Jester2138

Doesn't matter because due to a little thing called "The Law" he still has to work off the same publicly available information as anybody else. And it's not like other modules don't also use SMEs in the development.

Also experiencing that the Tomcat is not flying itself in the CVN-73 instant action Case I mission even when CMD CONTROL is illuminated.

If this is a joke, I don't get it.

This has been the case for me as well ever since VR was released. The alt-tab/tab/enter workaround described by Buzzer above does not work for me (or the OP, as he said in his post...). I suspect ED has been missing out on the vast majority of crash reports from VR users because of this

Source?

He's not talking about lag between head movement and PNVS movement. He's talking about how the PNVS does not appear to smoothly pan/tilt in the first place, but rapidly "step" across positions. It's most visible in the video he posted when tracking a passing scenery object with his head. You can see how the PNVS "steps" to pan instead of panning continuously. What he's showing would not be physically possible in a real sensor.

If you're talking about Karbala, a couple dozen Apaches overflew an entire Iraqi division in a deliberately planned ambush due to faulty intel and sustained hits from PKM, NSV, 23mm, and 57mm fire. Only one was forced down (intact) and the crew was captured. Nobody was killed by enemy fire, though one CPG had to be evacuated to Germany. That sort of event would be impossible in DCS right now IMO as even the PKM fire would rapidly kill many crew members with no trouble before we even start talking about the 23mm and 57mm.

Detailed on page 63 of the DCS Apache manual...

I was actually just thinking about how distracting I find the hook... Would love to be able to hide it.

Skill issue

Not even necessarily true for a low-intensity conflict. In Iraq/Afghanistan the Navy planes had MASSIVE tanker requirements compared to planes that could be based in-country or a neighbor.

If a Hornet is running cold from a Viper it's already lost the fight, regardless of not having to take 1-2 seconds after a 180 turn to bug the Viper manually before launching on it and turning cold again. Bizarre scenario to use to show the usefulness of the hypothetical capabilities of MSI. I always find these discussions that toe the line between classified/unclassified capabilities to be pretty pointless. Sure, maybe the Hornet in 2007 could shoot at a datalinked target without using it's own radar. It's implied in some documents that were leaked. For all you know, the Viper could do the exact same thing, but the documents showing that weren't leaked. Just stick to the unambiguous public stuff, or stuff you can find out yourself with CFD and whatnot. Better for everybody.

Wow. Hard to express just how strongly I disagree with that. The Apache is better at everything except high altitude. And for most of those things, it's not even close. The excellent RWR alone makes the Apache hugely superior and more deadly. Hellfires are hugely better than Vikhrs. The navigation and avionics in general are ridiculously superior in the Apache. The sensors and fire control systems are at least one full generation ahead in the Apache. I could go on and on.

If you think it's unrealistic, check this out: Good luck doing a lot of that in a coaxial helicopter like the KA-50/52!

See image. My understanding is that the disk would only tilt when there are aerodynamic forces from the spinning blades producing lift to tilt the disk. It can't tilt just sitting on the ground not spinning. Additionally, the blades seem to be articulated up down mechanically instead of just flexing. IIRC (can't seem to find this on the internet so I'm going off memory) the Apache is a rigid rotor system and the blades can only flex, not hinge like they're animated in DCS. Am I correct?