In some helicopters even if door is open and engine is running "\" won't work because pilot voice is too weak compared to engine noise. In air "\" won't work because it is (usually) not the command for pilot to transmit using radio. With "easy communications" assist on "\" works because it automatically chooses a radio to transmit so in that case "\" is radio transmit key.

HACK button should toggle. A10C2 Hack Toggle.trk

I did a 12x MK-82AIR drop at 999' spacing and it looks roughly accurate (11x999)/6076= 1.809nm. Maybe it's not elongating the time between releases properly for diving profiles? F16 12 MK82AIR 999ft.trk

Transmission on both radios simultaneously is physically impossible.

FLCS changes laws on WOW so touchdown with rudder input is strongly advised against. Bad things (tm) can happen.

First step when encountering an issue in simulation is to ask, "how do people in the real world solve this issue?"

Most folks say no. ED are investigating last I hear. The reason for X/Y mattering is frequencies. Ground X and Air X use different frequencies. Ground Y and Air Y use the same frequencies. This is why setting 1X A/A in your airplane when tanker is broadcasting ground 1X it doesn't work. However when you set 1Y A/A in your airplane and tanker is broadcasting ground 1Y it does. I don't think in real life 1Y ground and 1Y A/A are supposed to crosstalk despite using the same frequencies, but that's the DCS logic. 1X Ground, Interrogate, 1025 MHz (12µs), Reply 962 MHz (12µs) 1Y Ground, Interrogate, 1025 MHz (36µs), Reply 1088 MHz (30µs) 1X Airborne, Transpond, 1025 MHz (12µs), Receive 1088 MHz (12µs) 1Y Airborne, Transpond, 1025 MHz (36µs), Receive 1088 MHz (36µs) You can see that 1XG and 1XA don't even match up frequencies for sending and receiving while 1YG and 1YA do. 1YG and 1YA should filter each other out based on signal characteristics (single/double pulse, pulse spacing) but they don't in DCS.

That costs network bandwidth that's impractical if done every sim frame. What video compression does is have mostly change data but every so often throw in a "key frame" with all the data to fix any data drift.

I have never had the "bearing" checkbox in the editor ever have an effect. With unchecked I got bearing. With checked I got bearing. (this is in the old times when tanker TCN was A/A mode).

Unless we have networked force feedback it will never approach a 1:1 simulation of dual controls. But perfection is the enemy of potentially valuable new ideas. Even single player we don't have a 1:1 input device to cockpit control correlation. The hydraulics can fail, aero loads exceeded, limiters in place, etc. which don't prevent our input devices from their complete range. The motivation is commendable. A more accurate simulation involves the thing more like the thing and a reduction in artificial sim-isms. In almost or in fact all of the simulated modules, both operators are able to provide control input at any time. Additive input is a fine method of simulating this arrangement and I can't think of any better one. So we ask, why isn't this the case already? Why would DCS be designed the way it is instead of as described? My first thought is netcode. Blending two axis input streams in real time over network might not be the most pleasant experience. If it's sometimes good (LAN/super low latency internet) and sometimes bad then you're obliged to code a way of switching between the two modes. As a non-operating user you can watch the networked stick position and see sometimes it's not that smooth. The second thought is the current method is simpler and more robust. I'd really like to see a test setup of additive input. It could be very useful and perhaps the primary method of having multi crew going forward. Or it could be terrible. I'd very much like to see a practical example.

It should be inter-pulse spacing, either bombs or singles. As far as I know there is no explicit mechanism that would prevent selection of 12 RP SGL 999' and getting exactly that. In weird accelerated situations you might not get super even spacing but for a simple level flight where equal spacing means equal time interval it should work.

Yeah, sb out level, gear down when beginning descent, sb full when three point attitude is typical

Track provided. Behavior is that after pilot-initiated undesignate in TWS (also RWS) the antenna remains at the elevation commanded by TWS when target was bugged. Observations: If antenna elevation knob is adjusted while TWS is automatically setting antenna, upon undesignation antenna immediately returns to position according to elevation knob. If antenna elevation knob is not adjusted while TWS is automatically setting antenna, upon undesignation antenna elevation remains at the contact's last value. If after condition #2 a sufficient number of TMS down presses will cause antenna to resume elevation according to knob position. I haven't checked what happens on non-pilot-commanded loss of target. I feel it's probably not right that there's a difference in unlock behavior if/if not knob was moved during track. For uncommanded loss of track I'm sure radar maintains antenna elevation as long as knob isn't moved to help re acquisition. But that could be different for TMS down commanded unlock. F16 TWS after undesignate antenna elevation.trk

Any time you see a circle around a radar track symbol on FCR display, that means it's target of interest (TOI) or "bugged" in the parlance. When you have a TOI that's your AIM-120 target. There are conditions where launch is and is not allowed but if you are inside parameters, have a TOI, and hold the WR button the launch should occur.

A/S switch is solenoid-held. I would check that the action you're enacting isn't making an explicit off command on release. Also if the command is pulsed I would check that pulse is long enough to travel to the magnet and stick. Very short pulses can allow a switch to relax before it has a chance to stick.

Unrelated but any place you press CZ it does the same thing, SOI doesn't matter. I have seen the triple down hands on CZ through TGP in DCS so I assume it's still modeled that way.