Xoho

The trim indicator in the top left of the front dash (will attach screenshot once able) does not appear to function, and remains static and neutral even when trimmed fully in any direction. I have followed the startup lesson twice, and the manual checklist as well, so I believe it is most likely a bug and not user error. Please correct me if wrong. RESOLVED: EFM update fixed issue.

So, to be clear, some of you are against adding certain weapons to a digital combat simulator, because it's unethical? I guess we better remove CBUs, and really all weapons that hurt people... As for their use, that's really up to the mission creators to decide. I'm all for adding weapons that may not be used, just because someone may find a use for them. Yes, there have been many deaths caused by nuclear weapons and tragedies, however how many have been caused by conventional weapons? CBUs? If you don't want weapons in game because you don't think they belong, that's fine. Just don't blame it on other reasons. I'll continue to enjoy my MiG-21's nuclear weapons, in the missions I've designed where they actually have a purpose. (Cold War gone hot) This is a game, so why not enjoy it as one? To be clear, I think that nukes should not be included in the current game, as so many other things are broken it would be a shame to introduce more work to it. Hell, if anything a proper nuclear simulation would do wonders for ensuring that people fully understand the consequences of nuclear conflict. That's the beauty of games and simulations. We can make mistakes, and see what the outcomes would be if we actually did such a thing. EDIT: "Even wanting that at all is a red flag & should be professionally evaluated. This is the kind of thing someone asks for if they like to torture animals." Trev, please just stop. You're acting like a small child and not really helping your case, or anyone else's opinion of you. This kind of behavior is more of a "red flag" than anything anyone else has done or said.

Depends on how you blackout. I have never had any more issues with the viggen, and usually recover quite quickly. Then again, if I just yank the stick at M1.5 and pull a ridiculous number of G's, you'll black out, and possibly not recover for a little while. If you just pull 7-8g for a bit, you should recover quite quickly. Slamming -6G or something will be even worse.

I keep finding references to 250mm lug nut spacers. Is the ordnance mounted to the pylon with one of these and no rail/launcher?

A friend linked an armament matrix for the F-18 a while ago, and asked if there was one for the Su-27. I've decided to create these armament matrices for as many aircraft as possible, however to do that I'll need a little help. I'm not looking for any restricted information, however I would like to know the names of the launchers that various weapons are mounted on in game. I also plan to do one for the Su-33, J-11a, and Su-25/Su-25T in the immediate future. Here is what I have so far. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LthjaYbxaVU44OYNnw0JoGd6owKmGoIgEjxm_77Im4Y/edit?usp=sharing If this is against the rules, please let me know as I was unable to find anything saying it was.

In the past I've buddy lased with both the A_10C and AV8B Harrier from 15-25nm. WHen nearing the latter end of the spectrum, there were definite issues getting a lock, but that was mainly due to my connection to the server causing a bit of a jittery effect when looking at the end of the laser itself, this is most easily seen at nighttime with the marker/lase+marker. I never had any issues with the laser stopping short at 8nm, so something must have changed in 2.5.2 for this to happen. This being said, I have noticed a definite increase in issues with the KA-50 locking a point in space just ahead of me with the release of 2.5.2.

Stable has serious issues, beta has serious issues, they both have major issues, and I think most of us are just hoping to get some of the older ones fixed, and maybe use our new aircraft/maps while we wait. Unfortunately the new beta, 2.5.2, is causing more issues than it's worth on some servers, since you get constant freezing/stutters/crashes/bugs, and you can't have an "aircraft graveyard" to mitigate that without forcing people to wait 20-30-60-120 minutes just to get into your server.

I don't use SLI and I have this issue as well, so I doubt that's the issue here. It seems as though they changed how things render entirely in this new update, and that seems to be causing issues with the clouds as well. Lights are invisible until you zoom in fully, shading in the A-10/harrier TGP is seriously messed up and pops in/out, etc.

It's really easy to fly without any instruments while in the heaviest fog and thickest clouds with the lowest visibility options set, since you can see perfectly clearly when it flickers for a split second as you pass through the various layers of the cloud. It seems like it only renders the layer you're in, as when you pass through each layer it becomes perfectly clear for a split second. It's seriously disruptive and looks like crap. Not to mention that you can somehow see chimney smoke perfectly from 10000ft above a super thick cloud layer and heavy fog. If you fly above the clouds and look at where they intersect a mountain you'll see what I mean about cloud layers.

Just checked again, took a while to be sent and I had no indication of how I would be contacted at the time of purchase (never asked for my email, just paypal). I did just get the email though. Thank you!

I purchased the AJS-37 viggen from the heatblur website as it was 50% off, however it did not give me the serial number for activation, or any indication of when/where I would receive this. It did not ask for contact info aside from my address. When/where will I receive the product? It does say "come back to this page for updates on your order" however I've been trying and had no luck in getting back to that specific page.

I was trying to use the BLD VORTAC just southeast of Mc Carren Intl. As for the VHF homing, you have to be in FM, not AM to receive guidance. Pg 611 in the A-10C manual details the procedure. It is possible I was not on the right freq, however I was using the missed approach pattern for RWY 25R in the kneeboard pages. It specifies to climb to 3250 ft, then begin a right climbing turn direct to BLD VORTAC which is southeast of the airfield. Ch. 114X for TACAN, and 116.7 for the VHF DF homing. After testing, it turns out I misread the chart and was attempting to use a different beacon that was out of my LOS. So TACAN works, however the VHF homing does not. Someone mentioned that VOR and the VHF DF homing are not compatible, but I don't see why not. If someone could clarify that would be great. My understanding is that a VOR beacon is essentially a more accurate NDB, and while NDB works with UHF frequencies, which you can tune to with the UHF ADF radio settings, I assumed VOR beacons can be tracked by tuning in with the VHF DF radio settings since it also uses VHF frequencies. In the meantime I switched to the Caucuses map to practice my IFR stuff, and ran into a new issue where the kneeboard information does not match the .pdf charts in the docs folder, or in game frequencies for the various airfield towers. However that's a different issue entirely and is easily remedied. I'm just wondering if maybe the VOR beacon frequency I'm trying to tune into is out of date for NTTR, and I am unsure of where to find the pdf files detailing the various airport charts.

I recently started playing the NTTR map again,and realized that while several major airfields reference certain VOR and VORTAC beacons specifically for certain patterns, I am unable to navigate to/from them as they are not emitting any signal. (Yes I RTFM and followed the procedures) The only information I was able to find was from 2011 and 2013, and they stated that it was not yet added in. Several people I asked today also answered that only the UHF ADF works, and even then it only works with units placed in the mission editor. This seems like a major oversight if this is the case, as it seems as though it's been implemented for other modules without issue and as for the beacons, people were asking about this in 2011, 7 years ago. Are there any plans to fix this in the near future? If not, why?