Airbusjoerg

Sorry, I'm a little late to the burble party. Just again for me to confirm: The burble effect in combination with the flight model of the Hornet is unrealistic, isnt it? At least it should not be necessary to make wild changes in the pitch just before (or above) the deck to prevent the permanent 3PTS landings (and the C-gradings)? The way I learned and understood it is that the AoA is fixed during landing, I only control the sink rate with thrust and the stick is only used for lateral movements. I got along great with that before the burble effect. Now the burble effect throws me out of the correct AoA every time shortly before the touchdown, the nose lifts up right above the deck and falls down again and I could only correct this by courageous interventions on the stick - which is a big no-no for my understanding. That's not realistic, is it? And did I understand correctly that this pitch-down is due to the Hornet's flight model, which may be improved again in the future? PS: just did a _OK_ pass, but had to pull the stick quite a bit in the very last moments, almost like flare out... this feels so wrong...

Thank you very much. That answers all my questions (regarding F18 fuel switches ).

Can someone please explain the function of the switch "INTR WING" to me, also with regard to air refueling? Similarly, the function of the "EXT TANKS WING" and "EXT TANKS CTR" switches is difficult to understand. If I want to empty the external tanks first, I can set those to "ORIDE", right? But can I prevent the external tanks from being refilled during air refueling, for example, if I set those switches to "STOP"? Are there any practical examples somewhere? I can't find anything concrete about this.. I would like to understand in which way these switches are involved in the (normal) operations, i.e. when they are used and how. Thanks in advance!!

A quick question about the AGM-62 Walleye. Can it be used in conjunction with the Litening Pod / ATFLIR and does the system then display the in-range cues and the countdown to the target?

I'd like to know that too....

So, now I've packed all the stuff into a quick & dirty video. At the beginning you can see the mission I choose. After that (min 0:15) you see the settings AUTO, MFUZ nose, EFUZ inst, sensor on HUD. After that (min 01:40) you see the approach. The moment I designate the target (TDC depress), the bomb drop line and the target marker appears. Now it comes: as I pull up the nose, the marker moves with it and sticks somewhere in the Sky. It doesnt stay on the target (min 01:50). I turn left/right to show this. Also pay attention to the values like TOT etc. After that I do the whole thing again (min 02:40) - this time I refine (slew) the marker a bit with the TDC. Again, the result is the same, as I move the nose up, the target marker moves up with it and doesn't stay on target. At the end you can see my correct assignment of the TDC button in the settings (min 03:21) Now I am curious about your comments.

That is exactly the problem. In my case, it does not stay. I tried this for two hours yesterday and almost threw my computer out the window. The only other thing I could imagine is that my TDC does not center perfectly and always "wanders" minimally. I'll try that out later.

I´m doing basically the same. Go into a (not so shallow) dive, centre the ball and chain and designate (via TDC depress or Return). But when I lift the nose again to level, the target marker does not stay on the target but comes up with the nose, it gets "stuck" in the HUD, moves together with the HUD and also shows nonsensical distance values and TOT. Can you see this in my track file?

Yes I know and I tried, but as in my track can be seen the designation doesn’t work.

I dont understand your second sentence. Do you mean: "When you dive at an angle bigger than 7.5°, the targeting reticle will be caged to the VV"? If so - I know that, but that doesn't help me with my problem.

I am trying to use TDC to set a target in AUTO mode via the HUD. In 9 out of 10 attempts this does not work. This is what I do: A/G-Mode on, ARM Select bomb (no matter which one) Mode: Auto MFUZ: Nose EFUZ: INST DRAG: FF Sensor control switch to HUD (forward) Now point nose at target and press either TDC depress / Enter / Weapon relase button - in 9 out of 10 cases the target point is not marked successfully, but somehow "sticks" to the bomb drop line (and can be moved using TDC, but marks nothing). In the attached file you see exactly what I describe. I tried three times to nail a target, first time with TDC depress, second time with weapon release, third time with ENTER on keyboard. The target is not marked. After every try I undesignate and try again. Either I'm completely stupid or this is a bug (I hope the former because I can fix that quickly if someone tells me what I'm doing wrong). auto_bombs.trk

I often ask myself what I actually expect from such a dynamic campaign. That's because I have an on-off relationship with DCS and am always struggling between excitement (the planes) and boredom (the world around). My main problem with DCS is really the "dead" and "empty" world. Playing single missions don't change that, because then there are a few military units standing around and interacting somehow, but the world is still dead and without meaning. And building missions myself? I tried. That's like writing my own horror story and then being surprised that I don't get scared by my own jump scares. When I have the usual 2-3 hours of time for DCS in the evening after a long workday, I expect the following: Disclaimer: that is my opinion. Other opinions can (and may!) differ greatly from it. I choose a map / conflict and a plane I get a short overview of the situation and the choice from several possible missions, which differ in length, complexity and difficulty When I'm at the airport, I want "immersion" - a plane captain, ground crew, vehicles, other jets getting ready, proper radio - these empty, dead aprons are one of the biggest immersion killers in DCS - regardless of dynamic campaign or not (supercarrier is a start - but nothing more) In the air, I want to feel like something is happening around me. This doesn't have to be super much (would kill FPS anyway) and hyper realistic, a few other units with meaningful(!) tasks and some radio chatter would be okay After the mission, back at the airport, it would be nice to be welcomed by the ground crew and that the debriefing not only consists of a text box. What I absolutely do not need: Micro management - I don't want to manage units and costs - I hate economic simulations - I want to fly. Overdramatic Hollywood stories, I just want to be myself as a jet pilot, I don't need a semi-cool name and a backstory. If I want to be Commander Shepard, I play Mass Effect. This is a study sim*. Exaggerated action: please, no missions where I feel like I have to fight the whole damn war alone in one single mission. I have read the usual books like "Hornets over Kuwait" and I was also in the army myself and I know that war is not won by single superheroes. I hate it when I get missions in a study sim(!) that feel like Fortnite or GTA in the air from the first second to the last. It doesn't always have to go BOOOM right away, in a conflict there are so many tense "in-between" stages - e.g. securing a country's border while two other countries are on conflict at the other side. I don't always want these usual missions: "Fly to your target, take out the enemy planes [with a full load of bombs under the wings(!)], then kill the air defenses and bomb target X". As I said, just my thoughts on the subject. Someone else may have a completely different opinion on this. I have high hopes for this dynamic campaign and even if only a small part of my wishes were fulfilled, that would be great. *) This is not a low blow directed at story-driven campaigns in DCS. I have great respect for the tremendous work and love that goes into such campaigns. It's just not for me personally.

You helped me anyway. Because of your answer I searched again intensively for updates for the two mods and for the VPC mod there is indeed a "hotfix" for the 2.7... was not easy to find. So thanks a lot!

I have in 2020 once built a relatively extensive practice mission, has cost me a lot of time and effort. I haven't used it since 05/2020 and when I open it now with newest Beta 2.7, DCS crashes - both when opening it in the mission editor and when starting the mission directly. Is there any chance to find out why this is happening? It's a bit sad that all the work was for nothing. Other missions I have built (also at that time) still work without problems. dcs.log-20220402-191233.zip f18_waffenuebung.miz

That sounds GREAT. Would be very interested to buy one. Is CoreHawk3D around here somewhere on the forum? I would like to handle this directly with him, so I do not have to create an account on Etsy.

Schöner Thread! Ich hol mal bissel weiter aus... Ich glaube, mein erster Kontakt war "F16 Combat Pilot" von Digital Integration auf dem C64. Das muss um 1990 gewesen sein. Danach dann Sublogic Flight Simulator II, später auf dem PC dann so Sachen wie "Tornado" (ebenfalls von Digital Integration), Comanche, Chuck Yeagers, alles, was es so gab. Ein Schlüsselerlebnis war im zivilen Bereich der MS Flightsimulator 5.0 und irgendwann kam mal ein Kumpel mit Su27-Flanker um die Ecke... "guck mal, das haben echte Russen programmiert..." - die Grafik war zwar mau aber die Simulationstiefe für damals state of the art. Hab dann eigentlich alles mitgenommen, bin aber in den zivilen Bereich abgedriftet und ab 2006 dann mein A320-Homecockpit gebaut (früher MS, jetzt X-Plane). Das ist auch nach wie vor ein großes Thema aber zu Hause, wenn ich nicht im Cockpit bin, hab ich irgendwie wieder eine Herausforderung gebraucht und was neues gesucht. Irgendwann kennt man den Airbus halt besser als die eigene Ehefrau. Deswegen bin ich parallel dazu vor drei (oder 4)? Jahren auf DCS zurückgekommen (ich hatte das Thema "Eagle Dynamics" wie gesagt seit Su27 Flanker über alle Iterationen konstant im Blick). Mein erstes Modul waren die F4 und die L39, dann die F18 und dann war irgendein Sale und ich konnte mich nicht mehr zurückhalten... DCS hat mir erstmal Demut beigebracht. Ich kam von meinem hohen Homecockpit-Builder-Roß und dachte mir so: "was soll dich an dem Spiel schon groß fordern"... bis ich dann merkte, wie viel komplexer die militärische Luftfahrt so ist. Und wie furchtbar unergonomisch die ganzen "Helden meiner Kindheit" (F18, F16) in Wirklichkeit gegenüber einem Airbus so sind. In der zivilen Fliegerei sind Start und Landung die Höhepunkte, wenn man bei schlechtem Wetter im alten Hong Kong landen kann, fühlt man sich wie der Held vom Erdbeerfeld. Im zivilen Cockpit setzt nach dem Start erstmal Entspannung ein, bei DCS geht die Arbeit dann los. Formationsflug, Luftbetankung, Bedienung von zehntausend komplexen Waffensystemen und wenn man schließlich völlig fertig und total gestresst ist... die Trägerlandung. Eine völlig andere Welt. Die einzige Gemeinsamkeit: es sind strahlgetriebene Fluggeräte. Das war es aber auch schon. Ich hab in DCS erstmal fliegen gelernt, denn einen A320 "fliegt" man nicht, den "bedient" man. Module habe ich inzwischen fast alle, weil es mich fasziniert, die Technik und Systeme der verschiedenen Muster zu entdecken. Richtig eingearbeitet habe ich mich aber nur in die L39, die F4 und vor allem in die F18. Im Moment überlege ich, mich in die A10 reinzufuchsen - das wird aber auch nochmal ein langer Weg. Der Harrier überfordert mich noch regelmäßig (Thema Trägerlandungen). Hardwaremäßig hab ich mit dem 16000M-Hotas angefangen. Danach der Warthog mit Throttle. Nie richtig glücklich gewesen. Hab mich bei Luftbetankung immer rettungslos bescheuert angestellt und es nie hinbekommen, was ich auch immer als persönliche Schmach empfunden habe. Letzte Woche nun hab ich nach ewigem Überlegen einen VKB Gunfighter MK III Pro geholt und seitdem krieg ich Luftbetankung sauber hin, sogar im Kurvenflug und mit Wirbelschleppen. Ein Traum-Stick, ich bin so happy mit dem Ding. Als Schubregler bin ich wieder auf dem Thrustmaster FCS Throttle gelandet, allerdings mit Silikon-Fett geschmiert (Liqui Moly) - fühlt sich in der Form für mich besser und präziser an als der Warthog-Throttle. Darüberhinaus noch ein Streamdeck (damit kann man bei der F18 z.B. schön den UFC simulieren), ein Tobii (hatte lange TrackIR, das Gebammel am Headset ging mir aber auf den Zeiger, finde ich beim Tobii schöner) ein Tablet als Kneeboard und die üblichen Befestigungen von MonsterTech. Was das alles gekostet hat... nicht drüber nachdenken. Andere kaufen halt Autos im Gegenwert eines Hauses, stecken das ganze Geld in die Elektro-Eisenbahn, ins Heimkino, gehen Hochseefischen oder rauchen jeden Tank ne Schachtel Zigaretten. Ich hab meinen Spaß halt mit meinem Cockpit und zu Hause mit DCS. Man lebt nur einmal. Den PC rechne ich jetzt nicht extra, den hab ich "sowieso". Ich bin einer von denen, die seit Uhrzeiten ihren Computer alle paar Jahre selbst "zusammenstellen" und aufbauen, das ist im Budget fest drinnen und gehört einfach dazu so lange ich denken kann. Simracing hab ich übrigens auch mal angeschnitten. Hatte mal ein komplettes Fanatec-Set hier stehen. War auf Dauer nichts, konnte machen, was ich wollte... war immer zu langsam und das hat mich irgendwann Gefrustet. Alles für gutes Geld wieder verkauft. Naja, man muss sich halt auch mal eingestehen, wenn man es nicht drauf hat. Man ist schon ein bekloppter Nerd, irgendwie. Aber ich könnte mir kein anderes Leben vorstellen.

Okay guys, shame on me - it was my fault. I found out by chance. I use a stream deck when I play DCS. It's usually on the desk on the side. When I start DCS, I put it right in front of me. When I do that, the USB cable stretches a bit and puts pressure on the USB cable of the external sound card behind the computer. This causes the USB plug of the sound card to move ever so slightly to one side (inside the connector), which leads to occasional short interruptions - and that is why DCS then switches the sound output. When I put the stream deck after my DCS session back, the USB cable relaxes a bit and thus no longer touches the cable of the sound card. Therefore, the problem only occurred while playing DCS.

Absolutely agree. I have been struggling with "air refuelling" for 3 years, first with the 16000M, then with the Titanwolf Vulture and finally with the Warthog. I never got it right and it was always a damn drama. I hated it. And I really tried everything, watched a thousand tutorials, tried ten thousand different curve-settings, did dirty tricks with the autopilot - it all helped not much. Last week I finally made the decision to buy a Gunfighter MkIII - "Modern Combat Edition Ultimate" because I was sick of it and wanted to know if I was really too stupid. What can I say. I hooked the Gunfighter up straight out of the box, put a curve of 10 on X/Y axis, thought to myself, wow, does this thing feel wobbly and started DCS. It only took me two tries and then I was hooked up to the tanker and able to refuel without stopping, one day later I was able to stay on the tanker even in a turn - I've never been able to do that even remotely before. After that I did something I would never have imagined: I switched on the wake turbulence option and it worked the same way, maybe a little more difficult but overall no problem. I can tell you, I was so fuXXing hyped, like a five-year-old at Christmas. For the throttles I use the cheap Thrustmaster TWCS, but I lubricated the rails with Liqui Moli silicone grease, which makes it feel WAY better to me than the Warthog throttle (no "sticktion", precise, damped feeling). I also have to say that other things, such as carrier landings, have not been improved much by the new stick; they worked quite well before. I suppose, thats why the focus is more on the throttle work than on the stick in that case. Nevertheless, I love this stick even though it cost me an arm and a leg. Compared to all the other sticks, it feels like I have a direct connection from my brain into the FCS of the F18. And also very important: I no longer have a cramp in my arm or pain in my shoulder, even after flying for a long time.

Alright, yes I tried that, unfortunately it doesn't make any difference - the problem also occurs when I explicitly select the external sound card there. I have tried both variants.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. I explicitly set the audio output to the external DAC, not to "Standard", if that's what you mean.

What?! Great. What is your configuration? Also an external USB sound card? Maybe there is some similarity between our systems?

On my computer, DCS sometimes - completely randomly - switches from the external DAC (FiiO K5 Pro) to the Nvidia audio output (monitor) - during gameplay, which is annoying. I can fix this immediately in the options menu every time, but I don't understand why DCS does this. Has this ever happened to anyone? The FiiO K5 works super stable, I use it extremely frequently for other games and sound applications and never have any issues with it. It also doesn't disconnect on its own or anything, there is absolutely no problem with the USB connection or cable or whatever. DCS really is the only application that does this. By the way, it doesn't matter if I set the audio output to "Standard" or explicitly to the FiiO in the options menu. I´m on 2.7.11.21408.

At the moment - after even more practice in the last hours since I wrote my post - I'm getting pretty good at it. Basically, I do it the way you say. A lot of power right from the beginning, briefly tap the right toe brake (button) to align the aircraft, full right rudder until about 100 km/h, from this speed on I find the behaviour intuitive (the tendency to roll hard left after takeoff is easy to control once one knows it). So the takeoff seems to work even without pedals with toe brakes. BUT: definitely not the landing. After the touchdown - as soon as the effect of the rudder fades off - it is almost impossible for me to keep the machine on track without precision toe braking and I suppose, thats the point where I need new pedals anyway. Buttons are far too imprecise for this. Landing itself is not a problem - but below 100 km/h things get ugly every time.

Hi folks, I´m using the VKB-Sim T-Rudder-pedals (no toe brakes). Because of that - despite intensive training - I simply cannot manage to handle the BF-109 properly during takeoff. I use two buttons on the Hotas as toe brakes - but it doesn't work really well - I can't work with the brakes intuitive or in a controlled way. I'm now thinking about buying pedals with integrated toe brakes - basically only for the BF-109 (and perhaps some more warbirds in the future). Does that make sense, does that represent a massive improvement in terms of handling? (Background: I am actually quite experienced with flight simulation, but the BF-109 kicks my ass)

So am I. My problem is that I try to interpret the LSO's ratings and learn from them. Since the majority of my evaluations are "ungraded", I have taken a closer look at them (and of course continued to practice!). Unfortunately I came across "inconsistencies", e.g. a 3PTS although it is clearly visible in the replay that this was not the case. Or "to low" calls at the beginning, although the ball is centered.